Regardless, there is still little to no evidence that paying big $ to an individual RB is the way to go, or makes financial sense.
So this is what i'm told...
- Thread starter jreg1
- Start date
I’m saying when you are one of the top 500 or so in the world at whatever you do, that qualifies you as being “Elite” at your job. I don’t even know who those guys are that you mentioned, but I know the average person could not do what they do.
That does not, however, mean you are “elite” by NFL standards. That’s a whole different thing with a whole different set of standards, and it’s the reason why those 5-10 type of players in the world are so valuable and cherished.
utahphinsfan
Club Member
I agree. The days of the factor back are over & was against the phins trading for Cook & Taylor for this very reason.
p.s. I recall USC's Student Body right/left and the Woody Hayes philosophy (3 yds and a cloud of dust) being boring AF back when they were a thing.
utahphinsfan
Club Member
Clarification is appreciated.
The salary cap is set every year before free agency starts. I’m pretty sure nobody has paid extra for tickets because of any one contract or positional top 5 contract.
Exactly.
The collective bargaining agreement and media contracts are what they are, and that directly establishes the salary cap number.
It is irrelevant how the total pie is divided.
AgentXof12
Active Roster
After reading this thread, I'm thusly convinced of two things. The first is that unless you have a top 5 or maybe even top 3 QB, you need a reliable highly productive RB regardless of whether you plan to utilize a stable of backs or not. We can see a big difference with the Miami offense between relying on Mostert plus others versus Achane, Mostert... and others.
The other thing I'm convinced of is that RB's need to collectively bargain for pay-per-yardage contracts, because they're only going to rush for big yardage for a few seasons, and when they do it makes a huge difference for their teams. I believe Derick Henry damn near carried the Titans into the Superbowl yet no one will ever pay that man the kind of money even Ryan Tannehill is making. It's ridiculous. Henry will maybe make ~$15M tops. Meanwhile Ryan Tannehill is at what... $30M??
It's not like Ryan Tannehill is solely responsible for every passing yard picked up. And he's certainly no where even close to being Tua.
The other thing I'm convinced of is that RB's need to collectively bargain for pay-per-yardage contracts, because they're only going to rush for big yardage for a few seasons, and when they do it makes a huge difference for their teams. I believe Derick Henry damn near carried the Titans into the Superbowl yet no one will ever pay that man the kind of money even Ryan Tannehill is making. It's ridiculous. Henry will maybe make ~$15M tops. Meanwhile Ryan Tannehill is at what... $30M??
It's not like Ryan Tannehill is solely responsible for every passing yard picked up. And he's certainly no where even close to being Tua.
In response to the first paragraph.
I agree that in most cases to be a good team you need a somewhat productive run game, but only to the point that you aren't one dimensional, and force defenses to play "honestly". I don't, however, believe you have to have a top tier, high priced back to accomplish that. In fact, if you look at either top contracts or yardage leaders, it seems there is little correlation with those things and team success. McCafferty might be the exception this season, but even with him, prior to being a 49er, his team's success was very limited. Tell me the last "elite" back that was instrumental in a Championship run.
Now on to your second paragraph.
If RBs want to collectively bargain a different cut of the pie, I have no issue with that, but......... they would have to do it within their own player's union. The cap is the cap. The pie is finite. If you want some sort of artificial redistribution of $, that's something for the players to do from within.
If the rest of the players want to kick back to a fund to redistribute to RBs, for example, I doubt owners would object. I bet other highly paid position players would, though. That should tell you something right there.
I'm sure that's not good enough for you, though. You are probably only interested if the team foots the entire bill, and no other positions suffer. That's not realistic, IMO.
The cap will soon be $250m per year. That's a lot of cash. If players aren't willing to spread the wealth amongst themselves, who's fault is that?
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2016
- Messages
- 3,291
- Reaction score
- 5,568
You can play great football with a multitude of RBs in rotation.
You can't do that with QBs.
It just makes sense.
You can't do that with QBs.
It just makes sense.
AgentXof12
Active Roster
All good points. The thing that is working against elite RBs is the productiveness of RB committees plus every team needs at least a decent QB to have any shot in the playoffs, so the market for any starting QB with a smidge of upside is astronomical, because if he can put his game together you may fly pretty far (see: Geno Smith who never did jack sh*t with the Jets but now...).
I don't imagine anyone will have any sympathy for the running backs. They are as fungible as relief pitchers in MLB. An arm can break or fly off, and it's bring up the next arm from the farm system and 50/50 whether they will be good enough.
That said, you can have a league leading RB or WR and it not correlate to winning or success. QB is a rather interesting position because they do sort of control the offense. Good QBs do what they're told, but great QBs adjust the offense in response to what the defense shows them. So therefore every decent starting QB in the NFL gets a ton of money thrown at them... If I was a RB, I'd probably kick some mediocre QBs in the teeth. lol