OT: The Pittsburgher Thread: Super Bowl? Thats like a giant pot of chips or popcorn right?

[xlm34]

Tbf, I don't think the franchise tag is meant to help players. It's meant to be the compromise the owners accepted in exchange for free agency, no? Instead of cost certainty on everyone, they only get it on the few guys they want it on most.

Which right now is running backs, which kind of seems to point at the big issue here, which is people don't want to pay running backs for all the known reasons about short primes, injury risks, and so on... which raises the question of whether they would get paid in the open market. It's not like teams are stepping in saying "hey, we'd like to trade for this guy and pay him if you don't", right? Dalvin Cook is still a free agent.

Which is why I talk about paying rookie RBs. That's most of their prime. The tag doesn't help them, but all the non-RBs on tags eventually got their long contracts. Why? They've got lots of prime left. RBs, not so much.

So I'm skeptical.

I would also point out that NY offered to pay Barkley and he said "nah", so that one is kind of on him. He gambled that they wouldn't be able to tag him because they'd use it on Daniel Jones and lost.

That’s true on the franchise tag. I feel like teams have had enough time to adjust to the expanded free agency that something needs to be done about it. It’s basically just a tool to hold guys hostage and force them to risk injury on a one year deal or sit out. And it’s almost always used on guys who are at the top of their position anyway so it’s not like these players are getting more money than they would on a long term deal. Dupree is the only guy I can remember that was fine with it because he got paid more, but then he almost got f***ed because of his injury. It’s probably way too powerful of a thing for teams to ever let it go though so nothing will happen.

With Barkley, I always thought it was about guaranteed money. They get decent offers average wise on contracts but they know they’ll just get cut after a year or two. So the only choice they have is to essentially sign a one year prove it deal or play on the franchise tag. It’s just a shit situation for them. I don’t blame GMs for doing what they’re doing. But I also don’t blame the players for speaking up about it. It definitely doesn’t make them look dumb in my opinion.

The Barkley situation will be interesting. That to me is not a team that’ll be able to just slide a random cheap running back in and see little drop off. Their entire offense basically revolves around Barkley.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

Found out some interesting stats about the Steelers O, but to simplify it:

Steelers after their bye were one of the most efficient teams at moving the ball, but weren’t putting the rock in the end zone.

KP finished dead last among QBs with 30 or more RZ passes in TDs (5) and completion percentage (39).

They didn’t have problems moving the ball after the bye, so if we are looking at how this offense can make a big jump into a mid tier or even top ten offense, I think the key is KP becoming more efficient in the RZ.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Found out some interesting stats about the Steelers O, but to simplify it:

Steelers after their bye were one of the most efficient teams at moving the ball, but weren’t putting the rock in the end zone.

KP finished dead last among QBs with 30 or more RZ passes in TDs (5) and completion percentage (39).

They didn’t have problems moving the ball after the bye, so if we are looking at how this offense can make a big jump into a mid tier or even top ten offense, I think the key is KP becoming more efficient in the RZ.

Don't disagree that this team needs to be more RZ efficient (feel like that's been a theme for 5+ years).
But I caution anyone doing before/after bye week stat splits. Their schedule got appreciably easier in the 2nd half of the year after being very hard at the beginning.

Taking their overall year stats is more of a fair measure to me.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

Don't disagree that this team needs to be more RZ efficient (feel like that's been a theme for 5+ years).
But I caution anyone doing before/after bye week stat splits. Their schedule got appreciably easier in the 2nd half of the year after being very hard at the beginning.

Taking their overall year stats is more of a fair measure to me.

I already looked at KP’s RZ stats across the board and they never really improved, so it’s definitely a big Achilles heel for this offense.

KP drastically cut down on his turnovers after the bye, however.

So while we can point to an easier back half schedule, the offense moving so well between the 20s had a lot to do with:

- renewed focus on running the ball
- KP massively cutting down on his turnovers
- KP’s command of the offense increasing

I highly suspect this offense will move the ball well, but KP has to figure out the RZ if he and this offense are going to make a big jump.

 

[Pens1566]

Found out some interesting stats about the Steelers O, but to simplify it:

Steelers after their bye were one of the most efficient teams at moving the ball, but weren’t putting the rock in the end zone.

KP finished dead last among QBs with 30 or more RZ passes in TDs (5) and completion percentage (39).

They didn’t have problems moving the ball after the bye, so if we are looking at how this offense can make a big jump into a mid tier or even top ten offense, I think the key is KP becoming more efficient in the RZ.

The added thing about this that worries/concerns me is that our schedule to end the season was almost nothing but bottom feeders IIRC.

Not encouraging.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

Found out some interesting stats about the Steelers O, but to simplify it:

Steelers after their bye were one of the most efficient teams at moving the ball, but weren’t putting the rock in the end zone.

KP finished dead last among QBs with 30 or more RZ passes in TDs (5) and completion percentage (39).

They didn’t have problems moving the ball after the bye, so if we are looking at how this offense can make a big jump into a mid tier or even top ten offense, I think the key is KP becoming more efficient in the RZ.

I did the math earlier in this thread, but long story short the Steelers offensive TD numbers with Canada are appalling. Nearly league worst. Not that it shocks anyone.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

The added thing about this that worries/concerns me is that our schedule to end the season was almost nothing but bottom feeders IIRC.

Not encouraging.

Well it’s not like they were losing to these teams, and they were moving the ball as well as any team after the bye.

I believe they were second in the league after the bye for most drives that lead to TD/FG.

Most of those drives were FGs though and that’s exactly my point about the RZ production needing to improve.

So I guess it all depends on if you are an optimistic or pessimistic individual how you perceive it.

The one constant throughout the season was KP was one of the worst QBS in the league in the RZ.

If he can improve there, the offense will have to improve by default.

The added thing about this that worries/concerns me is that our schedule to end the season was almost nothing but bottom feeders IIRC.

Not encouraging.

I’m not going to defend Canada and I’ve made it clear what I think of him quite often.

But again, the RZ numbers will look a lot better if KP can become even avg in that area.

 

[UnrealMachine]

"Exploitable loophole"? I mean this is what the NFLPA agreed to and by proxy, Najee Harris and all the other RB's. If they didn't like the terms and conditions of their union, they didn't have to sign a contract. Everyone knows the rules of the game when they sign up. It's not like they changed the conditions mid-stream.

And again, if it isn't RB's right now, then it's a different position group in a few years. There is a limited amount of pie to go around and if you play a position that isn't highly valued, you're not gonna get paid like others. Will Harris go to bat for a different position group that's getting squeezed? I very much doubt it.

I feel like you and others in this thread are making this into some sort of "morality stance" when it's really about economics

If you are unfamiliar with the term then I would highly suggest familiarizing yourself with it, as it has become one of the mainstays of modern capital. As a PM in real life, I have to watch out for these things (unintended consequences) all the time in either contract negotiations or purchasing: Loophole

I won’t deny that there is a morality aspect to this. Especially when we are talking about a very dangerous position/profession for long term health. And the *possibility* that this is occurring due (in part) to collusion.

 

[ChaosAgent]

If you are unfamiliar with the term then I would highly suggest familiarizing yourself with it, as it has become one of the mainstays of modern capital. As a PM in real life, I have to watch out for these things (unintended consequences) all the time in either contract negotiations or purchasing: Loophole

I won’t deny that there is a morality aspect to this. Especially when we are talking about a very dangerous position/profession for long term health. And the *possibility* that this is occurring due (in part) to collusion.

What is a "PM?"

Also you are right. RBs are like 6% of NFL players. They can't sway the union overall.

 

[UnrealMachine]

What is a "PM?"

Also you are right. RBs are like 6% of NFL players. They can't sway the union overall.

Program Manager for a (work) organization. Not a big deal just emphasizing that I am quite familiar with Exploitable Loopholes.

 

[Peat]

That’s true on the franchise tag. I feel like teams have had enough time to adjust to the expanded free agency that something needs to be done about it. It’s basically just a tool to hold guys hostage and force them to risk injury on a one year deal or sit out. And it’s almost always used on guys who are at the top of their position anyway so it’s not like these players are getting more money than they would on a long term deal. Dupree is the only guy I can remember that was fine with it because he got paid more, but then he almost got f***ed because of his injury. It’s probably way too powerful of a thing for teams to ever let it go though so nothing will happen.

I wouldn't care if they took it out but at the same time, I'm okay with a tool to make the Steelers better being left in. Maybe reduce how many times the tag can be used, maybe increase how much it costs to use it, but I have limited sympathy for the injustice of getting paid 10m instead of 14m and I mostly just want to see good teams going at each other.

With Barkley, I always thought it was about guaranteed money. They get decent offers average wise on contracts but they know they’ll just get cut after a year or two. So the only choice they have is to essentially sign a one year prove it deal or play on the franchise tag. It’s just a shit situation for them. I don’t blame GMs for doing what they’re doing. But I also don’t blame the players for speaking up about it. It definitely doesn’t make them look dumb in my opinion.

The Barkley situation will be interesting. That to me is not a team that’ll be able to just slide a random cheap running back in and see little drop off. Their entire offense basically revolves around Barkley.

Absolutely agree the players don't look dumb. Why shouldn't they try and get better?

As for NYG and Barkley... my guess is Schoen and Daboll want to move beyond being an offence that revolves around Barkley, because that's a long term losing game. They want to see if Daniel Jones can be a person who the offence revolves around and if that doesn't work out, they'll go take a swing on drafting a guy after two years.

 

[ChaosAgent]

Program Manager for a (work) organization. Not a big deal just emphasizing that I am quite familiar with Exploitable Loopholes.

I was adamantly against the Steelers paying Le'Veon Bell, because it would have been stupid.

But it's only stupid because that's the system we have, which is unfair to RBs.

Some sort of extra RB stipend or RB bonus for those first few years seems needed. Maybe a $100M pool ($3M/team) to the RB position to be taken out of other salary cap.

 

[UnrealMachine]

I was adamantly against the Steelers paying Le'Veon Bell, because it would have been stupid.

But it's only stupid because that's the system we have, which is unfair to RBs.

Some sort of extra RB stipend or RB bonus for those first few years seems needed. Maybe a $100M pool ($3M/team) to the RB position to be taken out of other salary cap.

Same here. Ironically, while he was fighting for RBs to be paid more the long term effect was likely for owners to steer clear of these contracts because of how risky they are (health, performance decline, etc.). Again, my main point is that RBs are being disproportionately hurt the most by the entry level contracts - yet I totally agree that there needs to be some limit on those.

In some ways this reminds me of the unintended consequences of vet minimum pay in the NFL. Certainly the spirit of the agreement was to reward older players, but it did a lot to end careers early due to owners not wanting to pay. Economics is hard and sucks a lot of the time - totally exploiting (no pun) our instinctual desire for surplus that came about with the agrarian revolution.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

What is a "PM?"

Also you are right. RBs are like 6% of NFL players. They can't sway the union overall.

Aren't there equally as many QB's in the NFL vs RB's? I'd argue there are LESS QB's

So the argument about "swaying the union" doesn't apply. It's about value, plain and simple.
Just like society values entertainers, doctors and lawyers but doesn't value teachers or social workers.

There's a morality discussion in there, but again everyone knows what they are signing up for when they pick a career path

 

[ChaosAgent]

Aren't there equally as many QB's in the NFL vs RB's? I'd argue there are LESS QB's

So the argument about "swaying the union" doesn't apply. It's about value, plain and simple.
Just like society values entertainers, doctors and lawyers but doesn't value teachers or social workers.

There's a morality discussion in there, but again everyone knows what they are signing up for when they pick a career path

RBs aren't "picking their career path"

High school coaches are putting players at offensive positions, and many times putting their BEST players at RB.
Good luck as a 16 year old turning your coach down because you think it's going to hurt your future earnings potential and be disproportionately likely to ruin your body in the process.

Markets produce unfair outcomes sometimes. The NFL RB market is a screamingly obvious example and collective action by the owners/players would be needed to rectify it. Alex Highsmith just got a bigger contract than any RB is going to get for a decade. But there are 15 RBs that are more talented football players than him.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Markets produce unfair outcomes sometimes. The NFL RB market is a screamingly obvious example and collective action by the owners/players would be needed to rectify it. Alex Highsmith just got a bigger contract than any RB is going to get for a decade. But there are 15 RBs that are more talented football players than him.

Yup, we agree here. It still goes back to my "value" comment. EDGE guys are way more valuable than RB's bc it's a pass first league.

Want more money? Do something your industry/society values more

 

[The Old Master]

RBs aren't "picking their career path"

High school coaches are putting players at offensive positions, and many times putting their BEST players at RB.

and when they get to collage they are moved as the coaches see fit.
edit; fit; = a pos. that they can excel in.

 

[Peat]

RBs aren't "picking their career path"

High school coaches are putting players at offensive positions, and many times putting their BEST players at RB.
Good luck as a 16 year old turning your coach down because you think it's going to hurt your future earnings potential and be disproportionately likely to ruin your body in the process.

Markets produce unfair outcomes sometimes. The NFL RB market is a screamingly obvious example and collective action by the owners/players would be needed to rectify it. Alex Highsmith just got a bigger contract than any RB is going to get for a decade. But there are 15 RBs that are more talented football players than him.

Feels like a matter of time tbh. Sixteen year olds making huge life decisions in the pursuit of pro sports isn't rare; I don't think it'll be that long before we see super talented guys tell coaches "either you put me at X, Y, or Z, or I go play a different sport this year/transfer schools". Tbh I'm surprised that guys changing high schools to play for better football teams isn't already a thing. I know there's a few examples but not many.

 

[Fiji Water]

I think the players union should push to outlaw the franchise tag for RBs. Outside of that there isn't much that should be done. RBs usually decline hard by their late 20s. Why should an owner be forced to pay long term for a rapidly declining asset? This is professional football, not a charity league. The only other thing that could be done is to restructure rookie deals, so that RBs are paid fairly for the value they bring as opposed to where they were drafted, which more often that not is outside of Round 1.

 

[ChaosAgent]

and when they get to collage they are moved as the coaches see fit.
edit; fit; = a pos. that they can excel in.

College football still disproportionately values RBs.
For Pitt, the RB has been the best player on the team like half the time over the last 10 years.

You guys know this isn't a free market when your first 3-4 years you have slotted pay, right?

The only other thing that could be done is to restructure rookie deals, so that RBs are paid fairly for the value they bring as opposed to where they were drafted, which more often that not is outside of Round 1.

This is the most likely event. If a player is declared as an RB their salary doubles over the rookie scale or something. Or they get an extra $500K each year.
Of course then that may deter teams from drafting RBs. Which is why there should be a leaguewide carveout in the cap for this.

 

[xlm34]

I think the players union should push to outlaw the franchise tag for RBs. Outside of that there isn't much that should be done. RBs usually decline hard by their late 20s. Why should an owner be forced to pay long term for a rapidly declining asset? This is professional football, not a charity league. The only other thing that could be done is to restructure rookie deals, so that RBs are paid fairly for the value they bring as opposed to where they were drafted, which more often that not is outside of Round 1.

I think this is the best way to do it, but I can’t see the owners ever giving up the franchise tag without major concession somewhere on the players side.

College football still disproportionately values RBs.
For Pitt, the RB has been the best player on the team like half the time over the last 10 years.

You guys know this isn't a free market when your first 3-4 years you have slotted pay, right?



This is the most likely event. If a player is declared as an RB their salary doubles over the rookie scale or something. Or they get an extra $500K each year.
Of course then that may deter teams from drafting RBs. Which is why there should be a leaguewide carveout in the cap for this.

This is why I hate trying to compare this or really any professional leagues to normal jobs. If I’m unhappy with my pay, I can try to find a company that’ll pay me more. Maybe it doesn’t happen, but I at least have the ability to explore my options. With good running backs, they basically never get this option until it’s too late.

 

[OnMyOwn]

When you’re washed at like 28, it’s hard to have an argument for bigger deals. The franchise tag is what needs looked at. Also, high schools usually put their best player at QB, followed by RB. At least most of the big schools because that position touches the ball every snap. Those QBs frequently wind up running a ton and transition to another position in college.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

I follow you now.
But I still stand by my assertion that every person in the US has agency. If I don't like my pay or working conditions, I can decide to not do what I currently do.

Mr. Harris could choose to not elect to play football OR he could attempt a different position. While the former isn't likely to be successful, let's not act like he's a slave here in this situation.

Who acting like hes a slave?

Just because people have agency doesnt mean some of those people arent grtting a raw deal.

Its very weird on one hand your advocating that everyone has agency and your choice are your choices and on the other whining that they are using their agency (in this case their voice and platform) to try and change their circumstances.

Apparently the only bit of their agency they allowed to use is shut-up and change positions?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Analyst Believes Clock is Ticking Between Mike Tomlin and Steelers​

Mike Tomlin's seat is getting warm with the Pittsburgh Steelers.

https://www.si.com/nfl/steelers/news/analyst-clock-ticking-mike-tomlin-pittsburgh-steelers

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

https://www.si.com/nfl/steelers/news/analyst-clock-ticking-mike-tomlin-pittsburgh-steelers

AR2 basically said he feels lucky Tomlin wants to be the coach of his org - which is comical, but the only opinion that matters is his so, long story short, Tomlin isn’t going anywhere.