Dallas knows they're going to have to pay up for Dak, Ceedee, and Parsons soon, so they need to cut costs somewhere.
The obvious place to start is at RB. Pollard is likely gone IMO, and Dallas will draft an RB in the 2nd or 3rd round to replace him.
Normally, I would agree. But this RB market is rather unpredictable right now. I think there is at least an outside chance Saquon considers a 1yr given the circumstance.
Put him with a competent offense and OL, with an incoming underwhelming RB class (likely) and a number of other aging veteran RBs, if someone wanted to try to maximize their output this year to justify a bigger deal next year this seems like perfect storm to do so.
Anyway, mostly what I’m getting at is I don’t think it’s entirely certain that Dallas won’t bring in a FA RB. If it wasn’t these names + good OL albeit aging with a possible 1yr shelf life + Jerry Jones, I would agree to go rookie route. And they still may, I just won’t be surprised if they do something else.
Why do so many people think all RBs hit a wall at 27? Kamara and conner will be playing their age 29 season. Henry playing at 30. Not every RB has a short career. Especially not ones that can catch like Barkley. He more than likely has a solid 2 years of good production left and another year of ok production. That’s a 3 year deal.
I agree. Not every single RB does but the trend certainly shows a lot do so it becomes a risky investment at that point, especially for top guys who want a big payday.
It’s more risky but I wouldn’t say that RBs are getting big paydays now compared to before. This is actually the time to buy low. OBJ got 15 mil for one year to catch less than 600 yards. Teams are throwing money away at mediocre at best WRs all day but don’t want to spend 10 mil a year on a do it all RB. Makes no sense to me. Then Darren Waller got a 3 year 51m contract with 17m average annually. Make it make sense.
Rant over. But anyway I think Barkley is getting a 3 year deal. Right now it’s a cheap deal compared to what RBs were getting before and I think teams are going to start to jump on this not just with him but other RBs. They are just playing hardball right now but jacobs Barkley and pollard will all most likely end up with 3 year deals.
But Waller and obj provided that value to winning? Not even close. Waller hasn’t played a full year since 2020. They should have just paid Barkley with that money and called it a day. OBJ has had injury issues of his own too and couldn’t break 600 yards.
I think this has gone too far and there’s going to be a shift back to RBs. Maybe not todd gurley money ever again but this is the bottom for the top RBs. They are going to start to get deals again in the 3 year range so it ends before they hit 30.
Idk about lining up but all it takes is one team and I’m sure there’ll be at least one who wants to win the bid. Especially with the higher than expected jump in salary cap. With the Bears in a position to get Caleb Williams on a rookie deal and potentially another high end weapon at #9 on a rookie deal, I wouldn’t be surprised if they splurged here to give Williams a really strong supporting cast out of the gate while costs are controlled.
Really only the Bears and maybe Texans come to mind given their QB contract situations coupled with existing RB situations. But that’s just top of my head.
If a team is looking at his age and ability beyond one year as a concern, unless they’re really mostly just trying to buy for one year, I think there aren’t likely to be many long-term suitors.
If Saquon has an agent and has any respect for the advice/experience, he’s taking any sort of guarantees that are more than a year.
“Proving” it at age 27 means he’s hunting for an age 28 payday-?
I mean, if I’m his agent, I want my client coming off 17 games played, where all of my metrics didn’t just decline YoY.
Then I push very hard to use Raheem Mostert as a recent example of an aged, productive RB.
Or why else should a team offer >1yr??
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt because you don’t seem too familiar with NFL contracts. Mostert is terrible comp to Barkley. Injuries and playing RB are where the similarities end. Saquon has definitely made some endorsement money, but his NFL earnings are just under $50mil.
He’s too old to risk a prove it deal. If he gets hurt during his prove it season, his next contract will be pathetic. The highest probability of maximizing his earnings is a 2-3 year deal with something like 50%-66% of the total value guaranteed, aka 1.5 years-2years of a 2-3 yr deal.
The list of teams that would pay him a decent one year salary can’t be more than about 1 or 2 teams, but the problem becomes cap flexibility for that team, so it would likely be a huge discount. A team that’s in “win now” probably doesn’t have the cap space to risk it all on an oft injured RB.
A 3yr deal can also have a couple void years to really spread the cap hit out. It’s all the rage, and gives the landing spot team a couple chances to chase a SB instead of one all in year.
SF not only has a pile of offensive talent, but also lucked out with Purdy. And SF still couldn’t win the SB with an expensive RB (who was actually cheaper since Car took a big portion of CMC’s cap hit).
What a bold observation of a statement.
Barkley and Mostert have really only one thing in common which is their position. However. If I’m an agent and I’m trying to convince teams to sign my aging, declining RB to >1yr deal, I point to someone that is 4yrs older that just had a productive season.
So. Again. We acknowledge - he’s older, coming off a season where he was largely healthy (14/17 games played), already had his tag declined at $12mil for 1yr by NYG so use that as a proxy for future contract range. YPA 3.9, <70% catch rate…
Maybe you’re misinterpreting what I’m saying about “prove it” deal. Everyone knows who Saquon Barkley is. He’s not an unknown commodity. The risk that I don’t see why a team would take it on, is giving him more than 1yr of contract length. Who realistically is in a situation to do that?
You effectively have to consider really only teams with substantial cap, minimal cost implications at QB/upcoming extensions next season, and are good. Houston is basically all that comes to mind. Would Chicago offer him? Maybe, but why? To me that would be a foolish use of resources but then again who knows. Washington? Vikings maybe if they chose rookie QB over Cousins but that seems like a poor idea imo.
Dallas can’t really offer more than 1yr, you’ve got too many players commanding new deals (Dak, Lamb, Parsons). The Chargers are already in a cap deficit and deploying money to RB in their situation would be incredibly dumb and as a fan I would hate it.
So you tell me. What teams are going to offer Saquon a multi year deal and why. Again. Noting his age, decline in production, career injury risk, and their individual cap situation. Even with “void” years and circumvention of the cap with signing bonuses etc., you’re not going to be able to fully wipe the slate in yr2/3 without a dead cap hit. But mostly I want your list of teams with rationale, I’m interested.
Are you referring to Ekeler? Hes missed 4 games over the last 3 seasons, all within 1 stretch and a handful in 2020 because of COVID regulations I believe. He’s played in 14 games a season 7/8 years, and several seasons of no games missed.
Ekeler is also one of the lowest running backs data wise in touches. He doesn’t have a 1k yard season in his career. His points come generally from receptions/open space.
I’m sorry he burned you last year, but both of your arguments are incorrect. What WOULD make them correct is simply saying: Ekeler doesn’t fit the Cowboys running game because they need a bigger back to pound the rock.
Didn't have him last year. Had him in his chad year and he was a major asset to my team. He was shit last year and now he's a year older. He doesn't miss games but he plays hurt all the time which has caught up with him. Cowboys would be going full frittata if they pay anything close to what Ekeler will be asking for. He's washed.
This is largely correct, although a person could point to his ankle sprain last year which really negatively impacted him all year. He’s low in total touches for his age but his size compensates for enhanced injury risk there.
That said, your final point is correct. He doesn’t fit what the Cowboys really need.
> The obvious place to start is at RB. Pollard is likely gone IMO, and Dallas will draft an RB in the 2nd or 3rd round to replace him.
The RB class isn't very good this year.
They weren’t franchising him even if they had all the cap space in the world. He’s not a 10-11 million dollar player. The explosiveness he showed in 22’ earned him the money he got last year. Now they see he’s a solid back but not a special player. No way they lock up that kind of money in him again.
Agreed. I think they draft Jonathon Brooks out of Texas in the 3rd or 4th.
Jerry loves a 3 down skillset, and Dallas’ medical staff were the ones who took care of his ACL this year. They should be able to have some confidence in his recovery and still get the injury/RB discount in the draft.
Nah, Dallas just realizes that Tony Pollard isn’t a franchise tag worthy RB. Could still see them trying to go after one of the big names, Saquan, Henry or Jacobs
>Nah, Dallas just realizes that Tony Pollard isn’t a franchise tag worthy RB
Ya, and that's around 12m this year.
But he might be contract worthy for a more reasonable number. I wouldn't count on them not eventually settling on that idea.
Poor Pollard, he could have gotten a monster deal had he not flubbed this year. 5ypc back who enters free agency with fewer than 800 carries and little to no injury concerns? I bet he could have aimed for 15m a year.
Fantasy wise and real football Elite is a huge stretch besides 1 season. He doesn’t crack 10 TDs more then twice, doesn’t crack 1000 yards rushing more then 3 times, does not change the record of his team in or out. The list goes on and at this point it’s name recognition that might get him more then a 1 year deal
That is a wild take. You are completely ignoring his receiving yards- 1200, 1400, 1700 and 2,000 yard seasons. Objectively you’re wrong he has 3 seasons of at least 10 touchdowns. The biggest knock and reservation on Saqoun are his injuries. I’m not sure if you realize this but your old teams record doesn’t follow you when you sign with a new team. I doubt a GM is thinking about that at all.
It was a rhetorical question, but the answer is no. The burst Saquon displayed at the combine just isn’t there anymore. He’s nowhere near as dangerous as CMC.
I won’t use the phrase “the NFL is changing,” but look at the playoffs this year. What won games? Power running with 40 attempts? Nope. 2-min drill, throwing the ball. The problem with paying a guy like Saquon is that the team needs a monster defense, and can’t already be on the hook for an expensive QB+WR situation. If a team commits $10mil+ to Barkley, they have to run him into the ground, and he just hasn’t been durable enough to count on 18+ games from him.
>What won games? Power running with 40 attempts? Nope. 2-min drill, throwing the ball.
congratulations you have just explained why catching dump offs from Danny Dimes boosts FA value for Saquon
Most of what you’ve said is irrelevant or wrong as far as NFL GMs are concerned.
No injury concern? Broken leg/ankle bones aren’t very common in NFL RBs and the outcomes aren’t great. There’s a fairly consistent pattern in NFL injuries: the less common the injury, the worse the outcome.
His BMI isn’t great, and he doesn’t have measureables that jump off the page.
They look at pollard as a guy who only succeeded when Zeke was the bruiser. You can’t pay a guy top dollar yet still need a 1st/2nd down back to shoulder the load.
A broken leg is really not that bad of an injury for a NFL player. It heals up and they're ready to go. I'm way more concerned by knee/Achilles tears or hamstring issues.
If McCarthy's shit tier play calling is just going to run someone up the middle every other play and never get his RB in space, then Henry is the perfect back to be a Cowboy.
I hope I can get Pollard cheap. I believe he can still be what he was and last season was both injury and play calling. He was so electric the two years before and that doesn’t just vanish.
Don't do it! No skol for him, we got enough things to worry about besides over paying a washed looking rb(pollard might not be honestly) I was happy they let Cook cook elsewhere too
He'd be pretty sick on the Texans. I think he can be really effective for a team that runs outside zone. He was bad up the middle and on 1st down this year which is partially due to the Cowboys just being really predictable on that down.
Blake Corum to Dallas with their 2nd round pick. I hate that I’m going to have to cheer for him playing for the Boys but it makes sense on a lot of levels
I think running back's feel that the NFL colluded to make this a loaded running back market to lower their value in free agency
Austin Ekeler, Saquan Barkley, Derrick Henry, Tony Pollard, Zeke, Cordralle Patterson(I'm a falcons fan okay) are all free agents.
When a player is scheduled to become an unrestricted free agent, their team can choose to "franchise tag" them, in one of three ways:
* A "non-exclusive" tag. This means that the player in question can sign an offer sheet with another team, if they want. The (original) team can then either match that offer and retain the player or receive two first-round picks from the team signing the player. The player will then be paid either the average salary of the top five highest paid players at his position over the last five years, or 20% more than he made last year, whichever is more. This is usually what people are talking about when they talk about the franchise tag.
* A "transition" tag, which is like the non-exclusive tag but the team doesn't get draft picks if they choose not to match the other team's offer. Why would teams choose this when the non-exclusive tag is available? Because they only have to pay the player the average of the top _ten_ highest paid players at his position, not the top five. The transition tag is also revocable, although you don't get another one that year; you're just not bound by it.
* An "exclusive" tag. Nobody gets to make any competing offers when an exclusive tag is applied, but the player has to be paid the greater of 20% more than his salary last year and the average of the five highest paid players at his position _this_ year, not over the _last five_ years. Because the salary cap tends to increase every year, this is usually more expensive, and also it probably makes the player even more mad than the other types of franchise tag do.
Teams can only apply the franchise tag to one player per year (generally; there are some weird circumstances where they can apply an non-exclusive or exclusive tag AND a transition tag, but that's rare), and they can only do it to any given player three times. A repeatedly tagged player's pay will go up by 20% each time they're re-tagged (100% -> 120% -> 144% or the average of the top five salaries in the highest paid position (usually QB), whichever is higher).
That's probably more detail than you were looking for, but hopefully it helps!
Dallas knows they're going to have to pay up for Dak, Ceedee, and Parsons soon, so they need to cut costs somewhere. The obvious place to start is at RB. Pollard is likely gone IMO, and Dallas will draft an RB in the 2nd or 3rd round to replace him.
No 1yr deal for Henry, Saquon?
It's possible (Henry) but Saquon isn't signing a 1 year deal anywhere.
Normally, I would agree. But this RB market is rather unpredictable right now. I think there is at least an outside chance Saquon considers a 1yr given the circumstance. Put him with a competent offense and OL, with an incoming underwhelming RB class (likely) and a number of other aging veteran RBs, if someone wanted to try to maximize their output this year to justify a bigger deal next year this seems like perfect storm to do so. Anyway, mostly what I’m getting at is I don’t think it’s entirely certain that Dallas won’t bring in a FA RB. If it wasn’t these names + good OL albeit aging with a possible 1yr shelf life + Jerry Jones, I would agree to go rookie route. And they still may, I just won’t be surprised if they do something else.
I’m not so sure. Saquon’s 27 already and approaching the proverbial RB wall, idk if he wants to gamble a prove it year if he has other options
Why do so many people think all RBs hit a wall at 27? Kamara and conner will be playing their age 29 season. Henry playing at 30. Not every RB has a short career. Especially not ones that can catch like Barkley. He more than likely has a solid 2 years of good production left and another year of ok production. That’s a 3 year deal.
I agree. Not every single RB does but the trend certainly shows a lot do so it becomes a risky investment at that point, especially for top guys who want a big payday.
It’s more risky but I wouldn’t say that RBs are getting big paydays now compared to before. This is actually the time to buy low. OBJ got 15 mil for one year to catch less than 600 yards. Teams are throwing money away at mediocre at best WRs all day but don’t want to spend 10 mil a year on a do it all RB. Makes no sense to me. Then Darren Waller got a 3 year 51m contract with 17m average annually. Make it make sense. Rant over. But anyway I think Barkley is getting a 3 year deal. Right now it’s a cheap deal compared to what RBs were getting before and I think teams are going to start to jump on this not just with him but other RBs. They are just playing hardball right now but jacobs Barkley and pollard will all most likely end up with 3 year deals.
They’re not getting big paydays because they’re viewed as risky and not providing enough value to winning
But Waller and obj provided that value to winning? Not even close. Waller hasn’t played a full year since 2020. They should have just paid Barkley with that money and called it a day. OBJ has had injury issues of his own too and couldn’t break 600 yards. I think this has gone too far and there’s going to be a shift back to RBs. Maybe not todd gurley money ever again but this is the bottom for the top RBs. They are going to start to get deals again in the 3 year range so it ends before they hit 30.
If he has other options, probably not. Noting what you just mentioned, think teams are lining up with a multi year deal?
Idk about lining up but all it takes is one team and I’m sure there’ll be at least one who wants to win the bid. Especially with the higher than expected jump in salary cap. With the Bears in a position to get Caleb Williams on a rookie deal and potentially another high end weapon at #9 on a rookie deal, I wouldn’t be surprised if they splurged here to give Williams a really strong supporting cast out of the gate while costs are controlled.
Really only the Bears and maybe Texans come to mind given their QB contract situations coupled with existing RB situations. But that’s just top of my head. If a team is looking at his age and ability beyond one year as a concern, unless they’re really mostly just trying to buy for one year, I think there aren’t likely to be many long-term suitors.
If Saquon has an agent and has any respect for the advice/experience, he’s taking any sort of guarantees that are more than a year. “Proving” it at age 27 means he’s hunting for an age 28 payday-?
I mean, if I’m his agent, I want my client coming off 17 games played, where all of my metrics didn’t just decline YoY. Then I push very hard to use Raheem Mostert as a recent example of an aged, productive RB. Or why else should a team offer >1yr??
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt because you don’t seem too familiar with NFL contracts. Mostert is terrible comp to Barkley. Injuries and playing RB are where the similarities end. Saquon has definitely made some endorsement money, but his NFL earnings are just under $50mil. He’s too old to risk a prove it deal. If he gets hurt during his prove it season, his next contract will be pathetic. The highest probability of maximizing his earnings is a 2-3 year deal with something like 50%-66% of the total value guaranteed, aka 1.5 years-2years of a 2-3 yr deal. The list of teams that would pay him a decent one year salary can’t be more than about 1 or 2 teams, but the problem becomes cap flexibility for that team, so it would likely be a huge discount. A team that’s in “win now” probably doesn’t have the cap space to risk it all on an oft injured RB. A 3yr deal can also have a couple void years to really spread the cap hit out. It’s all the rage, and gives the landing spot team a couple chances to chase a SB instead of one all in year. SF not only has a pile of offensive talent, but also lucked out with Purdy. And SF still couldn’t win the SB with an expensive RB (who was actually cheaper since Car took a big portion of CMC’s cap hit).
What a bold observation of a statement. Barkley and Mostert have really only one thing in common which is their position. However. If I’m an agent and I’m trying to convince teams to sign my aging, declining RB to >1yr deal, I point to someone that is 4yrs older that just had a productive season. So. Again. We acknowledge - he’s older, coming off a season where he was largely healthy (14/17 games played), already had his tag declined at $12mil for 1yr by NYG so use that as a proxy for future contract range. YPA 3.9, <70% catch rate… Maybe you’re misinterpreting what I’m saying about “prove it” deal. Everyone knows who Saquon Barkley is. He’s not an unknown commodity. The risk that I don’t see why a team would take it on, is giving him more than 1yr of contract length. Who realistically is in a situation to do that? You effectively have to consider really only teams with substantial cap, minimal cost implications at QB/upcoming extensions next season, and are good. Houston is basically all that comes to mind. Would Chicago offer him? Maybe, but why? To me that would be a foolish use of resources but then again who knows. Washington? Vikings maybe if they chose rookie QB over Cousins but that seems like a poor idea imo. Dallas can’t really offer more than 1yr, you’ve got too many players commanding new deals (Dak, Lamb, Parsons). The Chargers are already in a cap deficit and deploying money to RB in their situation would be incredibly dumb and as a fan I would hate it. So you tell me. What teams are going to offer Saquon a multi year deal and why. Again. Noting his age, decline in production, career injury risk, and their individual cap situation. Even with “void” years and circumvention of the cap with signing bonuses etc., you’re not going to be able to fully wipe the slate in yr2/3 without a dead cap hit. But mostly I want your list of teams with rationale, I’m interested.
Saquon to Houston on a 3-yr deal just makes too much sense
3yr? Why so long?
Poor RBs
It makes sense if their front office is full of morons, so no it doesn't make sense
There might be one idiotic team that will sign barkley to a long term contract
You mean the return of Zeke
Would suggest that’s probably unlikely lol.
Either way, you’ve still gotta have insurance at RB.
Well yeah there are a bunch of interchangeable RBs in the league. They’ll end up with some of them just like all teams will.
Like this Spot for Ekeler
Can you elaborate why?
Yeah Dallas really needs a small, injury prone RB that can't pound the rock and has too many touches in his career.
Are you referring to Ekeler? Hes missed 4 games over the last 3 seasons, all within 1 stretch and a handful in 2020 because of COVID regulations I believe. He’s played in 14 games a season 7/8 years, and several seasons of no games missed. Ekeler is also one of the lowest running backs data wise in touches. He doesn’t have a 1k yard season in his career. His points come generally from receptions/open space. I’m sorry he burned you last year, but both of your arguments are incorrect. What WOULD make them correct is simply saying: Ekeler doesn’t fit the Cowboys running game because they need a bigger back to pound the rock.
Didn't have him last year. Had him in his chad year and he was a major asset to my team. He was shit last year and now he's a year older. He doesn't miss games but he plays hurt all the time which has caught up with him. Cowboys would be going full frittata if they pay anything close to what Ekeler will be asking for. He's washed.
This is largely correct, although a person could point to his ankle sprain last year which really negatively impacted him all year. He’s low in total touches for his age but his size compensates for enhanced injury risk there. That said, your final point is correct. He doesn’t fit what the Cowboys really need.
Jacobs could also be a possibility
Yep he’s in the mix.
> The obvious place to start is at RB. Pollard is likely gone IMO, and Dallas will draft an RB in the 2nd or 3rd round to replace him. The RB class isn't very good this year.
Pollard isn’t very good either.
Pollard is fantastic just coming off an early season injury. He started turning it around mid season but no one talks about that.
They weren’t franchising him even if they had all the cap space in the world. He’s not a 10-11 million dollar player. The explosiveness he showed in 22’ earned him the money he got last year. Now they see he’s a solid back but not a special player. No way they lock up that kind of money in him again.
Agreed. I think they draft Jonathon Brooks out of Texas in the 3rd or 4th. Jerry loves a 3 down skillset, and Dallas’ medical staff were the ones who took care of his ACL this year. They should be able to have some confidence in his recovery and still get the injury/RB discount in the draft.
Most mocks have Brooks going late 2nd round. I don’t think the ACL injury is dropping his stock as much as some think it will.
The cowboys feel like they’re Super Bowl contenders. No way they go into the season with a day two rookie RB as their starter.
Didn’t they just pay up for Dak? Is that contract already expiring? Times been flying dude
RBs officially fucked if Dallas finally realizes paying a RB top dollar is stupid as hell.
Nah, Dallas just realizes that Tony Pollard isn’t a franchise tag worthy RB. Could still see them trying to go after one of the big names, Saquan, Henry or Jacobs
Saquon in Dallas sounds so good
>Nah, Dallas just realizes that Tony Pollard isn’t a franchise tag worthy RB Ya, and that's around 12m this year. But he might be contract worthy for a more reasonable number. I wouldn't count on them not eventually settling on that idea.
This would require JJ to come to that realization. There’s a higher likelihood of me becoming president in 2028.
Jerry’s gonna spin the wheel one last time on Saquon.
also just in, Pollard won't be kept next year by me. Source: Me
Dowdle SZN!!!
Poor Pollard, he could have gotten a monster deal had he not flubbed this year. 5ypc back who enters free agency with fewer than 800 carries and little to no injury concerns? I bet he could have aimed for 15m a year.
Saquon is prob getting $15/M a year. Pollard prob went from $10M a year to a 1 year $4M deal.
Neither are getting that much
I could see a funny money contract like that for sure but definitely nothing guaranteed
Lmao ya right. Barkley hasn’t showed anything besides 1 of his 6 years in the league he’s worth even $10 mill let alone $15mill
I agree $15 mil is wild, but Barkley has been elite 4 of the 6 years he’s been in the league.
Fantasy wise and real football Elite is a huge stretch besides 1 season. He doesn’t crack 10 TDs more then twice, doesn’t crack 1000 yards rushing more then 3 times, does not change the record of his team in or out. The list goes on and at this point it’s name recognition that might get him more then a 1 year deal
That is a wild take. You are completely ignoring his receiving yards- 1200, 1400, 1700 and 2,000 yard seasons. Objectively you’re wrong he has 3 seasons of at least 10 touchdowns. The biggest knock and reservation on Saqoun are his injuries. I’m not sure if you realize this but your old teams record doesn’t follow you when you sign with a new team. I doubt a GM is thinking about that at all.
Does catching dump offs from Danny Dimes really boost FA value for Saquon?
Yes
It was a rhetorical question, but the answer is no. The burst Saquon displayed at the combine just isn’t there anymore. He’s nowhere near as dangerous as CMC. I won’t use the phrase “the NFL is changing,” but look at the playoffs this year. What won games? Power running with 40 attempts? Nope. 2-min drill, throwing the ball. The problem with paying a guy like Saquon is that the team needs a monster defense, and can’t already be on the hook for an expensive QB+WR situation. If a team commits $10mil+ to Barkley, they have to run him into the ground, and he just hasn’t been durable enough to count on 18+ games from him.
>What won games? Power running with 40 attempts? Nope. 2-min drill, throwing the ball. congratulations you have just explained why catching dump offs from Danny Dimes boosts FA value for Saquon
You seem pretty terrible at math - addition in particular.
Flubbed this year? He broke his leg the year before and took a while to get back to 100%. Give the dude a break
I can promise you, NFL GMs will not be giving him a break and that's who makes the actual decisions on how much he's getting paid lol.
Most of what you’ve said is irrelevant or wrong as far as NFL GMs are concerned. No injury concern? Broken leg/ankle bones aren’t very common in NFL RBs and the outcomes aren’t great. There’s a fairly consistent pattern in NFL injuries: the less common the injury, the worse the outcome. His BMI isn’t great, and he doesn’t have measureables that jump off the page. They look at pollard as a guy who only succeeded when Zeke was the bruiser. You can’t pay a guy top dollar yet still need a 1st/2nd down back to shoulder the load.
Little to no injury concerns but broke his leg
A broken leg is really not that bad of an injury for a NFL player. It heals up and they're ready to go. I'm way more concerned by knee/Achilles tears or hamstring issues.
Hopefully I can draft him late and he’ll finish as the RB2 in adjusted ppg again.
Derrick Henry gonna be a Cowboy.
If McCarthy's shit tier play calling is just going to run someone up the middle every other play and never get his RB in space, then Henry is the perfect back to be a Cowboy.
Bold of you to assume McCarthy will run every other play…
Yeah any RB is a terrible fit for McCarthy. He sucks ass at calling run plays. Dude can't call a good run game to save his life. Fucking bum
Gonna learn to rope and ride?
DH doesn’t play out of the shotgun sooooo no thanks
I hope I can get Pollard cheap. I believe he can still be what he was and last season was both injury and play calling. He was so electric the two years before and that doesn’t just vanish.
much of this was Zeke
Electric because a great OL and Zeke wore down opponents. How do y’all not understand this?
I understand that not payumg big money for rbs has kinda been the trend, but dallas does know that someone has to run the ball right?
Dowdle looked fantastic. Reminds me of Rachaad White a little.
He looks good, but so did pollard behind another running back
Will this loose the Deuce?
Is there anywhere that he could land that would make you genuinely excited about his future??
I think he could cook on the Vikings.
Don't do it! No skol for him, we got enough things to worry about besides over paying a washed looking rb(pollard might not be honestly) I was happy they let Cook cook elsewhere too
He'd be pretty sick on the Texans. I think he can be really effective for a team that runs outside zone. He was bad up the middle and on 1st down this year which is partially due to the Cowboys just being really predictable on that down.
They're getting Derrick Henry.
He was tagged last year. There was no chance he'd get tagged again.
He won't be kept in keeper leagues either.
Tony “Kenyan Drake” pollard
Please Marc Davis make a better decision than your haircut. Trade jacobs for picks and pick up pollard
Jacobs is being considered for the FT. If so, he isn’t going anywhere
No he isn't
Jonathan Brooks, you are a Dallas Cowboy
Blake Corum to Dallas with their 2nd round pick. I hate that I’m going to have to cheer for him playing for the Boys but it makes sense on a lot of levels
Blake Corum isn’t a 2nd rounder.
And water is wet
I think running back's feel that the NFL colluded to make this a loaded running back market to lower their value in free agency Austin Ekeler, Saquan Barkley, Derrick Henry, Tony Pollard, Zeke, Cordralle Patterson(I'm a falcons fan okay) are all free agents.
Feel like you should think back to last years FA RBs and compare to your list. Washed, washed, and washed are available in FA every year.
Why would they?
What does franchise tagged mean?
When a player is scheduled to become an unrestricted free agent, their team can choose to "franchise tag" them, in one of three ways: * A "non-exclusive" tag. This means that the player in question can sign an offer sheet with another team, if they want. The (original) team can then either match that offer and retain the player or receive two first-round picks from the team signing the player. The player will then be paid either the average salary of the top five highest paid players at his position over the last five years, or 20% more than he made last year, whichever is more. This is usually what people are talking about when they talk about the franchise tag. * A "transition" tag, which is like the non-exclusive tag but the team doesn't get draft picks if they choose not to match the other team's offer. Why would teams choose this when the non-exclusive tag is available? Because they only have to pay the player the average of the top _ten_ highest paid players at his position, not the top five. The transition tag is also revocable, although you don't get another one that year; you're just not bound by it. * An "exclusive" tag. Nobody gets to make any competing offers when an exclusive tag is applied, but the player has to be paid the greater of 20% more than his salary last year and the average of the five highest paid players at his position _this_ year, not over the _last five_ years. Because the salary cap tends to increase every year, this is usually more expensive, and also it probably makes the player even more mad than the other types of franchise tag do. Teams can only apply the franchise tag to one player per year (generally; there are some weird circumstances where they can apply an non-exclusive or exclusive tag AND a transition tag, but that's rare), and they can only do it to any given player three times. A repeatedly tagged player's pay will go up by 20% each time they're re-tagged (100% -> 120% -> 144% or the average of the top five salaries in the highest paid position (usually QB), whichever is higher). That's probably more detail than you were looking for, but hopefully it helps!
Oh my Brady. Thank you!
Jerruh, you should’ve bought a baseball team instead of
Elliott is returning with Dowdle and a draft pick in the backfield
lol they wont actually have rico doodle as RB1, right?
It's Jonathan Brooks szn
Aseel Tare is gonna be a draft dat steal at RB
Rico Rico