[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Wow, these posts are getting long. I'll limit my response to those points that are more substantial, rather than disputes over wording or the content of prior posts:

How do I know that Le'Veon Bell balked at the second tag? Because he didn't sign it.

What? No, that was not the question. The question was: "How do you know Bell balked at signing the second tender for the reason you stated?"

You know the reason Bell did not sign the tender for the reason you stated is because he didn't sign the tender? huh

That is like me seeing someone get on the freeway and I say:

"Oh that guy must be going to see the doctor."

My wife asks, "How do you know he is going to see the doctor, all he did was get on the freeway?"

I reply, "Because he got on the freeway!"

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Originally Posted by Chaka

As far as guarantees are concerned, I was trying to state a practical reality. Yes, of course it's technically possible that some rogue team could tag a non-QB like Bell for three years in a row, but I think it's pretty far-fetched. And I think that player would be delighted, given that they'd now be paid on par with the top five QBs in the game. Here's a list of the top cap hits in 2018 per Spotrac:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/

Notice anything about the top of that list? It's all QBs. The top 14 are all QBs. And consider that several other top QBs can't even be on this list because they're still on their rookie contracts. Incidentally, the top RB in this chart (which includes Gurley, by the way) is LeSean McCoy at just under $9 million - and isn't he one of those all-purpose backs that was doing the kind of things Bell does long before Bell came in the league?

A practical reality... so is that a guarantee or sort of like a guarantee but with a caveat for when you are wrong? You overcomplicate a simple thing. When will a team use the franchise tag a third consecutive year? When the need fits the demand. That's it, very simple. Is it common? No. Will it happen, eventually. Especially when a team can fit it under the cap and I bet it will be a non-QB position. There is no "rogue" teams or other nonsense. Just if the team needs the player's services and they can afford it. Most likely motivation in that scenario; going for a Superbowl.

Cool link! So QB's are the highest paid players in the NFL. Wait, what does that have to do with anything? Everyone knows QB's are the highest paid players.

This is a cap hit chart, it doesn't prove your point. Team's spread contracts around so they can pay more money some years and less money other years. I know you know this. That is why Gurley is below McCoy there. A better way to look at is just to take the amount of their contract and divide it by the number of years. It doesn't need every penny laid out. I believe LeSean McCoy makes around 8 million a year, that is a very reasonable number for his services, but of course, he is older, this was made in 2015, and he has a ton of wear and tear. Now the question is he better than say Gurley and Bell? I will say no. The question for you is will Bell and Elliot sign contracts that pay them more in line with McCoy's salary or Gurley's salary?

One other thing to point out
the top 7 RB's of 2015 according to SI:

Marshawn Lynch
Bell
Demarco Murray
Eddie Lacy
Jeremy Hill
Jamaal Charles
Arian Foster

Only one dual threat on that list, and only one that is still relevant today. McCoy isn't even in the top ten on that list.

Top 7 RB's today (subjective, but I think it is fair):

Todd Gurley
Le'Veon Bell
Ezekiel Elliott
Saquon Barkley
Alvin Kamara
David Johnson
Kareem Hunt

Very different style of runners in the second list. To date, running backs are on a pace to shatter the league records in a season for both receptions and touchdown catches. They have caught 77.5 percent of their targeted passes, a rate 12 percentage points higher than receivers and tight ends, and higher than in any full season since at least 2001. -http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25459151/nfl-2018-offensive-scoring-explosion-numbers

See if I was a douche canoe, I would just up that link of yours two years to the 2020 season where David Johnson is making 14.2 million and Gurley is making 17.2 to illustrate a point. But I'm not a douche canoe. Just a prick. Use the average.

[QUOTE=Chaka;98038]The bottom line is that I simply don't think it's reasonable to think that anybody is going to pay top-five QB money to a RB or any other non-QB - particularly on a one-year fully guaranteed contract - and that's exactly what they'd have to do under the CBA if they tagged a non-QB for a third year. It hasn't happened yet, and I don't think it ever will.

This is the problem, it doesn't matter whether you or I think it is reasonable or not. It only matters what will happen. As I stated above, if the need is great enough, someone will.

Originally Posted by Chaka

And before you complain that I used a "cap hit" chart instead of a "salary" chart, the truth is that I couldn't find a dependable salary chart since salaries are so fluid in the NFL - influenced by signing bonuses, non-guaranteed amounts, playing incentives, etc. - so this was the best I can find on short notice.

Then you shouldn't have used the cap hit chart to try and prove your point.

Originally Posted by Chaka

I'll believe it when I see it. YDFL Commish made the point earlier in this thread that there's no convincing historical support for the idea that an elite RB is a necessary ingredient for a Super Bowl team. I agree with this idea, so I don't think these players will start being paid on par with the upper echelon of QBs

What is with you and the strawman arguments? Just stick to what I say please. I never said elite running backs were going to be paid the same as QB's. No where did I say this. QB's will always be the highest paid people as long as offenses run through them.

As for elite dual-threat RB's not getting paid. Whelp, Gurley just signed a 4 year 57 million deal, with 45 guaranteed and averaged over 14 a year. I wonder what Ezikiel Elliot and Bell will get paid? Kamara? Hunt? McCaffrey? I think it is already being proven. And since you have pretty much no evidence to prove otherwise besides your opinion. I would say this point is closed.

YDFL Commish is right, this idea has been around for quite a while. You do not need an elite RB to win a Superbowl. Guess what you also don't need; an elite QB, an elite WR, an elite TE, an elite defense to win a Superbowl. But you do need some form of them combined to win. Do you think the Rams needed Faulk, or the Cowboys needed Smith? This is what you need, a defense that is above average at least. You need offensive weapons that can create mismatches. That can be WR's, TE's, or even running backs. And it really helps if you have a franchise QB. If you don't have a franchise QB your other areas need to be near perfect. But YDFL's statement really has little to do with this argument.

Originally Posted by Chaka

I was responding to the statement you made in post #63 that the tag amounts were "unreliable because they are not reflecting the current value, just the past value of contracts made under a smaller cap". I simply pointed out that this was incorrect. The salary paid to a current RB who is tagged is in no way affected by the fact that RBs in prior years received lower salaries because of a lower salary cap. What is important is the proportionate relationship between those earlier RB salaries and the overall cap amount in place at the time. Man, this must sound boring to anyone reading this...

The tag does 120% or top five at his position yada yada. Elite dual-threat running backs are going to receive higher contracts. But Bell is unlucky enough to be at the front of that line, not the back. So the average of the top five, nor the 120%, doesn't come close to what his perceived market value is. So he is getting hosed by the tag. This benefits the Steelers more than Bell, makes Bell more affordable for the Steelers to tag him consecutive years. Upteenth time I've said it.

Originally Posted by Chaka

As far as your current post, your making a lot of assumptions and are getting fairly deep into a scenario that I'm not sure is true. Because Bell thinks he's entitled to more than Gurley means that a $14.5 million tag is unfair? Setting this aside, and at this risk of going even deeper, I'll just say this: it's a zero sum game. If you're now going to say that the cap figures for RBs are too low because they don't account for a gathering RB storm on the horizon, then the counterweight to that position is that another position is overpaid and the cap figure for that position is too high. What position is this? You're going to have to rob Peter to pay Paul.

I don't know if Bell thinks he's entitled more than Gurley, it really has little to do with what Bell thinks he is entitled to or not. This is how agents start their negotiation. They look at the last contract that was signed by a player at or below the same talent level and try to get more money. Demarcus Lawrence will try to make more money than Khalill Mack. It isn't like Marlon Mack is trying to make more money than Gurley, Bell has a legitimate argument.

Why are you introducing yet another strawman argument into this? I never said another position is getting overpaid and never made a leap of logic that ridiculous. The cap is not an either/or situation. First of all, for this to even be an issue, each team would have to be spending the max at the cap. That would mean everyone is getting money from the exact same amount. Then, there would have to be a position group that was underperforming as a whole but getting overpaid as a whole. This isn't the case. If elite dual-threat RB's are taking money from somewhere, maybe a team feels it doesn't need a great 2nd receiver or great TE. There is only one football to go around. But for what you suggested, no.

However, there will occasionally be players that supersede the play of their position group. It's these guys that will be hurt by the averages at their position, coincidentally, they are also the likely players to attract the franchise tender.

And technically I didn't say RB's are underpaid, just that Bell's tender is substantially under what he is asking for. That should not be the case. NFL average and above average running backs are getting about what they deserve. But young dual-threat running backs are coming off their rookie contracts and are going to make more money because they are more important to their offense.

Originally Posted by Chaka

In any event, as I said, the system certainly allows for some temporary (1-2 year) inefficiencies, but even during those periods the tagged player is going to be paid under a fully guaranteed contract at a level near the top of his position. And, again, this is what Bell agreed to under the collective bargaining agreement.

A concession!!! Very big of you. Unfortunately, I think that 1-2 year inefficiency is costing Bell several million. If he was tagged a third year I think it would even out.

Originally Posted by Chaka

Nope, it is more restrictive on QBs, since nobody other than a QB is realistically in danger of being tagged for more than two years for the reasons set forth above. While it's true the Redskins declined to do so for Cousins, I really doubt they would have let a Luck or Rodgers get away in the same situation. Though QBs already dominate the top of the salary chart, the truly good ones are underpaid given the enormous influence they have on the outcome of a game. In fact, I recall during one offseason Polian or Irsay saying something to the effect that the Colts were prepared to pay any tag price to keep Manning, even if they had to cut other critical players to do so.

See, I disagree with this. Not with QB's eventually getting paid and teams will do anything to keep them. This is true. It's that the franchise tag will only be used on a QB more than two years. Especially when they just tried to use it a second time on a RB.

The tag may be used on QB's but it rarely is. It's all the other players that have to deal with it the majority of the time. The odds are that it will be some lower paid position because that is like 95% of the guys it is used on. And since it is a lower cap hit, it will be an easier pill for that team to swallow. It will likely be an extraordinary player that supersedes his position group. That is why I think it needs some fine-tuning. To illustrate this, below is the list of guys tagged the last five years. I think I counted 6 QB's total the last 11 years.

2018
Franchise-tagged players[15]
Chicago Bears – Kyle Fuller, CB (Transition): Signed 4-year contract for $56 million
Dallas Cowboys – DeMarcus Lawrence, DE (Non-Exclusive)
Detroit Lions – Ezekiel Ansah, DE (Non-Exclusive)
Los Angeles Rams – Lamarcus Joyner, CB (Non-Exclusive)
Miami Dolphins – Jarvis Landry, WR (Non-Exclusive): Signed 5-year contract for $75.5 million

2017
Franchise-tagged players[16]
Arizona Cardinals – Chandler Jones, LB (Non-Exclusive)
Carolina Panthers – Kawann Short, DT (Non-Exclusive): Signed 5-year contract for $80.5 million
Los Angeles Rams – Trumaine Johnson, CB (Non-Exclusive)
Pittsburgh Steelers – Le'Veon Bell, RB (Exclusive)
Washington Redskins – Kirk Cousins, QB (Exclusive)

2016
Franchise-tagged players [17]
Baltimore Ravens – Justin Tucker, K (Non-Exclusive): signed 4-year contract for $16.8 million
Buffalo Bills – Cordy Glenn, OT (Non-Exclusive): signed 5-year contract for $65 million
Carolina Panthers – Josh Norman, CB (Rescinded April 20, 2016)
Chicago Bears – Alshon Jeffery, WR (Non-Exclusive)
Denver Broncos – Von Miller, OLB (Exclusive): signed 6-year contract for $114.5 million
Kansas City Chiefs – Eric Berry, S (Non-Exclusive)
Los Angeles Rams – Trumaine Johnson, CB (Non-Exclusive)
New York Jets – Muhammad Wilkerson, DE (Non-Exclusive): signed 5-year contract for $86 million
Washington Redskins – Kirk Cousins, QB (Non-Exclusive)

2015
Franchise-tagged players [18]
Dallas Cowboys – Dez Bryant, WR: signed 5-year contract for $70,000,000
Denver Broncos – Demaryius Thomas, WR (Non-Exclusive)
Kansas City Chiefs – Justin Houston, LB (Non-Exclusive)
Miami Dolphins – Charles Clay, TE (Transition)
New England Patriots – Stephen Gostkowski, K (Non-Exclusive)
New York Giants – Jason Pierre-Paul, DE (Non-Exclusive).

2014
Franchise-tagged players
Carolina Panthers – Greg Hardy DE[19]
Cleveland Browns – Alex Mack C (Transition)[20]
New Orleans Saints – Jimmy Graham TE (Non-Exclusive)[20]
New York Jets – Nick Folk K (Non-Exclusive)[21]
Pittsburgh Steelers – Jason Worilds DE (Transition)[20]
Washington Redskins – Brian Orakpo OLB (Non-Exclusive)[22]

2013
Franchise-tagged players [23][24]
Buffalo Bills – Jairus Byrd S (Non-Exclusive)
Chicago Bears – Henry Melton DT
Cincinnati Bengals – Michael Johnson DE
Dallas Cowboys – Anthony Spencer LB
Denver Broncos – Ryan Clady OT
Indianapolis Colts – Pat McAfee P
Kansas City Chiefs – Brandon Albert OT (Non-Exclusive)
Miami Dolphins – Randy Starks DT