- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 8/30/23 at 9:45 pm to Coach Buzzcut
Even in a free market, the rb position wouldn’t be paid like it would have 30 years ago. The margin between top tier rb and third string isn’t that great as long as you can pass block.
Posted on 8/30/23 at 9:50 pm to TulaneFan
Someone tell the frickin Falcons front office please.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 1:48 am to RunningJacket
quote:
They figured out where the money is.
Google could've done that for them 25 years ago (ok they would've needed Yahoo). In 1999, the average NFL salary was $1.1M and the average MLB salary was $1.5M. In 2022, MLB average salary is almost twice that of an NFL player. Career longevity also favors MLB.
I am not disagreeing with you as I have no idea how kids choices in playing sports is trending, but regardless, the NFL being the lowest paid of the three major sports is nothing new.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 2:01 am to Basura Blanco
Does it make sense that qb’s make that much more than running backs?
Posted on 8/31/23 at 5:02 am to VeniceBeachMouton
quote:
Does it make sense that qb’s make that much more than running backs?
Yes
Posted on 8/31/23 at 5:52 am to dhuck20
??
The Falcons have two RBs under rookie contracts and if you count Cordarrelle Patterson as a RB, his contract is very team friendly.
The Falcons have two RBs under rookie contracts and if you count Cordarrelle Patterson as a RB, his contract is very team friendly.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 6:24 am to TulaneFan
The game has changed and running backs are no longer featured players.
No one cried when fullbacks disappeared from an important role in NFL offenses.
This is the NFL they wanted. Pass happy offenses with high scoring and low(er) ratio of hard hits. Have the right QB and you’re nearly unbeatable. Still looking for that QB? Good luck. Because you can’t rely on the running game anymore to deliver Super Bowls.
Thus, running backs are disposable.
No one cried when fullbacks disappeared from an important role in NFL offenses.
This is the NFL they wanted. Pass happy offenses with high scoring and low(er) ratio of hard hits. Have the right QB and you’re nearly unbeatable. Still looking for that QB? Good luck. Because you can’t rely on the running game anymore to deliver Super Bowls.
Thus, running backs are disposable.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 7:40 am to SpqrTiger
quote:
The game has changed and running backs are no longer featured players.
Then why are they getting the franchise tag so often? If just anyone can do it, why not just let them walk? The reason is Josh Jacobs matters to the Raiders offense. He is a difference-maker and creates mismatches just like any other superstar on the team. Barkley seems to matter enough and, you guessed it, gets franchised. Right now Johnathan Taylor can't get moved because the Colts wanted too much. They ask for Jalen Waddle in return with the Dolphins. Why put such a high price on a player who doesn't matter?
The truth is the franchise tag is ruining the running back position. The owners are conspiring to keep the position as low-paying as possible and then these NFL teams are squeezing another year or 2 beyond the rookie contract out of the position with the franchise tag. They can use it 3 times if they believe the back is worth it at that time in their career. That's now 6 and 7, even 8 years, they can keep a running back from free agency after their rookie contract when the guy is a superstar difference-maker.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 9:26 am to FirstCityDawg
quote:The point is that RB just doesnt have the value anymore. Which is more about the draft of Robinson with Allgeier and Patterson already on the team.
The Falcons have two RBs under rookie contracts and if you count Cordarrelle Patterson as a RB, his contract is very team friendly.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 11:37 am to bamameister
quote:
The reason is Josh Jacobs matters to the Raiders offense
No he doesn't. That offense is mediocre with or without him. Modern running games are almost entirely dependent on scheme and OL play and have very little to do with the skill of the runner himself. It's why the Titans can go 6-3 and run for 140 a game when Derrick Henry misses 9 games. It's why Carolina can go 1-5 before trading McCaffrey and 6-5 after trading him. It's why the Rams can sign CJ Anderson off the street after Todd Gurley gets hurt and not miss a beat.
quote:
The owners are conspiring to keep the position as low-paying as possible
It's not some conspiracy or collusion against RBs. It's just smart business. It's not like the owners are keeping RB salaries down and pocketing the money. The money is just being spent on positions that are harder to replace production, such as WR.
This post was edited on 8/31/23 at 11:41 am
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:02 pm to TulaneFan
If your kid was a good enough athlete to be a college running back, are you letting him? Or are you finding/insisting on another position?
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:04 pm to VADawg
quote:
No he doesn't. That offense is mediocre with or without him. Modern running games are almost entirely dependent on scheme and OL play and have very little to do with the skill of the runner himself. It's why the Titans can go 6-3 and run for 140 a game when Derrick Henry misses 9 games. It's why Carolina can go 1-5 before trading McCaffrey and 6-5 after trading him. It's why the Rams can sign CJ Anderson off the street after Todd Gurley gets hurt and not miss a beat.
On one hand, we have you running your mouth about what really matters in the NFL, and on the other hand, we have the Vegas Raiders franchising Josh Jacobs. An owner who promised to get this deal done and a head coach who stated numerous times they needed Josh Jacobs.
You know, the Raider's action just speaks so loud, I can't hear a word you're saying.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:04 pm to Geauxldninja
quote:
Hes not a super star but you can win with him I believe.
That makes one of us
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:06 pm to VeniceBeachMouton
quote:
Does it make sense that qb’s make that much more than running backs?
Does it make sense? Yes, but what doesn’t make sense is paying average qb’s so damn much money.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:06 pm to bamameister
quote:
On one hand, we have you running your mouth about what really matters in the NFL, and on the other hand, we have the Vegas Raiders franchising Josh Jacobs. An owner who promised to get this deal done and a head coach who stated numerous times they needed Josh Jacobs.
A failed head coach in one spot, soon to be two, and an owner who inherited the team and has no idea what he's doing.
If you want to trust Mark Davis and Josh McDaniels' decision making, more power to you.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:07 pm to bamameister
quote:
Then why are they getting the franchise tag so often?
Because it’s cheaper to franchise them than sign them to a long term deal. They still have value, just not in a long term contract situation.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:10 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Because it’s cheaper to franchise them than sign them to a long term deal. They still have value, just not in a long term contract situation.
That's the whole point. Without the franchise tag, the owners couldn't slow play the position. They can slow play a running back out of their prime.
The franchise tag has stopped free agency for the great running backs.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:10 pm to bamameister
They are betting that he’s still valuable for 1-2 years. Jacobs wants to be paid for 4-6 more years. The franchise sees it as a better financial investment to pay him $24M the next 2 years than $35-$45M the next 4-6 years.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:11 pm to bamameister
quote:
That's the whole point. Without the franchise tag, the owners couldn't slow play the position. They can slow play a running back out of their prime. The franchise tag has stopped free agency for the great running backs.
Maybe so, but I’d be willing to bet that franchises would be willing to suffer the loss of the talented running back as opposed to paying for 3-5 unproductive years.
They just don’t have to right now.
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News