So this is what i'm told... | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

So this is what i'm told...

jreg1

jreg1

Starter
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
1,085
Reaction score
516
The narrative around the NFL is that the running back position cannot be paid or invested in because of the risk of injury. Really?


Daniel Jones 40 million
Deshaun Watson 46 million
Kirk Cousins 35 million
Joe Burrow 9 million
Anthony Richardson 8.5 million

Aaron Rodgers hurt in the very 1st quarter of game one 50.3 million probably out for the year.

Anthony Richardson 8.5 million

Kyler Murray 46.1 million (missed a good chunk of last year and this year)

All of these quarterbacks are out for the year or part of it but the league refuses to pay top tier running backs money a good bit above the franchise tag! I am not saying they should make 20 million a year but the top backs should be a good bit above the franchise tag yearly salary.
 
jreg1 said:
The narrative around the NFL is that the running back position cannot be paid or invested in because of the risk of injury. Really?


Daniel Jones 40 million
Deshaun Watson 46 million
Kirk Cousins 35 million
Joe Burrow 9 million
Anthony Richardson 8.5 million

Aaron Rodgers hurt in the very 1st quarter of game one 50.3 million probably out for the year.

Anthony Richardson 8.5 million

Kyler Murray 46.1 million (missed a good chunk of last year and this year)

All of these quarterbacks are out for the year or part of it but the league refuses to pay top tier running backs money a good bit above the franchise tag! I am not saying they should make 20 million a year but the top backs should be a good bit above the franchise tag yearly salary.
Click to expand...
One has nothing to do with the other, IMO.

First, you have to demonstrate that teams that employ a "feature", or "3 down" back system has any advantages over a RBBC philosophy in terms of team success.

You may be able to sway me with some examples or stats, but I don't see it.

Then you have to consider that a QB touches the ball every single down, while RBs generally only a fraction of that.

Now factor in the the salary cap positional breakdown. What position are you shorting to make up the difference? Please don't insult us by saying QB, because you aren't winning jack with an average QB and the market sets that rate.

There are valid reasons why RBs are not seen as cornerstone players by most GMs/coaches today.
 
My guess is that the economics are studied very closely. Graphs and comparisons are known for which positions carry what salaries and what injury history.
Natural grass must be very expensive as the owners continue to refuse artificial turf is a safety issue.
 
Gsmack_42 said:
Has nothing to do with injury. Has to do with it’s not a primary position in today’s NFL.
Click to expand...
Ok well then stop throwing passes to them they are not wide outs! Stop asking them to block blitzing linebackers and defensive backs they are not offensive linemen! They are simply running backs!
 
College backs need to beef up but with the RPO shift and the quickness of the D-line and backers it makes it harder for them to turn out yards. Consider that Derek Henry is considered a bruiser of a back in the current NFL, he is 9,000 yards behind Emmitt Smith and has zero chance of coming within 6k of that record.

Until the NFL moves away from the passing friendly (not likely) rules the RB will always be a secondary position in the NFL.
 
NY8123 said:
College backs need to beef up but with the RPO shift and the quickness of the D-line and backers it makes it harder for them to turn out yards. Consider that Derek Henry is considered a bruiser of a back in the current NFL, he is 10,000 yards behind Emmitt Smith and has zero chance of coming within 8k of that record.

Until the NFL moves away from the passing friendly (not likely) rules the RB will always be a secondary position in the NFL.
Click to expand...
Backs have 50 and 60 catches a year and 150 to 250 carries a year but they are not a vital part of the offensives success?
 
jreg1 said:
Ok well then stop throwing passes to them they are not wide outs! Stop asking them to block blitzing linebackers and defensive backs they are not offensive linemen! They are simply running backs!
Click to expand...
Lol.....

That's a lame arguement.

Is this Dalvin Cook on a burner account?
 
You can pay a RB, but there's a limit of return on 95% of backs. For every CMC, you have guys like Zeke or Gurley who have amazing starts but fade quickly due to usage or injury. CMC is also injury prone too. Bellcow backs take a lot of beatings over the years. Zeke got over 300 carries a year and by the time his extension kicked in he was a shell of his former self. Had he stayed "elite" he'd been worth it but he was a dime a dozen power back at the end.

College football also spits out tons of quality backs. Most aren't "elite" but you don't need 1 elite back to win it all.

Quarterbacks on the other hand will make or break your team.

Zach Wilson has tanked a possible SB contender due to his **** play.
 
jreg1 said:
Backs have 50 and 60 catches a year and 150 to 250 carries a year but they are not a vital part of the offensives success?
Click to expand...
The problem with that theory is that you are looking for a socialist pay scale in a capitalist system of supply and demand.

Can you demonstrate empirically that one high paid back is any more effective in terms of wins than multiple lower paid backs?

If you can't, then teams are going to go the cheaper route.

There are very few backs that are do it all at a high level players. Even if they are, by the time they are finished with their rookie contracts, most of them are close to finished.

You can make a case that it isn't "fair" in your opinion, but can you make a case that it makes sense from an overall team building aspect?
 
jreg1 said:
Ok well then stop throwing passes to them they are not wide outs! Stop asking them to block blitzing linebackers and defensive backs they are not offensive linemen! They are simply running backs!
Click to expand...
I’m not the one that chooses the primary positions in the NFL. The GM’s do and they say QB, LT, WR1, DE, and CB are the primary positions to spend money on.
 
jreg1 said:
Backs have 50 and 60 catches a year and 150 to 250 carries a year but they are not a vital part of the offensives success?
Click to expand...
Disposable position:

2023Christian McCaffrey (27)825SFO
2022Josh Jacobs (24)1,653LVR
2021Jonathan Taylor (22)1,811IND
2020Derrick Henry (26)2,027TEN
2019Derrick Henry (25)1,540TEN
2018Ezekiel Elliott (23)1,434DAL
2017Kareem Hunt (22)1,327KAN
2016Ezekiel Elliott (21)1,631DAL
2015Adrian Peterson (30)1,485MIN
2014DeMarco Murray (26)1,845DAL
2013LeSean McCoy (25)1,607PHI
2012Adrian Peterson (27)2,097MIN
2011Maurice Jones-Drew (26)1,606JAX
2010Arian Foster (24)1,616HO

Not a lot of sustained success on that list.

Foster after 2010 played 6 more years with 4 good seasons , the rest was injury.
Jones-Drew played 3 more season after 2011 with limited production
AP was probably the best of the lot above and after 2012 had 3 productive seasons until he retired in 21
LeSean McCoy had 3 productive seasons at that level until he retired in 2020
DeMarco Murry played 3 seasons after 2014
Ezekiel Elliot has had 4 total season over 1000k rushing and looks to be over the hill
Kareem Hunt was one and done at this level
Derek Henry has had four season over 1000 yards with one 2000K. Now he looks tired.
Johnathan Taylor was on the trade block this year but still has some miles left
Josh Jacobs currently is the most productive out of the younger back.
McCaffery has been over 1000 yards three time in his career but is the most productive for all purpose yards.

Not a lot of sustained rushing success on that list. Always a younger dude.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom