Another week draws to a close, but not before we enjoy another filling of Cowboys Mailbag!!!! Settle down and we will get started.

These are all emails, chat replies, and tweets from you, the very valued reader/listener/responder. Here come 2,000 or so words that can be used to show everyone I got things wrong in about three years when people scan the archives to see what I was thinking back in the first week in March of 2016:

Q: Hello Bob. Hope this gets to you. My question is about the running backs. Do you think the Cowboys could win the division if McFadden was the lead back and there was no committee?

A: Greetings. Well, I don't want to disappoint those people who continue to be angry at me constantly because I don't believe Darren McFadden can be a No. 1 running back. In fairness to them, he was much better last year than I assumed he would be (I think I projected 600 yards) and I did not see much to get excited about with regards to his signing.

However, he exceeded expectations dramatically and for a while tried to save the team's offensive bacon. In fact, after a very quiet start when the team still had their other bad idea, Joseph Randle, McFadden was just standing on the sideline most of the game. But, as Randle fizzled and played his way out of the NFL, McFadden took advantage of the situation and even with ridiculous QB play was able to get more productive as the season went along. He ended with his second 1,000 yard season and a career high in carries. He also had his first season of 4 yards per carry or more since 2011. It all seemed to support the idea that you could line up anyone behind this offensive line and find success, but I also want to give him credit. It was worth noting that he was far more of a threat on man-blocking plays than zone-blocking (which is the original reason I thought he would be a poor fit here, but it ended up working out anyway).

So, would I double down on Darren McFadden and not address RB in free agency or the draft?

No way! I am absolutely going after a RB this spring and McFadden will remain an insurance policy and a tandem back. It is worth noting that in December when he was the most productive, we were looking at 15.8 touches per game, not 30. This seems to be his sweet spot to not over-use. I would not get carried away. In fact, if I had Lamar Miller or Doug Martin or possibly even Matt Forte, I would keep McFadden at about 8-10 touches per game. It is the only sensible way to proceed, in my estimation.

Q: Which free agent running back do you like the most? I think Forte, Ivory and Miller are available. Not sure about anyone else. Thanks!

A: Well, I am certainly glad you asked me that. This weekend, as I travel with the Dallas Stars to the North Wall to deal with Ottawa and Montreal, I will be doing a research project that should result in a daily report on each RB in that group for next week as I take a week off from the draft to cover free agency week. I would add Doug Martin to that group, but it is my feeling that the RB spot is the deepest position in free agency that the Cowboys could address with a cash splash and no longer have to worry about a draft class that is not very deep. There are enough No. 1 RBs out there who could be a tandem with McFadden and a healthy Lance Dunbar that hopefully, here in a few weeks, the Cowboys no longer have to wax nostalgic about DeMarco Murray and the silly plan to reacquire him and pretend that the 2015 exit to Philadelphia never happened. I saw nothing from him last season that disputed our original position from 2014 that Murray was being over-used and would likely pay for this in 2015 and beyond. He did. His legs looked dead and he looked like a different guy. Also, the other theory is that the Cowboys have invested so much in offensive line that they don't need to overspend to keep Murray. That theory also seemed correct in the end. And yet, people are excited to figure out a way to bring him back. I really don't get that one.

Q: People assume the Cowboys can trade back in the 1st and pick up a 2nd rd'er for their trouble. I read about other teams who are picking high considering the same thing. But is this the type draft where you're going to see teams jumping at the chance to get into the top 5 or 10 and give up their 2nd rd'er? I don't get that vibe. Your thoughts?

A: We are at the time of year where every possible scenario is being floated and discussed. Regardless of where you pick, the first thing the public wants to do is discuss what that means in terms of who is available at or around your actual pick. Then, the discussion quickly turns into the ideas of trading up or trading down to see if you can benefit from some magic auction held at the league's expense. In almost every case it is something that never materializes, but you must prepare yourself for any scenario.

This year, the Cowboys can consider both. For instance, if you really like a future QB, you might have to move up a spot or two to make sure nobody hops you for the QBs in play. Or, if you really would rather take someone like Ezekiel Elliott or Myles Jack, the popular view is that perhaps you could head back three or four slots and pick up a second-round pick and still get your guy. Nobody is saying it is impossible - because it is not, especially for the Dallas Cowboys who have a history for always moving in just about every draft - but in the end, this is just another way we spend hours and hours discussing things that are basically thrown against the wall to get us closer to draft day. Wild speculation is all part of this event that grows in popularity even if there is not much to see until late April.

Part 2 of this week's mailbag comes up later in the day ...