RB$ circling the wagons for fellow RBs

[dave mcbride]

43 minutes ago, Lost said:

 

Devin Singletary had twice as many yards from scrimmage last year as Dawson Knox and nearly as many passing targets.   Dawson Knox was awarded a 4 year 52 million contract extension.   Singletary was released and now playing under a 1 year deal for under 3 million.   Kinda crazy.

Knox is a better blocker and averaged 8 yards per target. Singletary averaged 4.8 yards per touch and target combined. 8 yards per play > 4.8 yards per play. 

[Shaw66]

I have very little sympathy for these guys.   They have the wrong perceptions of themselves.

 

Unless and until the news comes out that the owners have a big, secret agreement to set the compensation for all players, I'm going to continue to believe that (except for the draft), it's a free market for teams and players.  The players get paid what it's worth to the teams to acquire them.   Now, you might argue that the teams value the players incorrectly, but I think that's just not true.  The teams have a capped amount of money to spend, and the whole game, from the GM's point of view, is to acquire the collection of talent that is most likely to win within the limits of the cap.   

 

Why aren't the punters tweeting madly about how unfair their compensation is?   How about the offensive guards?   Why do the quarterbacks get those mega-deals?   It's all about value over replacement.   If you want to be regular contender for the title, you have to have a quarterback, so when you get one, you pay him whatever it takes to keep him.  You don't meet your punter's outrageous demands, because whether you have this punter or that punter doesn't really change you chances of making the playoffs all that much.   Same for offensive guards.   If you have a HOF offensive guard, yeah, you pay him.   The rest of them?   Well, you always want the best, but it doesn't matter so much which one you have. 

 

Great running backs don't correlate with consistent winning the way quarterbacks did.   They did once.   In the 60s, it was more important to have Jim Brown or Jim Taylor, and you could get away with Milt Plum, Frank Ryan, and Bart Starr (Starr was great, no doubt, but he was a great game manager - he didn't win games like Mahomes and Allen do).  No more.  Derrick Henry is a truly great running back, but he hasn't made his team a consistent top-five team.  Barkley hasn't, either.  As great as McCaffrey is, and I'd love to have him, he hasn't done it either.   Neither has Ekeler.   The era of teams being led consistently to the Super Bowl by running backs ended with Thurman and Emmitt, not because they were greater than the current crop of running backs, but because the game kept changing. 

 

And on top of just their pure contribution to winning, you have the injury factor.   The league has been offering more and more protection to quarterbacks for a couple of decades.  The running backs, who take MORE pounding than QBs ever did, have very little protection.  So, a big investment in a running back simple doesn't make a lot of sense, because the chances are you will not have him for very long.   When the Bills paid all that money to Allen, it wasn't just because he was worth it for the next few years - it was because by paying him that money, the Bills know they'll have the opportunity to pay him a lot more money a few years from now and keep him through the prime of his career.  Barkley's in his prime; Allen isn't.  By the time Allen is playing like Brady and Rodgers, Barkley will be retired. 

 

Running backs get headlines because the mystique of running backs from 50 years ago continues, even though the game has changed.  They also get headlines because the media can't get enough headlines out of QBs and receivers, so they need someone else to write about, and the running backs are the next most visible players on the field.  Because they get headlines, the running backs think they're important.  They believe their headlines.  The GMs know better.    

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

1 minute ago, Shaw66 said:

The GMs know better.    

I like your post, and agree 100% with the sentiment, until the final sentence when some drunken or drug addled owner, GM, or front office cabal decides to wildly overpay for talent. 😁

(see Haslam, James)

[JoPoy88]

1 minute ago, Ridgewaycynic2013 said:

I like your post, and agree 100% with the sentiment, until the final sentence when some drunken or drug addled owner, GM, or front office cabal decides to wildly overpay for talent. 😁

(see Haslam, James)

one could also include Jerry Jones here given the monstrous deal he gave Zeke not too long ago.

[DrDawkinstein]

I'm all about players milking every penny they can out of the NFL, but all this crying about being "devalued" to $8-10M/yr instead of $20M/yr is absolutely ridiculous.

 

I'll take $5M a year on a 3 year contract and be set for life. And my kid's life. (and probably my grandkids lives) Thank you.

1 hour ago, thenorthremembers said:

They get paid just fine.   There is always the other option, come join me in the 9-5 game.   Comes with student loan debt (my college degree wasn't free), 2 Chrysler Mini Vans, a decent house in Orleans County NY.   It's not a mansion in South Florida or California  but I'm still  living the dream baby.

 

All jobs get paid according to what the owner of the business is willing to pay.  If you don't like it find a new job.

 

 Please stand back while I play the world's smallest fiddle for these 20 and 30 something millionaires.   They have all the right in the world to protest and complain about it, they also have all the right in the world to be roasted for how tone deaf they come across.

 

Well not necessarily since that's what unions are for. And the owner needs the workers far more than the workers need the owner.

 

But I agree with you in general, and to further your point, the players already have a union, and a decent Collective Bargaining Agreement. Most of these guys in question have a MINIMUM of over $1M thanks to the union and CBA.

 

I'd happily take the minimum of $1.08M to hang around and work out with my friends all day. Heck, I'd take it to keep grinding in my 9-5!

[Shaw66]

8 minutes ago, Ridgewaycynic2013 said:

I like your post, and agree 100% with the sentiment, until the final sentence when some drunken or drug addled owner, GM, or front office cabal decides to wildly overpay for talent. 😁

(see Haslam, James)

Oh, for sure, but that's what free markets are about.   Someone always overpays in a free market, and someone underpays.  That's how market prices are determined.   Schoen obviously has learned his lessons.  He knows how important Barkley is to the future of his team (less important than Barkley thinks he is), and he has the discipline not to overpay.  

 

The only thing going on in all these tweets from running backs is they are demonstrating, as a group, that they misunderstand their own values.   Punters don't misunderstand; they negotiate a little here and there, and the very best may even change teams, but they understand that there is a limit to how much their team will pay them.   

[Chicken Boo]

If you're a team that relies heavily on your star RB, then pay them.  

 

It's that simple.  It disgusts me the way RBs are being treated when they take the worst beating of anyone on the field.  

 

What are the Titans, Giants, Raiders, Colts without their stud RBs, you know.. the guys that are directly tied to their success?  Herbert is another whose flaws are exposed without Ekeler on the field.  

 

It's hard to win when you pay scrub QBs $40 + million per season, is more like it. 

8 hours ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

This isn’t a RB league anymore. It’s a passing league. It’s also why QB, WR, and TE salaries have shot way up. 

 

Tell that to Henry, Taylor, Jacobs, Ekeler, Barkley, McCaffrey...all of whom are the key to their team's success.  

[Chicken Boo]

15 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

I'm all about players milking every penny they can out of the NFL, but all this crying about being "devalued" to $8-10M/yr instead of $20M/yr is absolutely ridiculous.

 

I'll take $5M a year on a 3 year contract and be set for life. And my kid's life. (and probably my grandkids lives) Thank you.

 

You don't understand, especially if you think $15 million after taxes, lawyer/agent fees, insurance and whatever other expenses your have or may come up, are guaranteed to float you and your family for life. 

[BADOLBILZ]

8 hours ago, Virgil said:

If so many backs didn’t fall of a cliff around 27, this wouldn’t be an issue.  Most of these guys are up for a contract around 26.  

 

8 hours ago, QCity said:

 After 5+ years in the NFL RB's start breaking down and can't stay on the field

 

This is true.........and part of the reason is that today's RB's(with the exception of Derrick Henry) can't hold a candle to the last crop of great RB's that arrived when guys like Adrian Pederson and Marshawn Lynch entered the league.    The wall got closer......falling from 30 all the way to 26......when the great talents started playing other positions.

 

So these guys are complaining about not being paid like a great RB of yesteryear...........but they aren't as good, either.   It's the only position where the quality of athletes has gotten worse.   They aren't the Thurman Thomas.......they are Kenny Davis.   They aren't Jerome Bettis they are Barry Foster.   

 

If the league wants to be equitable they should pay them more on their rookie deals.   They may not have the longevity of yesterdays starting RB's but they are doing a lot of work relative to what they get paid.   But if not,  then it's not a big deal.   There will always be some RB's because there are still plenty of muscle hamsters that can't hit a curveball and can't play other positions.

 

 

Edited July 18, 2023 by BADOLBILZ

[Solomon Grundy]

9 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Not really a fair comparison. You make it sound like any star RB could have been a star QB if they chose. Totally different skill sets. 

Exactly!! Like Manute Bol couldn't be a point guard no matter how much he tried

[KDIGGZ]

14 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

You don't understand, especially if you think $15 million after taxes, lawyer/agent fees, insurance and whatever other expenses your have or may come up, are guaranteed to float you and your family for life. 

You need to go back to school or take a finance class if you don't think you can survive on $15 mil before taxes lol

[Solomon Grundy]

8 hours ago, Simon said:

God has blessed you with a body and skillset that enables you to become a multimillionaire just for playing a game and then retiring in your thirties, free and wealthy for the rest of your life.

But that's still not enough and the world owes you more.

Go hump some shingles, you spoiled rotten little brats.

I wonder how you feel about the corporate execs? 😎

[Buffalo_Stampede]

I’ve always felt you get paid what you’re worth. If you’re worth more you’ll get more.

 

It’s like WNBA players saying they deserve more. No. If people wanted to spend money on the WNBA then you would get more.

Edited July 18, 2023 by Buffalo_Stampede

[blacklabel]

9 hours ago, Virgil said:

Would you pay someone for 5 years knowing you might only get 2-3 good years out of them? 

 

Yeah this here makes a lot of sense. The player wants guaranteed money but can't guarantee he'll be able to fulfill the entire length of his contract. 

[Ya Digg?]

Just now, Buffalo_Stampede said:

I’ve always felt you get paid what you’re worth. If you’re worth more you’ll get more.

So the problem with this statement though is exactly what’s happening with the Giants. Danny dimes is not worth 40+ million and Barkley is worth more to the giants than what is being offered to him

[JoPoy88]

50 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

I'm all about players milking every penny they can out of the NFL, but all this crying about being "devalued" to $8-10M/yr instead of $20M/yr is absolutely ridiculous.

 

it’s not even that big of a gap for these guys, either:

This deal got squashed over $1-$2Million. That’s it. 

Edited July 18, 2023 by JoPoy88

[transient]

40 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

Tell that to Henry, Taylor, Jacobs, Ekeler, Barkley, McCaffrey...all of whom are the key to their team's success.  

None of whom have a ring among them…

[Chicken Boo]

19 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

You need to go back to school or take a finance class if you don't think you can survive on $15 mil before taxes lol

 

I clearly said after taxes and all expenses, especially if you have children.  Taxes lop that $15 mill into almost half right off the top *and in this hypothetical, you'd be a former NFL RB.  You're going to have former NFL RB knee, joint and back problems for the rest of your life.

 

Heaven forbid you, your spouse or children get cancer or some other debilitating disease... 

 

You have to account for worst case scenarios.  

8 minutes ago, transient said:

None of whom have a ring among them…

 

Cool.  Now let's do QBs who make 2-4 times as much.  

Edited July 18, 2023 by Chicken Boo

[Buffalo_Stampede]

10 minutes ago, Ya Digg? said:

So the problem with this statement though is exactly what’s happening with the Giants. Danny dimes is not worth 40+ million and Barkley is worth more to the giants than what is being offered to him

He is worth that to the Giants. The Giants feel it would be harder to replace Jones than Barkley.

[Chaos]

There is a simple solution.  The NFL has different franchise tags by position. So it is well established there are different financial implications for different position groups. The rookie contract lengths should also adjust by position group. RBs should have a rookie contract life of two seasons.  This will further devalue their draft position but will make them free agents in their prime. 

[KDIGGZ]

5 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

I clearly said after taxes and all expenses, especially if you have children.  Taxes lop that $15 mill into almost half right off the top *and in this hypothetical, you'd be a former NFL RB.  You're going to have former NFL RB knee, joint and back problems fo these rest of your life.

 

Heaven forbid you, your spouse or children get cancer or some other debilitating disease... 

 

You have to account for worst case scenarios.  

Right, you need to take a finance class. You don't know the difference between after taxes and before taxes. Don't worry, most people are bad with money. They purposely don't teach it in school because schools create employees. 99% of this board won't make in their entire life of working what these RB's make in 1 year. No matter what your job is, you are paid based on your value. If these RB's are so valuable as you say, then the team would have no choice but to pay them what they want. The fact is, they are not and can be easily replaced by a younger and hungrier runner for much cheaper.

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

4 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

He is worth that to the Giants. The Giants feel it would be harder to replace Jones than Barkley.

There might be a new 'low cost' option available in the metropolitan NYC area...

Willing to entertain 'interesting fringe benefits' as part of his overall compensation package.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

4 minutes ago, Chaos said:

There is a simple solution.  The NFL has different franchise tags by position. So it is well established there are different financial implications for different position groups. The rookie contract lengths should also adjust by position group. RBs should have a rookie contract life of two seasons.  This will further devalue their draft position but will make them free agents in their prime. 

The biggest thing here is in order to pay RBs more you have to take money from somewhere else. Meaning other positions or owners. Also if the owners agree to give more money they aren’t going to want to pay RBs.

 

There really isn’t a solution unless owners and other NFL players feel bad and want to give their money to RBs.

[transient]

5 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

Cool.  Now let's do QBs who make 2-4 times as much.  

I’ll do you one better, let’s look at the last 15 SB winners and identify the teams with RBs making 15M dollars… or 10M dollars, even… the season they won the SB. If you want, do it by percentage of cap space taken up for a more accurate comparison… eyeballing it, it’s probably only Seattle with Marshawn Lynch that even approximates what you’re talking about, and I have no idea if he was in his peak contract years when they won it. 

[Chicken Boo]

4 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Right, you need to take a finance class. You don't know the difference between after taxes and before taxes. Don't worry, most people are bad with money. They purposely don't teach it in school because schools create employees.

 

It's definitely YOU that doesn't understand the difference between net and gross pay. 

Edited July 18, 2023 by Chicken Boo

[Chicken Boo]

1 minute ago, transient said:

I’ll do you one better, let’s look at the last 15 SB winners and identify the teams with RBs making 15M dollars… or 10M dollars, even… the season they won the SB. If you want, do it by percentage of cap space taken up for a more accurate comparison… eyeballing it, it’s probably only Seattle with Marshawn Lynch that even approximates what you’re talking about, and I have no idea if he was in his peak contract years when they won it. 

 

Take a look at the last 15 Super Bowl winners and tell me how many of them have middling QBs.

 

[SoMAn]

It is what it is…a changing game and changing market for some positions. 

 

If they don’t like the job, go sit for an insurance license exam.

They effectively get paid over $1,000,000 with 4 months off to vacation or just spend time with family.

 

In the glory days of when RBs where taken 1st overall and were often the best paid, corners, receivers, and OTs  were second tier players on the wage scale. 

That’s flip-flopped with the change in game and rules that favor the passing game. 
 

 

[DrDawkinstein]

1 hour ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

I clearly said after taxes and all expenses, especially if you have children.  Taxes lop that $15 mill into almost half right off the top *and in this hypothetical, you'd be a former NFL RB.  You're going to have former NFL RB knee, joint and back problems for the rest of your life.

 

Heaven forbid you, your spouse or children get cancer or some other debilitating disease... 

 

You have to account for worst case scenarios.  

 

Cool.  Now let's do QBs who make 2-4 times as much.  

 

Play 3 years and you are vested into NFL healthcare for life.

 

Taxes and agent fees will come out right about 40%. So still leaves me with $7M+.

 

A $5M principal nest egg should give anyone a salary of $200k (or more) a year for the rest of your life. For doing nothing. Better off then 99% of us civilians.

 

edit:

Federal Taxes will be about 36.5%. The blended State Tax rate will be about 5%. Agent fee cannot be more than 3%. So that is 44.5%.

For the sake of discussion, let's call it 45%.

 

$15M - 45% = $8,250,000

For the sake of discussion, let's call it $8M

 

At an ultra conservative 3% draw, that principal generates $240k/yr. Forever. Plus anything over 3% generated by my investments gets added onto the principal.

 

Maybe I can't live like a show-off diva baller. But my family and I can definitely live comfortably for a loooong time.

 

Edited July 18, 2023 by DrDawkinstein

[transient]

Just now, Chicken Boo said:

 

Take a look at the last 15 Super Bowl winners and tell me how many of them have middling QBs.

 

Arguing that you can’t win a SB with a middling QB isn’t a justification for overpaying for a star RB. If anything, the last 15 years demonstrate that teams that are dependent on their running game over their QB would be better off tearing it all down until they find their QB than paying a stud RB a lot of money to overcome their QB deficiencies, assuming that winning the SB is their goal.

[Bill from NYC]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

This is true.........and part of the reason is that today's RB's(with the exception of Derrick Henry) can't hold a candle to the last crop of great RB's that arrived when guys like Adrian Pederson and Marshawn Lynch entered the league.    The wall got closer......falling from 30 all the way to 26......when the great talents started playing other positions.

 

So these guys are complaining about not being paid like a great RB of yesteryear...........but they aren't as good, either.   It's the only position where the quality of athletes has gotten worse.   They aren't the Thurman Thomas.......they are Kenny Davis.   They aren't Jerome Bettis they are Barry Foster.   

 

If the league wants to be equitable they should pay them more on their rookie deals.   They may not have the longevity of yesterdays starting RB's but they are doing a lot of work relative to what they get paid.   But if not,  then it's not a big deal.   There will always be some RB's because there are still plenty of muscle hamsters that can't hit a curveball and can't play other positions.

 

 

I agree. Most running backs seem to me to be about the same in quality. Their success seems to be dictated by mainly by:

1)  The quality of their OL.

2) Whether or not their QB is good enough to keep the LBs and safeties playing back.

The rule changes and safety concerns have made this a passing league and it is very unlikely to change.

[C.Biscuit97]

Honestly, you have to see both sides and they both are valid. RBs age badly and rarely last long. So you get 100% why teams are hesitant to pay them.

 

However imagine if you are Derrick Henry or Barkley and you are the offense. Meanwhile, your scrub qb is making 4 times as much as you. That’s pretty BS. You get destroyed physically, are a much, much better player but get 4 times less? I would be pissed too. 
 

im not 100 percent sure that solution. I do think the qb money has gotten out of control. Allen and Mahomes is one thing. But Daniel Jones and 15 td passes makes $40 million/ year is wild. I also think rbs should be allowed to go pro whenever they want once they are in college. Teams prostitute these dudes (both in college and see what the Flacons did to Jamal Anderson during their SB run) and then throw them away. It is one of the coolest positions in sports and they might get treated the worst.

6 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

I agree. Most running backs seem to me to be about the same in quality. Their success seems to be dictated by mainly by:

1)  The quality of their OL.

2) Whether or not their QB is good enough to keep the LBs and safeties playing back.

The rule changes and safety concerns have made this a passing league and it is very unlikely to change.

But that’s why the special ones - Henry, Barkley - who can shine with garbage qbs and mid o line play deserve bigger money. 
 

 

42 minutes ago, transient said:

I’ll do you one better, let’s look at the last 15 SB winners and identify the teams with RBs making 15M dollars… or 10M dollars, even… the season they won the SB. If you want, do it by percentage of cap space taken up for a more accurate comparison… eyeballing it, it’s probably only Seattle with Marshawn Lynch that even approximates what you’re talking about, and I have no idea if he was in his peak contract years when they won it. 

Eh, how many qbs making max money have won SBs recently? Mahomes’ contracf just kicked in, Brady always took discounts, etc. paying anyone top position money is not great for team success.

 

but how many receivers making top money have won SBs? I can’t think of any (see KC trading Hill before winning a SB). Yet, their salaries keep escalating 

[SoCal Deek]

As with all things, this is not complicated.
 

What is something worth? Answer: What someone else is willing to pay for it. 

 

We seem to have a real problem with that in society. It’s time for a mandatory class. 

[EasternOHBillsFan]

6 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

As with all things, this is not complicated.
 

What is something worth? Answer: What someone else is willing to pay for it. 

 

We seem to have a real problem with that in society. It’s time for a mandatory class. 

 

We have a real problem with associating money with success... all money does is allow a person to do more of what they want the more they have of it- it doesn't make them better or smarter, it just makes them rich. They don't want to pay RBs nearly as much because of their propensity for injury and wearing out a lot sooner... fine. That being said, if they are going to do that, they should be taken care of monetarily or through medical benefits that are commensurate with the extra wear and tear they place on their bodies. Frankly I am surprised that football remains as it is because of the cases of CTE that keep cropping up- these men want to be able to live comfortably after their career and the RB position is especially brutal. That being said, THEY APPROVED THE CBA and they must accept partial blame for this.

[C.Biscuit97]

6 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Another one. Gurley only 23 years old when he got paid. So it’s not about age. It’s about the position. 
 

The Rams are a great example. They have struggled to replace Gurley but they still won a Super Bowl with his replacements. They had a RB by committee that year.

Eh. gurley had damaged knees coming into the nfl. And those Rams team with Gurley were way better than the Rams team that won it (they are one of the worse recent SB winners). 
 

 

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

 

We have a real problem with associating money with success... all money does is allow a person to do more of what they want the more they have of it- it doesn't make them better or smarter, it just makes them rich. They don't want to pay RBs nearly as much because of their propensity for injury and wearing out a lot sooner... fine. That being said, if they are going to do that, they should be taken care of monetarily or through medical benefits that are commensurate with the extra wear and tear they place on their bodies. Frankly I am surprised that football remains as it is because of the cases of CTE that keep cropping up- these men want to be able to live comfortably after their career and the RB position is especially brutal. That being said, THEY APPROVED THE CBA and they must accept partial blame for this.

All of that is true but it’s sort of like saying I want to be an underwater welder but am afraid of being in the water. 
 

Anyone ever seen the Monty Python ‘Lion Tamer’ sketch? One of my all time favorites! 👍

[EasternOHBillsFan]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

All of that is true but it’s sort of like saying I want to be an underwater welder but am afraid of being in the water. 
 

Anyone ever seen the Monty Python ‘Lion Tamer’ sketch? One of my all time favorites! 👍

 

Underwater welders GET PAID PREMIUM PAY for their job, though...

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

 

Underwater welders GET PAID PREMIUM PAY for their job, though...

Once again….They get paid EXACT MINIMUM the industry has determined they need to be in order to fill the available positions. Just like every other job, ever. 

[Nextmanup]

10 minutes ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

They don't want to pay RBs nearly as much because of their propensity for injury and wearing out a lot sooner... fine.

That is NOT why they aren't paid more.

 

They are not paid more because the game has changed since 1983 and a really good WR raises your win probability much more than a really good RB.  

 

Players are generally compensated according to their impact on Wins and Losses.

 

The day may come (this was predicted when the salary cap was invented) when ALL the money goes to the QB and elite offensive weapons, and the rest of the team will make league minimum.

 

 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

17 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Eh. gurley had damaged knees coming into the nfl. And those Rams team with Gurley were way better than the Rams team that won it (they are one of the worse recent SB winners). 
 

 

And what are you saying?

[Buffalo_Stampede]

I think most fans would say centers are more important than RBs. Maybe not.