Jump to content

Should Rookie RBs Get Shorter Contracts?


JaguarCrazy2832

Recommended Posts

I think that is fair.  3 yr. rookie deal with team option for 4, rather than 4 and 5.

They need to hammer down what is considered a RB then as so many line up split now and WRs line up in backfield as well.  Maybe they already have a good definition.  My definition would be lining up between tackles and off LINE OF SCRIMMAGE for 51% of your snaps.  Excludes QBs of course.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t know how much any of these factors really matter tbh.

It’s a position that has a short shelf life and requires little to no player development.  A team can sign a guy off the street and they can play the next week at a high level.

As long as those things remain true, the value will never be there imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2019 at 7:06 AM, wackywabbit said:

 

I was going to say this. Or they should remove the positional basis for it. If someone is truly a "franchise" player that you must keep from the open market, it should at the average of the top 5 for ALL positions, so basically only QBs should get it.

 

On 7/16/2019 at 6:30 AM, iknowcool said:

They should just get rid of the franchise tag.

 

On 7/20/2019 at 3:40 PM, Tony7188 said:

I think the bigger issue is the franchise tag. Even if you shorten rookie RBs contract to 3 years with a team option, teams can still just franchise tag that player for two years and then let them go. 

So much this. Players union needs to stand up and not sign anything that doesn’t get rid of the franchise tag or at least move it into much more prohibitive use. QB money. I’d go after RFA rags as well. The rookie cap has been working out well. If I was a player in the union I’d tell my rep I’m voting no on every deal that doesn’t allow free will when a contract expires.  I’d be hesitant to vote for anything that didn’t include players getting a leg back with free agency, even if it requires giving the owners a “max contract” limit like the NBA. Lock out is imminent unless the players give up even more this time around. The owners know that group is weak. 

 

It’s been a known issue that running backs have shorter careers generally and are paid less because their drop off is so steep and replacements are lined up for days. It’s the trade off of the position. Growing up, you wanted the ball and the glory well turns out everyone else did too. There’s plenty of running backs to be had. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Kiwibrown said:

All rookie contracts need more escalators in them, something that leads to year 4 being top 10 money for the position if the player deserves it 

Agreed. So many of these guys go in to that last year under that with no deal but have earned it. They don't want to hold out, I would think if they meet certain criteria, both sides would love it. The team looks smart and probably helps them keep the player while the player gets paid for being Top-10

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wwhickok said:

No, teams should make more of an emphasis to split the load between 2 or more RBs. Stop making one guy take all the beating imo.

Then they will just point to the production when it is time to pay them.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2019 at 3:40 PM, Tony7188 said:

I think the bigger issue is the franchise tag. Even if you shorten rookie RBs contract to 3 years with a team option, teams can still just franchise tag that player for two years and then let them go. 

I think paying them like a top 5 RB for the final two years would be fair compensation for locking them down then. 

This could actually be a happy medium. But no, other positions will want it too. 

Edited by Dome
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should definitely give more of our money to the aggrieved RBs

 

"Washington running back Adrian Peterson has made about $100 million in salary, and millions more in endorsements, during his NFL career. But he’s deep in debt after his lawyer says he trusted people who ripped him off.

TheAthletic.com reported that Peterson is being sued in Pennsylvania for failing to pay back a $5.2 million loan. In two separate matters, judges have ordered Peterson to pay $2.4 million to one creditor and $600,000 to another creditor.

Despite the fortune Peterson has made, he appears to be nearly broke, with debts that he is struggling to pay, and debts that he’ll continue to struggle to pay even after getting a $1.5 million signing bonus to remain in Washington this year, with another $1 million in salary on the way for the season"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

We should definitely give more of our money to the aggrieved RBs

 

"Washington running back Adrian Peterson has made about $100 million in salary, and millions more in endorsements, during his NFL career. But he’s deep in debt after his lawyer says he trusted people who ripped him off.

TheAthletic.com reported that Peterson is being sued in Pennsylvania for failing to pay back a $5.2 million loan. In two separate matters, judges have ordered Peterson to pay $2.4 million to one creditor and $600,000 to another creditor.

Despite the fortune Peterson has made, he appears to be nearly broke, with debts that he is struggling to pay, and debts that he’ll continue to struggle to pay even after getting a $1.5 million signing bonus to remain in Washington this year, with another $1 million in salary on the way for the season"

So... I don’t make a lot of money. I spend less then I make though. I save a little for retirement, and I save a little bit that I put in an old pickle jar. I have zero sympathy for Adrian Peterson who doesn’t get this concept of spending less then you make. With just his signing bonus I could replace my annual salary permanently with dividend stocks. You know what I’m less then sympathetic. I’m glad a fool and his money were easily parted. He had the chance for a college education, access to NFL financial services,  That have been highlighted during his career by players like Drew Brees and yet he still managed to blow through his earnings. He’ll get by. He just won’t be able to afford that 10th new automobile. 

 

My sympathy isn't with the top players. Melvin Gordon is making top ten money this season already. He just wants more and to be paid for production he will likely never give a team. I’d rather a cap be out on top tier contracts and then inflate the bottom players. Those roster bubbles players that will play less then 3 years and not have the lifetime earnings of established Superstars. Bigger rosters (90) and higher minimums with fully guaranteed deals would be the direction I’d want to move in. 

 

Rookies should come in with a 3 year contract. After that free agency. No RFA, no transition tags and no franchise tag. 

Edited by Boltstrikes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Kiwibrown said:

All rookie contracts need more escalators in them, something that leads to year 4 being top 10 money for the position if the player deserves it 

You can't mandate escalators, though. That's a team thing, and because there's a cap, it kinda has to be. 

46 minutes ago, Thelonebillsfan said:

Getting rid of the franchise tag solves this problem instantly. 

No, it doesn't. It changes things, but it doesn't solve the problem. It would also create different problems. I know the players don't like the tag, and certain teams definitely abuse it--but the league needs the tag, desperately. I still love the NBA, but if had a franchise tag, things would be so much more palatable over there.

The problem with the running back contracts lies solely with *******s in management. These good backs need to to demand renegotiation after their third year. Hold out, demand trades, whatever. FORCE managements to deal with the problem as they should. 

2 hours ago, Shanedorf said:

Despite the fortune Peterson has made, he appears to be nearly broke, with debts that he is struggling to pay, and debts that he’ll continue to struggle to pay even after getting a $1.5 million signing bonus to remain in Washington this year, with another $1 million in salary on the way for the season"

I don't even know if you have a point, there. You're talking about a guy who we've long known is an idiot. How does his situation apply to the greater league? 

Edited by Heinz D.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Heinz D. said:

You can't mandate escalators, though. That's a team thing, and because there's a cap, it kinda has to be. 

No, it doesn't. It changes things, but it doesn't solve the problem. It would also create different problems. I know the players don't like the tag, and certain teams definitely abuse it--but the league needs the tag, desperately. I still love the NBA, but if had a franchise tag, things would be so much more palatable over there.

The problem with the running back contracts lies solely with *******s in management. These good backs need to to demand renegotiation after their third year. Hold out, demand trades, whatever. FORCE managements to deal with the problem as they should. 

The management still have more leverage than the player though. Which runningbacks in the last 20 years have had that much leverage? 

Faulk, LT, Lynch, Peterson, maybe Gurley. 

How many QBs have had that much hold outleverage? The list would be massive.

Brady, big ben, manningx2, rivers, palmer, Rogers, farve, cam,  the list is huge.

1 hour ago, Heinz D. said:

I don't even know if you have a point, there. You're talking about a guy who we've long known is an idiot. How does his situation apply to the greater league? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...