2019-2020 NFL Season Thread [ARCHIVED] Football • Page 680

My boy @whitenblue88 here did just fine with Marlon Mack! Top 20 rusher making less than 2 million (I think less than a million but don't super recall)

 

All of those backs are comparable to Fournette though because he’s on his rookie deal too?? I’m comparing apples to apples here but nice try. I would resign all of those backs but right now wouldn’t resign Forunette. That’s why they are relevant.

 

Answer @whitenblue88's question. Who is on their second contract and DOESN'T have durability concerns. Of course CMC looks great to re-sign right now. The whole argument is how will he look in 4 years! My guess is...not great.

 

The league just went back to having good RBs in the draft again after a several year drought (hence why RBBC got so popular 7-10 years ago). Give it 1 or 2 years. You will see all those guys continuing to be successful in their second contracts.

Let’s put it this way: can YOU name any average to below average 27-28 year old backs who were even as good as Gordon / Kamara / CMC to begin with? LeSean McCoy & AP are like the only old backs in the league who actually did use to be good, and they didn’t decline until age 30 on the dot. Basically all the other old backs have always been underwhelming, it’s not just “they declined because of age”.

We are trying to pull a trend out of a coincidence and sometimes it’s just a coincidence haha. The last time the league had a lot of RB talent there were a lot of backs in their upper 20s still killing it.

 

Not that I think this proves or disproves elite RB worth, but Barnwell had a good stat in his most recent article saying the IND backfield combined for 340 carries, 1,558 yards, 12 rush TDs, and then 96/613/3 in the air last year, and that’s all midround guys on rookie deals

 

Bored of this argument

 

And paid like $3 million bucks for it haha

 

Steelers beat Patriots in week one then close to them in the championship game. Book it.

 

^ Honestly...probably.

 

Sorry but I do think you guys are over exaggerating. I don’t think there are many examples at all of a back who was great at 23 and sucked by 27. All the ones who are 26-30 that aren’t good right now, were never good so attributing that to age is a false parallel.

When the great runningbacks of the last few drafts get resigned I would bet y’all money that at least three quarters of them are still very good at age 28.

 

Cool...Gordon was barely a top 20 rusher last year, so like, hope the chargers re-sign him and continue to suck forever.

 

He missed 4 games and still got 1372 total yards and 14 total touchdowns. He averaged like 115 yards and 1.2 TD per game.

The rushing yards are a bit underwhelming but the TDs are not and throwing to him a lot definitely aided their offense.

 

Lmfao

 

Randall: "He missed a quarter of the season,"
Also Randall: "Durability issues be damned!"

 

Missing 4 games isn’t that uncommon. A WR that pulls a hamstring misses 4 games. A defender with a major concussion can easily miss 4 games.

I agree with you when it comes to Fournette - missing 11 games with soft tissue bullshit injuries is way too much. But are we now gonna say don’t resign any player that has a *normal* amount of injuries?

 

He has yet to make it through a season. Not once. Not ever. I'd sure look forward to giving him $14 mill/year. Better hope the games he misses are early.

Edit: Damn it he did actually survive one season. Don't care.

 

At some point we have to accept that football is violent and your RB is gonna miss 4-5 games sometimes. That doesn’t automatically mean they aren’t worth resigning.

 

$14 mill a year isn’t even that much in the modern NFL. There are offensive guards getting paid close to that nowadays. I think that RB are paid appropriately and that their lower salaries already account for their injury risks. If they were paid like $17-$18 mill per year like top receivers or pass rushers, then I might agree more with you, CarpetElf and socklord

 

At some point, we have to accept that football is violent and resources are limited and your RB is gonna miss 4-5 games sometimes which means you probably shouldn't put too many of your eggs in that basket.

 

At some point we have to accept that most offenses fucking suck if their running game isn’t a threat, so even those 11 games of a very good back that you are getting, are worth the contract. Because for 11 games you are much more likely to win.

 

ummm....$14 million/year is actually a lot of money when you have a talented team and need to pay people. I'd certainly rather have Marlon mack for $2million and be able to give more money to my offensive line.

 

Who's the last RB to be drafted and have meaningful game time who was actually "bad"?

 

Probably Lawrence Maroney haha

 

Consider a team that has a great back for 11 games and doesn’t for 5.

If you can get 7-8 of those 11 as wins, and eke out 1-4 or 2-3 without your runningback, that is still a playoff team.

These are realistic numbers for a lot of run first teams. Even with 5 games missed you still greatly improve your chances of being a contender and teams not fully able to gameplan against you.