Colts grant Jonathan Taylor’s request to seek trade

[Doc]

Good.

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

Todd Gurley was in 2018
The combination of Devonta Foreman and Tevin Colemen were in 2016
Marshawn lynch was in 2013 & 2014
Frank Gore & Ray Rice were in 2012


How much further do you want me to go back? In the last 20 years, we have been blessed with seeing most of the top 10 greatest QBs of all time, including the undisputed top 2 and likely top 3, many of them all competing for a Super Bowl simultaneously.  Since then, we've introduced Mahomes, who's already top 10 all time. It shouldn't be any surprise that SB winners have been largely QB driven since that time.

That doesn't mean that elite RBs don't help you get there and give you a better chance to win.
 

 

Now go research how much money was invested in RB's that were part of the Super Bowl teams.  How is this something people keep missing?  When you weaken your team elsewhere to over pay a RB, the overall team success drops considerably.  Over the last 20 years, while there have been talented RB's who have been in the SB, the vast majority did not have hefty top of the market RB contracts.  

 

So your list is irrelevant in relation to whether its worth paying for a top tier RB

[Utah John]

The Dolphins have serious over-the-cap problems now, with worse ones to come next year.  They're trying to do what Beane is trying to do, construct a roster than gets strong and stays strong, year after year.  They're facing the same restrictions Beane is facing but haven't had the same success Beane has had.

[Bubba Gump]

Unless the Colts took JT off the PUP list, he ain't playing anywhere til week 5.

[Airseven]

Beane already made his big moves. They didn’t work.

[BullBuchanan]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Now go research how much money was invested in RB's that were part of the Super Bowl teams.  How is this something people keep missing?  When you weaken your team elsewhere to over pay a RB, the overall team success drops considerably.  Over the last 20 years, while there have been talented RB's who have been in the SB, the vast majority did not have hefty top of the market RB contracts.  

 

So your list is irrelevant in relation to whether its worth paying for a top tier RB

No. Do your own homework.

I never said it was. Like I told the other guy, if you want to move goalposts, create a new argument for that instead of trying to apply it in reverse to other arguments.

So far, no one has countered that elite RB play can help teams reach the super bowl, and they probably won't.

[Alphadawg7]

7 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

No. Do your own homework.

I never said it was. Like I told the other guy, if you want to move goalposts, create a new argument for that instead of trying to apply it in reverse to other arguments.

So far, no one has countered that elite RB play can help teams reach the super bowl, and they probably won't.

 

Lmao, move the goal post?  This was my first comment.  And second you clearly just don't want to actually talk about reality and rather live in a fantasy world where players dont cost anything or against the cap. 

 

So compare apples to apples here.  Just saying some lame blanket statement about how adding elite players helps is irrelevant.  Any position, adding elite talent helps any team.  But one player doesn't make up a roster. 

 

So why not stay in the world of reality? My guess is because it doesn't support your opinion, so you rather ignore the reality of investing big around a RB because it doesn't normally work out.  Go look up teams who invested top 5 contracts specifically into RB's and show me how many of them made and won the Super Bowl.  Show me how spending top tier money on that position makes teams SB winners.  

 

Spoiler alert:  The list is very short, won't say how short, I will leave that as a surprise for you to find on your own.  Oh...and he was dead the whole time  

Edited August 29, 2023 by Alphadawg7

[Warcodered]

28 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

No trade

 

 

@FilthyBeast is going to be devestated.

[Bubba Gump]

 

[Scott7975]

Miami released Myles Gaskin.  That was pretty surprising to me.  They must like the guy they just drafted.

[BullBuchanan]

7 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Lmao, move the goal post?  This was my first comment.  And second you clearly just don't want to actually talk about reality and rather live in a fantasy world where players dont cost anything or against the cap. 

 

So compare apples to apples here.  Just saying some lame blanket statement about how adding elite players helps is irrelevant.  Any position, adding elite talent helps any team.  But one player doesn't make up a roster. 

 

So why not stay in the world of reality? My guess is because it doesn't support your opinion, so you rather ignore the reality of investing big around a RB because it doesn't normally work out.  Go look up teams who invested top 5 contracts specifically into RB's and show me how many of them made and won the Super Bowl.  Show me how spending top tier money on that position makes teams SB winners.  

 

Spoiler alert:  The list is very short, won't say how short, I will leave that as a surprise for you to find on your own.  Oh...and he was dead the whole time  

It may have been your first post on the subject, but my response was to a different circumstance, so yes, moving the goalposts. If you want to talk about running backs making a significant rate who made a significant contribution to reaching/winning a super bowl, we'd have to define all those terms to even get started. It's a lot of legwork looking through contracts, comparing it to the average price of a back and the cap in a given year and I'm not really interested in all that just for you or others to say nUh uHhHhH at the end of it all.

It's also not going to reach a point of statistical significance for the following reasons:

The aforementioned elite level QB play we've seen over the last 20 years.
The limit on only two teams reaching a super bowl per year
The number of RBs that meaningfully contributed to SB appearances while on rookie deals

Because of the above, you have to look at a longer timeline, which people are already discounting 2012 and being equivalent to 1965. I cna only imagine if I brought up Marshall Faulk or even Edgerrin James

 

[Chicken Boo]

47 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

No trade

 

 

 

I don't understand.  I thought RBs were a dime a dozen and thus easily replaced?

 

See.  The Colts want Taylor's production they just don't want to pay for it.  

[FireChans]

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

"Winning" a super bowl was not the challenge. Getting a team to the super bowl was. If you want to move the goalposts so that you can find a way to be right, go ahead but I'm not interested in that discussion.

 

The answer is the same regardless lol

[FireChans]

35 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

I don't understand.  I thought RBs were a dime a dozen and thus easily replaced?

 

See.  The Colts want Taylor's production they just don't want to pay for it.  

He’s on his rookie contract. 

[Doc]

Just now, FireChans said:

He’s on his rookie contract. 

 

He's looking for $12M/year.

[JohnNord]

No one will admit it but Irsay and Ballard played this perfectly.  Teams thought the situation was so bad they’d be desperate to get rid of Taylor for anything.  They stood pat and waited for the others teams (namely Miami) to meet their demands.   
 

When they couldn’t get the value they wanted, they simply put Taylor on PUP.  This buys them more time up until the trade deadline.  
 

The Colts are restarting with a new coach and rookie QB and aren’t expected to content.  They hold all the cards here.  
 

https://x.com/nicereedsteve/status/1696615853343531471?s=46&t=8ZEIwokTeanemk54SQ608g

Edited August 29, 2023 by JohnNord

[Alphadawg7]

3 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

It may have been your first post on the subject, but my response was to a different circumstance, so yes, moving the goalposts. If you want to talk about running backs making a significant rate who made a significant contribution to reaching/winning a super bowl, we'd have to define all those terms to even get started. It's a lot of legwork looking through contracts, comparing it to the average price of a back and the cap in a given year and I'm not really interested in all that just for you or others to say nUh uHhHhH at the end of it all.

It's also not going to reach a point of statistical significance for the following reasons:

The aforementioned elite level QB play we've seen over the last 20 years.
The limit on only two teams reaching a super bowl per year
The number of RBs that meaningfully contributed to SB appearances while on rookie deals

Because of the above, you have to look at a longer timeline, which people are already discounting 2012 and being equivalent to 1965. I cna only imagine if I brought up Marshall Faulk or even Edgerrin James

 

 

Going too far back is irrelevant though, it was a different game 20 years ago, and that was a different game than even 10-20 years before that.  What matters is what is most effective in the modern NFL, which we all know is both a pass driven league where the QB makes a gazillion dollars if they are even just solid.  

 

When you have a team with a rookie contract at QB, more things open up temporarily like in SF where they can afford to have an elite defense, elite RB, and pay their recieving playmakers top dollar too.  Because they aren't paying much at all at QB.  

 

Just taking a quick look at the last 10 SB winners...none of them had a top 5 paid RB 

 

2023 - Chiefs - 7th round rookie making peanuts

2022 - Rams - RB making peanuts

2021 - Bucs - RB making peanuts 

2020 - Chiefs - RB making peanuts

2019 - Pats - RB making peanuts and it was a platoon

2018 - Eagles - RB making peanuts

2017 - Pats - RB making peanuts and a platoon

2016 - Broncos - RB was making peanuts

2015 - Pats - RB was making peanuts

2014 - Seattle - Lynch got $6m, but wouldn't get his $12M per year deal until a year later and because Wilson was still on a rookie deal, although this was also when Seattle would begin to unravel moving forward

2013 - Ravens - Ray Rice was making under a million

 

I mean that is just a quick look only looking at last 10 winners.  Point is, teams who pay big money to RB's have not been winning the SB much in the modern era, if at all.  I am not even sure how far back you have to go to find a team who had a top 5 paid RB.  Does not mean there were not teams who had talented RB's on them, means that they didn't use significant cap space on those positions and either had them on rookie deals or cheap FA deals.  

 

TRIVIA:  When was the last time a Super Bowl winning team had a 1,000 yard rusher?  Answer:  2016 LaGarette Blount.  Its an NFL record now for most years in a row that the SB champion did not have a 1,000 yard rusher that season.  And Blount was a low budget FA signing.  

 

So not only are teams winning SB's without highly paid RB's, they are doing so without RB's who aren't even amassing 1,000 yards in a season anymore.  

 

This notion that an elite RB matters so much is factually incorrect in just about every capacity in the modern NFL...which is why talented and elite RB's are getting hosed by the NFL on their contracts despite being some of the most talented players on their rosters.  Its just not a proven way to win anymore, in fact, its practically proven to not be effective way to win a Super Bowl.  

 

BONUS FUN FACT:  The last team to have a RB lead the NFL in rushing that won a Super Bowl that year was the Broncos in the 90's with Terrell Davis.  

Edited August 30, 2023 by Alphadawg7

[thenorthremembers]

2 hours ago, Utah John said:

The Dolphins have serious over-the-cap problems now, with worse ones to come next year.  They're trying to do what Beane is trying to do, construct a roster than gets strong and stays strong, year after year.  They're facing the same restrictions Beane is facing but haven't had the same success Beane has had.

And have a QB on a 5th year option rather than an extended contract.  

[Aussie Joe]

2 hours ago, Warcodered said:

@FilthyBeast is going to be devestated.

His beloved Dolphins still have a Top 3 if not the best roster in Football… apparently ..

[AKC]

9 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

This notion that an elite RB matters so much is factually incorrect in just about every capacity in the modern NFL...which is why talented and elite RB's are getting hosed by the NFL on their contracts despite being some of the most talented players on their rosters.  Its just not a proven way to win anymore, in fact, its practically proven to not be effective way to win a Super Bowl.  

 

BONUS FUN FACT:  The last team to have a RB lead the NFL in rushing that won a Super Bowl that year was the Broncos in the 90's with Terrell Davis.  

I enjoyed the construction of your post and the effort. You clearly understand something that's elusive for a lot of fans of the NFL in the modern era- successful teams today have a strategy that isolates positions where a big ticket expenditure can be acceptable, versus the old school reaction of filling ugly holes in your roster with big spends that will keep you from being a more complete team in your strategic image. NFL GMs have nearly completely figured out that the big RB money dump doesn't work.  A contemporary contender like the Bills should continue following their strategy instead of going Imelda Marcos and following the Rams model of stepping outside their strategy to buy up all the shiny shoes they're sure everyone else is idolizing.