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

[Buddy Bizarre]

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

Weird- this article says something different

https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/ron ... 2307230060

"Reports out of New England indicate Bill Belichick might have to win a playoff game this season to save his job. That’s despite the fact he has led the Patriots to nine Super Bowls over the years, winning six.

Speculation in Pittsburgh has Mike Tomlin almost certainly getting another contract extension before Steelers training camp opens on Wednesday. That’s despite the fact his teams have missed the playoffs in three of the past five seasons and haven’t won a postseason game since 2016. "

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Uh bc under the terms and conditions of the CBA, that's the only AGENCY he has.


Harris and others are whining about the positions they find themselves in, which I believe is wholly unproductive and pointless.

Harris should really be more focused on how/why an UDFA matched his production for about 1/7 of his salary. I mean if anyone has a gripe about pay, it should be Warren

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

Uh bc under the terms and conditions of the CBA, that's the only AGENCY he has.
You're acting like I'm the one who wrote the agreement. I'm only commenting on its limitations.

Harris and others are whining about the positions they find themselves in, which I believe is wholly unproductive and pointless.

Harris should really be more focused on how/why an UDFA matched his production for about 1/7 of his salary. I mean if anyone has a gripe about pay, it should be Warren

The Bell and Gurley deals were the death knell for RBs getting big deals.

Those two became living symbols to owners about why opening their pockets for Rbs is a bad idea.

By the same token though, I get why Harris and co are pissed off.

Their franchise tags are the lowest in the league after kickers and punters, yet they take the most abuse of any position.

I don’t know what the solution is, but there used to be a time when the best athletes played RB and it was a high value position.

If the league keeps devaluing the position, most of these athletes will as you said, just play other positions.

Over time I’d imagine that will impact the skill of the RB position when you have lesser athletes being the only ones willing to play the position.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

If the league keeps devaluing the position, most of these athletes will as you said, just play other positions.

Over time I’d imagine that will impact the skill of the RB position when you have lesser athletes being the only ones willing to play the position.

I disagree here a bit. All sports are a bit cyclical and there will always be counters to new philosophies.
I mean, Pitt is taking this exact approach (at least their offseason moves reflect this): with other teams playing more of a finesse/pass happy approach, the Steelers want to play bully-ball

They've invested heavily in the Oline and added a monster TE.

So while we're now in the current cycle of RB's being devalued, we'll see another position group hit in the next iteration of the NFL

 

[The Old Master]

Over time I’d imagine that will impact the skill of the RB position when you have lesser athletes being the only ones willing to play the position.

and then their pay will skyrocket.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

RBs value will bottom out until it becomes a competitive advantage to pay them and then their pay will bounce back. Like anything else.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

I disagree here a bit. All sports are a bit cyclical and there will always be counters to new philosophies.
I mean, Pitt is taking this exact approach (at least their offseason moves reflect this): with other teams playing more of a finesse/pass happy approach, the Steelers want to play bully-ball

They've invested heavily in the Oline and added a monster TE.

So while we're now in the current cycle of RB's being devalued, we'll see another position group hit in the next iteration of the NFL

Steelers would have to win the SB with their “new” philosophy though, and the Titans have already lead that march against the grain to playoff failure.

Who knows how trends will go, but I wouldn’t bet any serious money on the league ever going back to the golden days of the 90s for rbs.

The position likely has to bottom out with lesser athletes playing the position so poorly that the remaining few who do it well will become unicorns like power fwds in the NHL.

It’s either going to be a scenario like that playing out over a decade or so, or a team winning the SB on the talent of some star RB.

Ie this rb wins league rushing title and has a monster playoffs and wins SB mvp.

That’s usually what it takes to start a massive trend of copycats.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Speaking of running backs, any indication the team will add a back to its depth chart? I mean, I guess Benny Snell remains unsigned, but I was thinking of someone who's actually been productive.

 

[xlm34]

Speaking of running backs, any indication the team will add a back to its depth chart? I mean, I guess Benny Snell remains unsigned, but I was thinking of someone who's actually been productive.

It looks like right now it’ll just be either McFarland or a UDFA as the third back. Snell was a pretty big special teams guy though so maybe they will bring in someone cheap or just bring Snell back.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Speaking of running backs, any indication the team will add a back to its depth chart? I mean, I guess Benny Snell remains unsigned, but I was thinking of someone who's actually been productive.

I think they'll have one of the UDFA's come in and snag that spot.
But I wouldn't have an issue if Snell came back on the cheap. He played his best football as a Steeler and did well on ST's too. I honestly thought he was not an NFL player his first couple of seasons.

 

[Peat]

RBs value will bottom out until it becomes a competitive advantage to pay them and then their pay will bounce back. Like anything else.

That can't happen with the franchise tag there as teams will just use the franchise tag on them until they're 27 and wash their hands off of them. Only way that changes as it currently is if the competitive advantage is so strong that a RB can sit out and force a trade to a team that is willing to pay them... but why didn't a team that values RB so much just draft their own high and tag them?

Maybe the solution is every RB lists their position as WR so that's who their franchise tag gets tied to.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

That can't happen with the franchise tag there as teams will just use the franchise tag on them until they're 27 and wash their hands off of them. Only way that changes as it currently is if the competitive advantage is so strong that a RB can sit out and force a trade to a team that is willing to pay them... but why didn't a team that values RB so much just draft their own high and tag them?

Maybe the solution is every RB lists their position as WR so that's who their franchise tag gets tied to.

Maybe but by using the tag on a back you eliminate the ability to use it elsewhere. That’ll be the reserved for the star RBs.

Just think the only way for their value to rebound is for it to crater so low that it becomes “undervalued” and investment in RBs naturally comes back.

The position is just not a good use of cap space with how important QBs, pass rushers, protectors and WRs are. Its unfortunate but true.

I’m never against maxing out earnings potential (especially with how taxing the game is on the body) and I totally get the frustration, but big picture even league min guys make a lot of dough. Getting tagged for a year should easily be enough to set you up for life. So it’s harsh to say they’re not worth it but these guys are not struggling either. A.k.a. their leverage is extremely limited - they stand to lose a lot by walking away or holding out and someone will always be happy to take their spot for league minimum.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Maybe but by using the tag on a back you eliminate the ability to use it elsewhere. That’ll be the reserved for the star RBs.

Just think the only way for their value to rebound is for it to crater so low that it becomes “undervalued” and investment in RBs naturally comes back.

The position is just not a good use of cap space with how important QBs, pass rushers, protectors and WRs are. Its unfortunate but true.

I’m never against maxing out earnings potential (especially with how taxing the game is on the body) and I totally get the frustration, but big picture even league min guys make a lot of dough. Getting tagged for a year should easily be enough to set you up for life. So it’s harsh to say they’re not worth it but these guys are not struggling either. A.k.a. their leverage is extremely limited - they stand to lose a lot by walking away or holding out and someone will always be happy to take their spot for league minimum.

Anyway, what some people don't quite understand is the NFL Union doesn't operate the same way as your typical union. In a standard union, different positions get assigned a pay band.

Position X: Payband of $A to $B
Position Y: $C to $D

and so on.

So many nuances in sports PA's that there are going to be a number of unintended consequences. This is one of them.

 

[UnrealMachine]

Maybe but by using the tag on a back you eliminate the ability to use it elsewhere. That’ll be the reserved for the star RBs.

Just think the only way for their value to rebound is for it to crater so low that it becomes “undervalued” and investment in RBs naturally comes back.

The position is just not a good use of cap space with how important QBs, pass rushers, protectors and WRs are. Its unfortunate but true.

I’m never against maxing out earnings potential (especially with how taxing the game is on the body) and I totally get the frustration, but big picture even league min guys make a lot of dough. Getting tagged for a year should easily be enough to set you up for life. So it’s harsh to say they’re not worth it but these guys are not struggling either. A.k.a. their leverage is extremely limited - they stand to lose a lot by walking away or holding out and someone will always be happy to take their spot for league minimum.

So on one hand you are never against maxing out salaries, but on the other hand league minimum guys make a lot of dough?

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

So on one hand you are never against maxing out salaries, but on the other hand league minimum guys make a lot of dough?

Um yeah… on what planet is 750k (for about 7-8 months of work) not a lot of money?

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

What is lowest salary in NFL?
The minimum for an NFL player's salary is $750,000 in 2023, according to Spotrac, but that number changes based on experience. The minimum for a rookie is $750,000, but that increases to $870,000 for players with one year of experience and $940,000 for players with two years of experience.Mar 3, 2023

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

My point about them making a lot of money is that the absolute bottom barrel NFL salary is still 3x-4x the best/most competitive positions for college graduates…with opportunities for sponsorships and improved quality of life compared to corporate America— so there is no limitation of cheaper and more eager replacements. It’s also just f***ing cool to be a pro athlete lol. With it being shown that these cheaper/eager replacements can be effective, the other side of the table (owners/GMs) now have legitimate options. Having other legitimately acceptable options = only true negotiating power there is.

Meanwhile the backs don’t have a ton of that. And they have more to lose- by not playing on a tag they give up millions of dollars- so their ability to walk away is limited. The owner likely spends to the cap either way, they’re not risking much by walking away. Again, more legit options.

And since there’s not a lucrative marketplace the good backs NEED to take every opportunity to squeeze whatever they can because it could evaporate in an instant. I get their position.

My whole point is that every side of this is justified right now but I do not see a way for RBs to win given current market dynamics. It’s just business.

 

[UnrealMachine]

Um yeah… on what planet is 750k (for about 7-8 months of work) not a lot of money?

The same planet where the difference between the highest and lowest paid NFL player is $51.25M (or an increase of 6,833%).

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

The same planet where the difference between the highest and lowest paid NFL player is $51.25M (or an increase of 6,833%).

That’s no different (actually a lot better) than the spread between me and the best person at my profession?

 

[UnrealMachine]

My point about them making a lot of money is that the absolute bottom barrel NFL salary is still 3x-4x the best/most competitive positions for college graduates…with opportunities for sponsorships and improved quality of life compared to corporate America— so there is no limitation of cheaper and more eager replacements. It’s also just f***ing cool to be a pro athlete lol. With it being shown that these cheaper/eager replacements can be effective, the other side of the table (owners/GMs) now have legitimate options. Having other legitimately acceptable options = only true negotiating power there is.

Meanwhile the backs don’t have a ton of that. And they have more to lose- by not playing on a tag they give up millions of dollars- so their ability to walk away is limited. The owner likely spends to the cap either way, they’re not risking much by walking away. Again, more legit options.

And since there’s not a lucrative marketplace the good backs NEED to take every opportunity to squeeze whatever they can because it could evaporate in an instant. I get their position.

My whole point is that every side of this is justified right now but I do not see a way for RBs to win given current market dynamics. It’s just business.

Why limit the scope to just college graduates? NFL league minimum also pays way more than working in a cobalt mine.

That’s no different (actually a lot better) than the spread between me and the best person at my profession?

When does your holdout begin?

 

[Peat]

Maybe but by using the tag on a back you eliminate the ability to use it elsewhere. That’ll be the reserved for the star RBs.

Just think the only way for their value to rebound is for it to crater so low that it becomes “undervalued” and investment in RBs naturally comes back.

The position is just not a good use of cap space with how important QBs, pass rushers, protectors and WRs are. Its unfortunate but true.

But it's star RBs we're talking about, right? Nobody seems up in arms about whether James Conner makes enough.

As long as that exists and it's being based on low existing RB pay, there's no way for their market to bounce back just based on market conditions. It's not that teams won't pay more, look at NYG making a better offer to Barkley before tagging him, but as long as they can tag cheaply, why not? Is it all that surprising or unusual that of the tags this year, half went to RBs, and only the RBs will play (or not) on theirs?

What it'd require is RBs being more valued as players... but how does that happen in a passing league where they're injured a ton and have the shortest shelf life?

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

Why limit the scope to just college graduates? NFL league minimum also pays way more than working in a cobalt mine.


When does your holdout begin?

Because the NFL drafts from colleges and jobs that college grads seek would be alternatives for NFL players and vice versa.

On the second part- I feel like you’re kind of just being difficult for the sake of it. I’m just pointing out the lack of leverage they have. I would try to get the most I could too if I was them.

What it'd require is RBs being more valued as players... but how does that happen in a passing league where they're injured a ton and have the shortest shelf life?

I mean I agree. It’ll take the one team that zigs when everyone zags because they see a bunch of good football players that no one else wants for that reason and has massive success. Then the schematic shift of a copy cat league.

Or maybe the position is a dinosaur and won’t ever come back. That could be the case.

 

[UnrealMachine]

Because the NFL drafts from colleges and jobs that college grads seek would be alternatives for NFL players and vice versa.

On the second part- I feel like you’re kind of just being difficult for the sake of it. I’m just pointing out the lack of leverage they have. I would try to get the most I could too if I was them.

You might be surprised to know that less than half of NFL players have college degrees. The good ones typically enter the draft after college year 2 or 3. But I guess since they only work 7-8 months out of the year, and presumably just sit around and do nothing the other 4-5 months, the onus is on them to complete the credit hours.

Perhaps I’m just giving you the deserved retort on your whataboutism arguments? In your mind it’s perfectly reasonable to straight up compare a salary that averages 3.3 years (average NFL career length) to one of a person (college grad) whose career will likely span 30-40 years? My point was why not make your argument even more absurd that it already is?

 

[xlm34]

Because the NFL drafts from colleges and jobs that college grads seek would be alternatives for NFL players and vice versa.

On the second part- I feel like you’re kind of just being difficult for the sake of it. I’m just pointing out the lack of leverage they have. I would try to get the most I could too if I was them.



I mean I agree. It’ll take the one team that zigs when everyone zags because they see a bunch of good football players that no one else wants for that reason and has massive success. Then the schematic shift of a copy cat league.

Or maybe the position is a dinosaur and won’t ever come back. That could be the case.

Whether we like or not, this seems to be what the Steelers are going for now. Although I think before bigger contracts are handed out, we’ll just see teams do what the Lions and Falcons just did in the draft and take RBs early to get basically 7 years of control.

 

[Peat]

I mean I agree. It’ll take the one team that zigs when everyone zags because they see a bunch of good football players that no one else wants for that reason and has massive success. Then the schematic shift of a copy cat league.

Or maybe the position is a dinosaur and won’t ever come back. That could be the case.

Thing is, I don't really believe in either. I don't believe it's a dinosaur position and I don't think anyone is going to create a super team out of 27/28 year old running backs as things stand. If it was a dinosaur position I don't think we'd have seen two RBs go in the top 15, and I think the physical limitations of the position are even more of a definite than that.

I think it comes down solely to a situation where the economics of the NFL screw RBs far, far harder than anyone else. They are the position that suffers the most from their first 4/5 years being immensely devalued, and the position that suffers most from the franchise tag, and the position that has the least to gain from going to market at 27.

Ergo my disagreement that things will change under the current model. The solvable problem isn't how decision makers value the position, it's how the NFL's pay system allows them to execute that.