- 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
re: The NFL running back conundrum
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:21 pm to Oilfieldbiology
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:21 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
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.
Again, that's the whole point. The NFL doesn't have to. They don't have to offer free agency to great running backs when they can legally slow-play them with the franchise tag. My point is to look at all the guys getting the franchise tag at running back. They only put that on players they value and choose not to lose.
This isn't a value issue as it is getting discussed in this thread. It's a monopoly by the owners to set an unfair value.
3
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:39 pm to bamameister
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.
Didn’t Cooper Rush go 4-1 or 5-1 when Dak got hurt?
Also Teddy Bridgewater went 5-0 when Brees was injured
Posted on 8/31/23 at 12:48 pm to bamameister
quote:
They don't have to offer free agency to great running backs when they can legally slow-play them with the franchise tag. My point is to look at all the guys getting the franchise tag at running back. They only put that on players they value and choose not to lose.
Change the value system for franchise tags for RBs so they automatically become Top 3 in salary for that position or do away with it entirely.
Side note: The players and others in the NFLPA need to make sure that DeMaurice Smith is nowhere near the negotiating table for the next CBA, he has fricked over so many players.
Posted on 8/31/23 at 1:08 pm to bamameister
quote:
This isn't a value issue as it is getting discussed in this thread. It's a monopoly by the owners to set an unfair value.
Yep, if RBs had no value like described ITT then they wouldn't all be getting franchise tagged. Why pay them the $11 or $12M if they are all replaceable.
The problem with RBs is the rookie contract + franchise tag option will essentially put them out of the league by the time they can hit the open market. They really should just abolish the franchise tag option for RBs
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News