The Curious Case of RB Values in the NFL

[Iggloo]

Interesting idea for a way for the NFL to pay RBs more. Use a special bonus pool to reward them for success when they put up numbers.

 

[SteelersPride]

A

well plenty of 1st round backs that missed. That is the danger.

Do you land an Eric Dickerson or a Felix Jones.

Well there in lies my point. We had so many other needs. Build your foundation before taking a luxury pick. I hope it was just najees foot last year(it likely was), but hes been a wasted pick thus far. His rookkie year was nothing but volume.

najee is the one guy keeping you guys above 500 the last two seasons

So strongly disagree. Defense did that. Najee certainly did not last year. His rookie year, if we could of gotten even top 15 rb production id of been happy. He played 90% + of the snaps and handled 90% of the carries. His actual advanced stats arent pretty. Another steeler fan can chime in. There are a bevy of reasons why, some
Out of his control. But that doesnt change things.

 

[SteelersPride]

I’m fairness to Najee that offensive line was garbage two years ago and less offensively smelling garbage last year.

Which is exactly why we shouldnt of drafted him. We should of fixed the line. I didnt circle back yesterday, my fault. Hope you know I was goofing around.

 

[fastforward]

I don't believe the current RB situation means a pay restructure is necessary. I would be against rookie pay mechanisms that are different for different positions. I would be in favour of altering rookie contracts at the next CBA, (as I was for the last CBA). 3rd year rookie contract pay is too low. 4th year rookie contract pay is too low. The 4th year should be RFA tag options for non-1st round picks. RFA tags values are too low and compensation is too high. Being RFA tagged should count as the 1st tag against a player, (meaning the next franchise tag option would be the 120% tag).

The game is changing and positional pay for veterans is reflecting that. It's always tough to see players in a certain position become devalued but at the same time pay for interior OL and Ss is going up. Should their pay be diverted to pay RBs? After all, paying RBs more means paying other people less.

 

[wilwhite]

I don't believe the current RB situation means a pay restructure is necessary. I would be against rookie pay mechanisms that are different for different positions. I would be in favour of altering rookie contracts at the next CBA, (as I was for the last CBA). 3rd year rookie contract pay is too low. 4th year rookie contract pay is too low. The 4th year should be RFA tag options for non-1st round picks. RFA tags values are too low and compensation is too high. Being RFA tagged should count as the 1st tag against a player, (meaning the next franchise tag option would be the 120% tag).

The game is changing and positional pay for veterans is reflecting that. It's always tough to see players in a certain position become devalued but at the same time pay for interior OL and Ss is going up. Should their pay be diverted to pay RBs? After all, paying RBs more means paying other people less.

I took a look at actual career length by position. Kickers and QBs are the only ones over 4 years. Linemen are between 3 and 4, other defensive players right around 3, TEs and WRs a little under 3, and RBs at 2.5.

I think a clean way to fix RB salaries is to tie the length of rookie contracts to the average career length at the position. Instead of 4 years for with a fifth-year team option for everybody, it should be:

• 2 years with a third-year team option for RBs
• 3 years for TEs and WRs
• 3 years with a fourth-year team option for defensive non-linemen
• 4 years for all linemen
• 4 years with a fifth-year team option for QBs and kickers

NFLPA should negotiate for this.

 

[ducky]

I don’t know the best answer but something is going to come probably even before the next CBA. A lot of the star RB’s around the league participated in a zoom this weekend to talk what can be done.

We are going to see a lot of RB’s with “hamstring“ injuries this year. What’s the point of playing a full season and putting up big numbers when teams are only going to downgrade your next deal by blaming it on workload? I wouldn’t be shocked if we see a week or two where most RB’s around the league all pick a week of protest and come down with an injury at the same time.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

I took a look at actual career length by position. Kickers and QBs are the only ones over 4 years. Linemen are between 3 and 4, other defensive players right around 3, TEs and WRs a little under 3, and RBs at 2.5.

I think a clean way to fix RB salaries is to tie the length of rookie contracts to the average career length at the position. Instead of 4 years for with a fifth-year team option for everybody, it should be:

• 2 years with a third-year team option for RBs
• 3 years for TEs and WRs
• 3 years with a fourth-year team option for defensive non-linemen
• 4 years for all linemen
• 4 years with a fifth-year team option for QBs and kickers

NFLPA should negotiate for this.

I like where your head is at but more to consider.

A. reason why certain positions are lower avg. is because we have so many strings at those positions. so lot more turnover.
What is the avg. for the starters would be more accurate at the conversation you are presenting.

but then there is B.

B. all rookie contracts are guaranteed. So if a low level player makes the team he gets 4 years of pay. Even if cut. For the bottom side by making these contracts shorter. Take away from the bulk of the RBs in the league (the guys that bring that avg. years down)

So if the NFLPA is doing their job for all players. Cant see them going there. Right now few real successful RBs suffer (by getting rich)
If they make changes for those few. They damage the many.

I also dont have an answer for the RB dilemma.

Maybe increase their pay by whatever equation they use &/or get rid of their 5th year option.
Dont really know of a clear answer.

 

[fightinfunbags]

I don’t know the best answer but something is going to come probably even before the next CBA. A lot of the star RB’s around the league participated in a zoom this weekend to talk what can be done.

We are going to see a lot of RB’s with “hamstring“ injuries this year. What’s the point of playing a full season and putting up big numbers when teams are only going to downgrade your next deal by blaming it on workload? I wouldn’t be shocked if we see a week or two where most RB’s around the league all pick a week of protest and come down with an injury at the same time.

Personally, I think that’s what the attempt was with that meeting last night. I said to my buddy that I think they’re trying to put together some sort of position protest. “You guys say RBs don’t matter with the way we get valued? Ok. Good luck playing week whatever without the RB position. I just don’t think you could get enough people on board to make it work though.

 

[fastforward]

I took a look at actual career length by position. Kickers and QBs are the only ones over 4 years. Linemen are between 3 and 4, other defensive players right around 3, TEs and WRs a little under 3, and RBs at 2.5.

I think a clean way to fix RB salaries is to tie the length of rookie contracts to the average career length at the position. Instead of 4 years for with a fifth-year team option for everybody, it should be:

• 2 years with a third-year team option for RBs
• 3 years for TEs and WRs
• 3 years with a fourth-year team option for defensive non-linemen
• 4 years for all linemen
• 4 years with a fifth-year team option for QBs and kickers

NFLPA should negotiate for this.

That looks hugely problematical. This would be determining NFL positional contracts based on 'work' done outside the NFL. Would the NFL announce their decisions on slash player designations before the Draft? What about rookies that didn't play football in college, or in North America for that matter? Would players be able to contest player designations, and if so over what time period? The NFL wants to pay rookies based on Draft positions without any adjustments based on positions. If they base rookie contracts on positions how do they avoid paying them by positions? Since contracts would be of different length would the time periods before players and teams could renegotiate contracts be different? This might create more issues than it would solve.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

I think RBs are good to snag in the 2nd round. Look at last year, a number of teams snagged good ones but even then all of them got injured lol (Ken Walker was injured and had to miss a few games before Penny went down, and at some point late season he had to sit a game or two).

That said, there's a HUGE difference in most cases between a 2nd round RB and a 7th round RB. Yah you might get lucky, but having a crappy runningback in the backfield has it's own issues. If the defense doesn't have to respect the run at all and the runningback is a terrible blocker and/or receiver, it makes it that much harder to throw. And very few teams in history have been successful with a spread wideout offense.

 

[Duffman]

I believe someone on his board said years ago,l that running backs don’t matter

 

[PDay8810]

I believe someone on his board said years ago,l that running backs don’t matter

Yep...sounded dumb then too

 

[richig07]

That is pretty crazy, kickers score the most points on a team but RB’s workload and having to understand the playbook should be taken into account. Kickers aren’t getting points if the offense doesn’t move down the field.

Part of the devaluation I think stems from the league being pass happy for quite awhile now but some RB’s are a big part of the passing game as well so that can add to the confusion. Another factor could be longevity and how injury prone the RB position can be.

That is ALL RB salaries averaged out. Teams carry 3-4 RB's. Teams have ONE kicker. Average out the starting RB money and it will be drastically different.

 

[richig07]

Yep...sounded dumb then too

Nah. Right on track. The people in this world who study this the most, disagree with you entirely. The last "franchise/elite" RB to win a SB? Was Marshawn Lynch in 2013. Going on a full decade ago. We went 5 straight seasons since then where Legarrette Blount and/or CJ Anderson led the rushing attack for the winning team. They once did so against each other in a Super Bowl in 2018 when Anderson took over for Gurley in the postseason.

Every position "matters". Of course, the "doesn't matter" is hyperbole. However, there's a scale of importance from "long snapper" to "quarterback". RB is much closer to long snapper than it is QB.

 

[PDay8810]

Nah. Right on track. The people in this world who study this the most, disagree with you entirely.

I trust the opinions from coaches to players. Actual people involved in the game.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]