2019-2020 NFL Season Thread [ARCHIVED] Football • Page 928

I actually think that Gordon isn't good enough for Rivers to win anything, they need a zeke or a Barkley. Should they keep Gordon? Definitely, but it won't be enough.

 

IIRC it was for RBs given a big second contract

 

I just remember listing off backs that were playing at the time that were good at age 28-30. I listed like 15 or 16 of them that no one really disagreed with. which is half the league, so to me that supports my opinion that the better backs last. Because it’s instinct more so than athleticism that makes them effective, and they don’t lose that edge when their explosiveness starts to wane.

 

#TTP

 

Being “good” and warranting huge chunks of your cap are very different things. Frank Gore is 1047 years old and is fine. But he’s fine because he’s cheap as fuck

 

And I think the takeaway is that you need to be discerning before giving out a big RB contract, not that big contracts for RBs are unilaterally bad.

I personally don’t think Gordon is dominant enough to be a good bet to keep up above average numbers for 4 more years in the way someone like Zeke or Barkley is

I think giving Elliott the contract early is mutually beneficial, and that while there are personal reasons to not do so, I don’t see nearly as many football red flags for him performing at a high level for the next 4-5 years

 

From Matt Forte to Deuce McAllister to Curtis Matin, hell Ricky Williams took time off and came BACK at 30-32 and was still good, like the Jags having Fred Taylor go off at age 30 wasn’t even rare, a huge portion of teams had that kind of back

 

The argument we initially had that white is referencing was looking at big money second Contracts and it wasn’t great.

 

Better than the Packers 4-12 record (Drew’s prediction lol)

 

History doesnt back this up.

 

And this was my other argument, that old backs already do get paid way less and earn way less guarantees than other positions. So the market value of RBs already compensates for the risk. You’re generally paying your 28 year old RB1 half what you’re paying your 30 year old WR1.

 

He's going to get sacked...

 

I think we are overcompensating to say “don’t sign” a great, top 10 RB when they literally earn more yards and touchdowns through more defenders than the vast majority of WR at 50-75% of the cost

 

I agree, be discerning, obviously not every back is worth that extension only the rare-ish talents. We just disagree on Melvin Gordon then. I think he’s gonna keep getting slightly better the next couple years personally.

 

I pulled a list of large RB contracts from about a 5 year span in the late 00s and early 10s and it was split pretty evenly between good (either the player had no discernible drop off or it was a situation like AP where he missed a season and a half but also had a historical season in there so it’s hard to call a failure) and bad (either ill advised like Demarco Murray or they just fell apart by the end of the deal)

 

Bengals have 4 LBs and 11 DLs on the roster lol

Seattle is gonna rush for 300 yards against us

 

Stop making my eyes bleed

 

Oh we are arguing about RBs again see you all in three days

 

Why 3?

 

Bears packers season opener wooooooo

 

That's 4 days

 

Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday...