- 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
Cole Kmet contract extension: this is why RBs are mad
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:33 am
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:33 am
Cole Kmet is an average to above average TE, he had 50 catches last year. He just signed a 4 yr 50 million dollar contract with 32 million guaranteed
LINK
So basically, if he hits his incentives, his four year contract is worth more per year than Saquon Barkley’s new 1 yr deal, and about 2 million more than the RB franchise tag.
This isn’t a thread to explain why RBs get paid less, we had that thread, most of us understand it well and agree that paying running backs a ton of money or giving them long contracts is bad business. This is just a thread to point out why RBs are upset, an average TE is able to negotiate a long term contract worth more per year than what one of the best RBs in the league is able to get for a year and what the RB franchise tag is worth, it does suck for them.
LINK
So basically, if he hits his incentives, his four year contract is worth more per year than Saquon Barkley’s new 1 yr deal, and about 2 million more than the RB franchise tag.
This isn’t a thread to explain why RBs get paid less, we had that thread, most of us understand it well and agree that paying running backs a ton of money or giving them long contracts is bad business. This is just a thread to point out why RBs are upset, an average TE is able to negotiate a long term contract worth more per year than what one of the best RBs in the league is able to get for a year and what the RB franchise tag is worth, it does suck for them.
17
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:35 am to Tiger1242
Its what the market demands, oh well.
However, if I was an elite athlete playing RB in HS, I would do everything in my power to try to transition to WR.
However, if I was an elite athlete playing RB in HS, I would do everything in my power to try to transition to WR.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:36 am to Tiger1242
RBs tend to be fairly interchangeable now that offenses are so pass heavy.
A TE who can block as well as catch doesn’t necessarily grow on trees unless you can find a power forward who won’t get a sniff in the NBA and they have an IQ above an avocado to learn their job.
A TE who can block as well as catch doesn’t necessarily grow on trees unless you can find a power forward who won’t get a sniff in the NBA and they have an IQ above an avocado to learn their job.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:39 am to Fun Bunch
If it is a small school, the RB tends to be an athlete recruit at the next level who becomes a WR or a DB.
Early Doucet at St Martinville did everything there then was a WR at LSU. Jimmy Williams was a do everything at Episcopal then eventually transitioned to CB at Vandy. Etc.
Early Doucet at St Martinville did everything there then was a WR at LSU. Jimmy Williams was a do everything at Episcopal then eventually transitioned to CB at Vandy. Etc.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:43 am to Tiger1242
Whatever. The bottom line is that TE is a much more valuable position on every team.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:48 am to Tiger1242
Salaries for sports at any level are insane.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:51 am to Tiger1242
quote:
So basically, if he hits his incentives, his four year contract is worth more per year than Saquon Barkley’s new 1 yr deal, and about 2 million more than the RB franchise tag.
This isn’t a thread to explain why RBs get paid less, we had that thread, most of us understand it well and agree that paying running backs a ton of money or giving them long contracts is bad business. This is just a thread to point out why RBs are upset, an average TE is able to negotiate a long term contract worth more per year than what one of the best RBs in the league is able to get for a year and what the RB franchise tag is worth, it does suck for them.
Sure it does. The complaint is production. The NFL is shortchanging the running back position regardless of production.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:54 am to Tiger1242
quote:
This isn’t a thread to explain why RBs get paid less, we had that thread, most of us understand it well and agree that paying running backs a ton of money or giving them long contracts is bad business. This is just a thread to point out why RBs are upset, an average TE is able to negotiate a long term contract worth more per year than what one of the best RBs in the league is able to get for a year and what the RB franchise tag is worth, it does suck for them.
Your feelings are meaningless.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:55 am to dukke v
quote:
Whatever. The bottom line is that TE is a much more valuable position on every team.
Dont be fricking stupid. They are not more important to every team.. tight ends are going to suffer some of the same issues running backs suffer as more elite athletes play the position, devaluing their individual worth as the market will eventually adjust..
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:56 am to Tiger1242
I thought the same whenever I saw this on ESPN. I had to look up who Cole Kmet was lol.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 8:59 am to teke184
quote:
A TE who can block as well as catch doesn’t necessarily grow on trees unless you can find a power forward who won’t get a sniff in the NBA and they have an IQ above an avocado to learn their job.
I can assure you Cole Kmet’s grow on trees
Posted on 8/2/23 at 9:03 am to TROLA
GFY….
Posted on 8/2/23 at 9:08 am to Tiger1242
quote:
his four year contract is worth more per year than Saquon Barkley’s new 1 yr deal,
I admit I don't understand NFL and contracts...but shouldnt a 4 year deal be worth more than a 1 year deal?
Posted on 8/2/23 at 9:13 am to Tiger1242
I think everyone knows why running backs are mad. There isn't anything that can (or should) be done about it outside of collective bargaining. I will be interested to see if the running backs have enough sway to get the union to make their issue a priority in the next labor deal. The union has been trying to snuff out the franchise tag in every negotiation since its inception. They haven't gotten it done, and outside of that, I'm not sure the union is really going to go to bat for running back specific rules. Certainly the owners aren't going to crack the door on a position group specific rule that threatens their entire labor model.
Ultimately, running backs are stuck and long term, we'll probably see more talented players try and stick at another position to avoid that pitfall.
Ultimately, running backs are stuck and long term, we'll probably see more talented players try and stick at another position to avoid that pitfall.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 9:14 am to sunnydaze
quote:
I can assure you Cole Kmet’s grow on trees
6'6 260 pound human beings who are in good enough shape and have good enough skill to play a skill position in the NFL most certainly do not grow on trees. They're certainly more rare than 6'0 220 pound human beings.
The Bears overpaid Kmet, but I do think he has some untapped potential.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 9:15 am to TROLA
quote:
Dont be fricking stupid. They are not more important to every team.. tight ends are going to suffer some of the same issues running backs suffer as more elite athletes play the position,
Unlikely, b/c of how saturated the RB market is.
The reason starting TEs are so valuable isn't their elite output, but rather the lack of supply, generally.
It will take 10+ years to stop the supply of RBs to get similarly low.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 9:17 am to bamameister
quote:
Sure it does. The complaint is production. The NFL is shortchanging the running back position regardless of production.
In what way are they shortchanging the running back position? Instead of locking up ONE running back at length for a large amount of their cap, they get 3 or 4 interchangeable running backs run by committee. Actually, what's happening is better for the RB market as a whole. It's only bad for the top level RB's who can't cash in anymore. More running backs will now get decent contracts and playing time. No more bellcow backs. And if you stayed healthy, you got a shot at a 2nd contract in that committee or another. That's not a bad lot in life if you ask me.
I get it. Saquon should be pissed, but what can he do? All he can do is play for what he is offered, or change position. Them's the breaks. Cole Kmet can do something that is not easily replaceable. Maybe Saquon should bulk up and become a TE.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 9:21 am to Cajunhawk81
From a roster management perspective, having all those RBs also serve as your special teams guys means you are getting more jobs done for less money.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 9:25 am to bamameister
quote:
Sure it does. The complaint is production. The NFL is shortchanging the running back position regardless of production.
This is like cobblers and candlemakers. The value they used to provide is not the value they provide today. This is just a media ginned up issue because of current contract disputes. The proof is that no one cried over fullbacks basically being completely phased out and the exact same economics working against traditional linebackers. Instead of propping up candlemakers, maybe those guys should try and provide light bulbs.
Posted on 8/2/23 at 9:26 am to Tiger1242
TEs are more valuable than RBs.
Not sure the misunderstanding
Not sure the misunderstanding
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News