NFL - NEWS & NOTES

Then if I were you, I would put money on the Steelers at Rivers or MGM because their odds to make the playoffs are the worst in the division.

 

So what did the Raiders do last season? Just curious as to why they should pay him more instead of investing in better play from their other positions they need. Proof that greed and self desire rule bad teams. Brady, Maholmes, Brees are all players who deserved to make millions of dollars more but understood that the team needs revenue to improve all the way around and not just the me me me card.

 

This will probably bring out the Alpha Dogs on the site, but . . .

While doing some research for my book, I compiled a spreadsheet of every draft in the "Common Draft Era" (1967 to 2022) I stumbled across some data that may change your thoughts on career longevity across various position groups. The data I downloaded from Pro Football Reference.com included the last year played for every player drafted. As I knew what year they were drafted and the last year they played, it was a simple task to calculate their career duration.

I'll try to post a couple screen shots that depicts the career length by position

 

Thank you, Lyman. I want your book and you must sign it!!!

 

That may be a daunting task as its probably going to be a digital (e-book) only.

 

I might be misunderstanding you, but according to the graph you already posted, RB's are still having the same longevity as other crucial offensive positions, so doesn't that play into the gripe of RB's wanting an equal compensation as compared to other positions? I might be missing something, but that's not unusual. And since the graphs 'prove' that the RB position is drafted more than others, doesnt it seem that they are in demand, #1 and #2, if productive, deserving of at least equal compensation?

 

lol, you didnt say, but Im old-school... books are paper things you pick up and read. I have hundreds and hundreds of books on book shelves, cant stand the 'electronic. stuff. Maybe you can e-sign my e book in a very digital way.

 

The intent was to dispel the myth that RB's have a shorter career span than other positions.

 

Got it, thank you. I was leaning that way and you have made it clearer. Appreciated.

 

RB Mixon restructures deal to stay with Bengals

Per Adam Schefter and ESPN

 

If you look at it in a star player types mold, RB doesn’t really have anyone besides Derick Henry that could challenge to land in the top twenty five all time. QB and WR have quite a few playing right now that could easily end their careers top twenty five. I know it doesn’t mean that they are better than the RBs, but they are producing more offense than the RBs position. It’s a passing game now and a run first and often team hasn’t been winning championships. QBs and WRs get all the MVP awards for the season and post season. RBs are just not as important as WRs who can catch the ball and QBs that can deliver the ball on target. Nobody wants to sign the stud RBs that are FAs right now. Eliot, Cooks and the likes could definitely improve every team in the league. But not one sees them as a sound financial investment for their team. It’s hard to believe that RBs were some of the highest paid players at one time.

 

Which is ridiculous. Looking at the rosters of the four teams. You can see the Bengals and the Steelers have better overall players than the Browns and Ravens.

 

I honestly don’t think the Steelers take the division as we sit here today. Anyone who says anyone other than the Bengals are the team to beat at the moment is wrong in my opinion. Still a long ways till week one and a lot can change but for now the Bengals are the defending division champs and if anything got better. The rest of the division needs to prove they can keep up.

 

...

Mixon gets it. With incentives he will make close to what he was originally signed for. He can earn up to 8M (base just under 6M) which is just a million shy of the earning he would have made.

 

I know that, but RBS aren’t getting ANY money. What are they going to do go on strike as a position group? If I can’t get the $16M, then I sign a deal with $10M guaranteed and $8M in reasonable incentives. They stay healthy, they make bank. Right now Barkley is offered $13M wants $16M.. taking $10M guaranteed with $8M in incentives makes sense for everyone.

 

Would Giants, Raiders rescind franchise tags from Saquon Barkley, Josh Jacobs?



In an offseason full of decisions made — good, bad, or otherwise — the smartest move might have come from Cowboys running back Tony Pollard.

Recovering from a broken ankle while the running back market cratered, Pollard quickly opted to accept his franchise tender of $10.1 million, making the salary for 2023 fully and completely guaranteed. While it removed any leverage he might have had to, for example, skip the offseason program in an effort to get a long-term deal, it’s not as if he was going to participate anyway, given the injury. And with the arbitrary mid-July deadline for franchise-tagged players to sign multi-year deals, there would have been no reason to skip training camp or regular-season games to try to get something that, by rule, he wouldn’t have been able to achieve.

That brings us to the two franchise-tagged running backs who have yet to accept their $10.1 million tenders: Saquon Barkley of the Giants and Josh Jacobs of the Raiders. Until they do, their teams could rescind the tenders, making them free agents.

It has happened rarely, but it’s a device held by every team that uses the tag. Until it is accepted, it can be removed.

From the teams’ perspectives, they would need to find a replacement, either internally or externally. As evidenced by the deal done Friday to keep Joe Mixon in Cincinnati, Dalvin Cook could likely be signed for less than $10.1 million.

From the players’ perspective, who would roll out the green carpet for them at this stage of the offseason? Who has the need, the cash, and the cap space to give them either what they’re looking for in a long-term deal or what they could have on a one-year contract from their current teams?

It’s an important factor for the players and their agents to consider, with the deadline for signing long-term deals only two days away. If they don’t take the best offer on the table as of Monday at 4:00 p.m. ET (and they have every right to reject any such offer), what happens next?

As they huff and puff about not showing up for camp or Week One, the teams could blow their houses down by removing the tags and forcing them to become eleventh-hour free agents, scrambling to get something as good as they could have gotten by Monday’s deadline.

The franchise tag is bad for players. It always has been, it always will be. But the rules to which the players collectively agreed remain in place, and the teams aren’t bashful about using them to the fullest extent. For the Giants and Raiders, one last move could put either or both of their franchise-tagged tailbacks in contractual checkmate.

NBC

 

Ravens with Lamar is still a better roster than the Steelers with Pickett on paper. Steelers going into the season are the 3rd best team on paper. Now the games still must be played which could change everything and who ends up on top will be known in 5.5 months but it does start with the QB, as we have found in 7 out of 10 teams who have won the super bowl in the past 10 years. Tom Brady (4), Patrick Maholmes (2), Nick Foles (1) (No defense in the Eagles win over the Patriots). Seahawks (who still had a solid offense), Denver (Manning's arm was shot by this point), Rams (Defense didn't show up until 3rd quarter but where the difference late).

 

We'll print (and perhaps even bind) our own copies. Might even be enough of us to have a book signing event.