squire12 Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 59 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said: I think "condense the franchise tag bins to represent positionless football" is a thing you could sell the owners on. Like the bins couldbe: Quarterback, Offensive Skill Player, Offensive line, Pass Rusher, Secondary, DT/ILB, Specialist. Why do the owners need to make that change? What are the players willing to give in order to get this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 1 hour ago, Refugee said: There are plenty of jobs that are underpaid relative to the work that they do. These guys are obviously in a different stratosphere than say a child miner being exploited in the Congo but I think most players would agree RBs sacrifice their body as much or more as anyone else on the field. Relative to the money the league generates, I’m all for the players getting a large stake of it. Relative to what RBs produce for their teams, I don’t think they are being fairly compensated. I’m all for workers using any leverage they have to better their situation. You will quickly see fewer talented players wanting to play RB and that might just be how the market plays out. One big difference is that the NCAA game still emphasizes the ground game in a way that the pros do not. An abundance of talented guys who can carry the rock funneled into a league that uses them far less creates a buyers market. I think there needs to be some agreement to support these guys who are putting it on the line as much as and realistically more than their peers. In the meantime, if you’re a RB, keep working on catching passes, those are the guys that attract the most value. *I think where PC is going with adjusting the franchise tag is the most direct way to balance the situation without creating entire new market structures. If you could franchise a guy but the number was high enough to make sure he’s well compensated and the team would have to really decide if it was worth it would ease some of the pressure. Of course, if there was a “skill position “ tag it would probably bring the average WR tag down and they would not go for that. No easy answers. The WR tag wouldn't change. Still top x players in that bin. All are WR, so the WR wouldn't drop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Refugee Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 1 hour ago, PossibleCabbage said: Isn't the franchise tag calculated by "the average of the top 5 salaries at the position"? So if the top 5 "offensive skill positions" are all WRs, then the RBs are getting a pay bump when they're franchised based on that. If you're not willing to pay your RB "top 5 WR money" then maybe don't franchise him- you could still work out a contract or let him test free agency. I’m pretty much against the tag in general but if it were to be changed to “skill position” etc ownership would ask for some huge concessions. They’ve got it good right now at RB even if WR is getting out of hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turf toe Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 47 minutes ago, Old Guy said: Feature RB's are at their best in their 1st contract, almost without fails. Most of the time their production falls off at some point during their second contract. Very few make it to the end of second contract because of the decline. Most will miss a lot of time during the first and second contracts. WR's are coming into their prime in the second and even into their 3rd contract. Giving RBs a big second contract is almost always fool's gold. I"m also not a big fan of paying top 10 WR's at the top of the food chain either. I'm against paying RB's with second contracts as a steadfast rule. Aaron Jones has been terrific so far, his second deal, I still wouldn't have done it. I get all that, thing is there are no absolutes, specially with so much platoon usage now, it is safer to give a 2nd contract if the mileage is low, I use to be old school, draft em, use them up, and replace every 4 drafts, not so much any more, the best RB's are on 2nd contracts or about to be just as Jones is, and he's earned every cent we've paid him. also in todays schemes we are seeing huge production from players like Jones, Cooks, Samuel, McCaffery etc. so they become more then just a RB when there used as a receiver so much, the ones that do that and stay healthy deserve more then whatever that franchise tag was. imo anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 58 minutes ago, Refugee said: I’m pretty much against the tag in general but if it were to be changed to “skill position” etc ownership would ask for some huge concessions. They’ve got it good right now at RB even if WR is getting out of hand. I don't think owners really care which players get paid how much, so long as the total pie is growing and their cut of it stays the same. The reason for the rookie wage scale to begin with was "whiffing at the top of the draft was affecting competitive balance" which is a "keep the pie growing" thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 4 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said: I don't think owners really care which players get paid how much, so long as the total pie is growing and their cut of it stays the same. The reason for the rookie wage scale to begin with was "whiffing at the top of the draft was affecting competitive balance" which is a "keep the pie growing" thing. Yeah owners don't really care who/ what positions gets the money as long as the % revenue stays where it is. I just think if the players / NFLPA wants to push hard for thing like.... - shorter rookie contracts - removing the franchise tag ..... the owners are going to want something in return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 (edited) 11 minutes ago, squire12 said: Yeah owners don't really care who/ what positions gets the money as long as the % revenue stays where it is. I just think if the players / NFLPA wants to push hard for thing like.... - shorter rookie contracts - removing the franchise tag ..... the owners are going to want something in return. The NFLPA has wanted to do away with the franchise tag for a while, and the owners are committed to not doing that because they see the value in being able to keep a superstar QB around in perpetuity (at least until he declines and/or loses his mind). I think they will see "fewer TEs and RBs get franchised because it's too expensive to do so" as a reasonable compromise for "keeping the franchise tag around." Edited July 30, 2023 by PossibleCabbage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 2 hours ago, turf toe said: I get all that, thing is there are no absolutes, specially with so much platoon usage now, it is safer to give a 2nd contract if the mileage is low, I use to be old school, draft em, use them up, and replace every 4 drafts, not so much any more, the best RB's are on 2nd contracts or about to be just as Jones is, and he's earned every cent we've paid him. also in todays schemes we are seeing huge production from players like Jones, Cooks, Samuel, McCaffery etc. so they become more then just a RB when there used as a receiver so much, the ones that do that and stay healthy deserve more then whatever that franchise tag was. imo anyway. Please do not try and slip Deebo Samual into the RB group. He has never averaged 4 carries a game. He occasionally gets a snap out of the backfield but he's a jet sweep guy. Cook and McCaffery are on their second team already. There are so few RBs that separate themselves from the next 20 or so guys. Give me 3s who have different skill sets who are slightly above JAGS and let me roll. Give them a second contract if it's under 10 a year. Otherwise, let them walk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 14 minutes ago, HighCalebR said: On to Canada then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 42 minutes ago, Zycho32 said: On to Canada then. Seems weird he feels like another move is the right move for his career. It reads like it was partly his choice. I thought he was a smart guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 9 minutes ago, HighCalebR said: Seems weird he feels like another move is the right move for his career. It reads like it was partly his choice. I thought he was a smart guy. Only the supremely talented can interact Caustically with the Highers-Up and still tread water on their careers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 1 hour ago, HighCalebR said: Amari Rodgers seems like a classy guy. Unfortunately, form a football standpoint at the NFL level he suffers from LOFT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tperk Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 1 hour ago, Zycho32 said: On to Canada then. He is gonna sign with the Jets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 13 minutes ago, Tperk said: He is gonna sign with the Jets. And they'll cut Wilson for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.