|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 12:37:44 GMT -5
Now you are making a strawman argument. I was just point out what Martin saying that RBs having a short lifespan in the NFL is an inaccurate statementAR you really implying if he plays well .He should be punished for that and become trade bait? If you are a player coming out of the NCAA and the Giants do as you suggest reward players coming off their rookie contracts that play well with trading them. Would you want to be drafted by the giants? . Seems RB's lifespan is 2.57 years (pretty damn short) www.statista.com/statistics/240102/average-player-career-length-in-the-national-football-league/Again a BS stat. True for the cookie cutter RB. The 95% of the backs coming out of the NCAA .Barkley is a 5% RB. The guys on that list are not cookie cutter backs. Out of all the QB that have been drafted . What is the percentage of the ones that are the cream the crop? Sitting on the bench for 10 years "Alex Tanney" doesn't in any way suggest QB last longer because you can make a career riding the pines.
|
|
|
Post by Martin on May 21, 2021 12:45:26 GMT -5
First off I don't see it as a rant just a forward thinking opinion. You may be too tied up into little details such as exact salary amounts etc... but I am interested in a larger view. That view is RB's like Barkley if hypothetically healthy and play reasonably strong as they approach their renewal will try to command a large deal. IF that were to happen I am against it. I pointed out the highest paid RB salaries to show where this could be headed. Rant? no not really just more of a concern for a RB that can't block. So you are saying if he plays well. It becomes a problem? Now we are getting to the root of the issue here. Three poster have said the same thing in essence He he plays well he should not be rewarded for that effort. Now the consensus is not to pay players that preform. I asked the Captin this If he is an all pro for the next two seasons and is instrumental to putting a trophy in the case, Is your idea of gratitude for that is to trade him or let him walk? TEM let me preface this with that you are one of the posters that I follow here on this board due to your intelligence and respect for others. Not to say I always agree with you. In this case I wanted to point out that RB's have the lowest lifespan of any position and after they surpass 2.57 years you now have the odds against you. RB's as you know take a beating and I am in the camp of being extremely cautious about paying them after there rookie contract. In this case Barkley has blocking issues which compounds the problem. Your scenario about SB playing great and being part of a trophy is a difficult one. The old school me says you keep him. Would you get rid of Mickey Mantle? No. I miss the old days of sports and player loyalty to your team. The new school me says you can't take on a salary with the odds against you that he will break down or get injured due to he has well surpassed 2.57 years.
|
|
|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 12:46:52 GMT -5
Thank god you are not the Owener or the GM . Because in its true nature football is a entertainment business. If you get rid of you best performers. You won't fill the house. This is smart. Let’s keep a player in part to keep fans coming to the games. Earth to TEM, fans will go to games if Tweedledum and Tweedledee were playing. Barkley missed most of last season. A show of hands, did anyone tune the games out due to Barkley being out? It’s been proven time and time again. Do not sign a running back to a big contract. If you want to go against the grain, so be it. You’ll be like the Cowboys who are scrambling to get under the cap. Don't back track .You are saying don't pay a player if he preforms ,has all pro numbers, or helps put a trophy in the case. By you even suggesting that. You are contradicting your entire I hate losing narrative. Are you saying it is ok to lose as long as the players I do not want on roster fail to preform because if they help us win. We may have to pay them This comical irony at its best. "don't pay winners"
|
|
|
Post by giantlegacy on May 21, 2021 12:56:41 GMT -5
I agree 100% about the pass blocking and it's huge! I can't imagine B. Parcells and B. Belichick having a RB who can't block. Fans are gonna talk about SB speed, power etc... but the Giants Oline is the weak link added with D Jones turnovers and then you put in a RB who can't pick up the blitz??? WTF !!! No way, put the money in the oline get 3 RB's by committee and now you don't put all your eggs in one basket on the field and with the budget. Truer words have never been spoken... Build the OL, and stop listening to the fantasy playing fans...running backs are media creations for sports center. Play calling and the OL creates these overpaid players in a position of little value Get a bunch of modern all around smallish bowling balls like SF has that are good in all aspects of the game and can be a threat for a highly explosive play any time one gets the ball (we just claimed such a guy on waivers ..Armistead..explosive =25 plus yards or more)..so that you can run our offense no matter who is in there at any time
|
|
|
Post by giantlegacy on May 21, 2021 12:58:27 GMT -5
I agree 100% about the pass blocking and it's huge! I can't imagine B. Parcells and B. Belichick having a RB who can't block. Fans are gonna talk about SB speed, power etc... but the Giants Oline is the weak link added with D Jones turnovers and then you put in a RB who can't pick up the blitz??? WTF !!! No way, put the money in the oline get 3 RB's by committee and now you don't put all your eggs in one basket on the field and with the budget. That is the truth and baffling to me. He seems committed to improving all aspects of his game but that one stands out as a hole in his game. He could have been confused about assignments with so many gaping holes in our OL with multiple defenders pouring through. Or I could be making excuses for him. Let's see where that goes this year. That could be a legit reason because it does seem he is late at times identifying the guy he is supposed to block when multiple guys are regularly getting through Really strange considering he was really good at this at Penn state
|
|
|
Post by vinnie on May 21, 2021 12:59:20 GMT -5
I would never make any RB on my team the highest paid ever, they are never worth it. That would be a cap killer and would be as bad as a move, if not worse, than drafting a RB in the top 10. Just look at Ezekiel Elliot vs Henry as a prime example of how to handle RB’s.
|
|
|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 13:04:10 GMT -5
So you are saying if he plays well. It becomes a problem? Now we are getting to the root of the issue here. Three poster have said the same thing in essence He he plays well he should not be rewarded for that effort. Now the consensus is not to pay players that preform. I asked the Captin this If he is an all pro for the next two seasons and is instrumental to putting a trophy in the case, Is your idea of gratitude for that is to trade him or let him walk? TEM let me preface this with that you are one of the posters that I follow here on this board due to your intelligence and respect for others. Not to say I always agree with you. In this case I wanted to point out that RB's have the lowest lifespan of any position and after they surpass 2.57 years you now have the odds against you. RB's as you know take a beating and I am in the camp of being extremely cautious about paying them after there rookie contract. In this case Barkley has blocking issues which compounds the problem. Your scenario about SB playing great and being part of a trophy is a difficult one. The old school me says you keep him. Would you get rid of Mickey Mantle? No. I miss the old days of sports and player loyalty to your team. The new school me says you can't take on a salary with the odds against you that he will break down or get injured due to he has well surpassed 2.57 years. If lifespan injuries are an issue . Why did we just reward a WR coming off a hip injury. Why ?????? Because ownership the GM and the HC all agreed he is worth the risk on what he brings. I feel the same about you Martin also. I am going to say this again. I do not give a crap about lifespans of players . Everyone of them is a injury away from it all ending. Here is my rant: I could care F-ing less about who is wearing the blue hat with the white NY on the side of it. Who picket that player. How we obtained that player. Who whines because we have that player. Or how much that player costs. All I want is the best players that we have, If anyone thinks letting a play walk that is a the top of the game at his position because some internet talking head idiot states the position he plays does not warrant that pay. If Barkley puts up top of the heap numbers and helps this team out of perpetual losing cluster F we have . I say pay the man if we have to.
|
|
|
Post by vinnie on May 21, 2021 13:04:28 GMT -5
Gettlemans ears just perked up when he saw this thread. If Dave is still our GM, I could very well see this happening. Even if it defies all logic of giving a big contract to a running back. But, that went to hell once he drafted him 2nd overall. Ask yourselves this. Would you want to sign a player who has an injury history, can’t block your grandmother, and plays a position that is easily replaceable? Let him finish his rookie contract with us, then let some other team pick up the fantasy dynamo.. Yup, I easily see delusional Dave doubling down on his mistake like Jerry Jones did with Elliott. He’ll want to prove he was right and he’ll think he’s getting a discount, no matter the salary, because you can’t put a price on a player touched by God.
|
|
|
Post by giantlegacy on May 21, 2021 13:04:47 GMT -5
Thanks Big Ben. I’m speaking more when his contract is up. Three seasons in, two of them riddled with injures. This should be the easiest decision amongst the fan base. Thanks for the big head commercials, and jumping out of a pool demonstration. Enjoy your second part of your career for another franchise. So what if he is an all pro for the next 2 seasons and we put a trophy in the case . He is a fundamental part of that. You let him walk? If things go to plan ...might make some gag Toney has blossomed We start regularly drafting and developing outside dynamic playmakers like we should have been doing (on a BPA basis BTW and not forcing a pick ),which is also a symptom of Jones being a top qb that can help develop young pkaymakers .. If Barkley starts putting up Marshall Faulk numbers and stays healthy delete Golladay (as he would have served his purpose)and draft another playmaker to cycle in early...
|
|
|
Post by giantlegacy on May 21, 2021 13:08:40 GMT -5
Depends on the baci Henry got his money and not only did he lean himself out a bit but had his best year as a pro. Now granted he didn't have to be 75/ of the offense last year as they opened up the passing game (which also helped opem tbe run up a bit ) As good as Henry played. Its still early in the contract. I can't think of a back that recently got paid and was worth the big contract - mostly due to injuries. Gurley, Shady McCoy, Chris Johnson, Leveon Bell, Arian Foster, Davonte Freeman, Zeke Elliot, Jamaal Charles, even McCaffrey got hurt so we'll see how that goes. Henry is kinda a major outleir for sure..a bigger violent runner that also has stayed healthy Again he also slimmed down and also has started to make sound buisness decisions on when to crunch a guy full speed and when to go down or step out of bounds (Lynch actually started doing this in 2013 ish which is why he lasted so long) I'm actually torn which way to go..
|
|
|
Post by NAVY2323(ret) on May 21, 2021 13:13:02 GMT -5
I don’t have much faith that he will stay healthy. There’s something about this generation of phenomenally built athletes that once the start going south they kind of stay there physically. Look at JJ Watt. You would think with the crazy physique some of these guys have that wouldn’t be the case, but it is.
|
|
|
Post by Kruunch on May 21, 2021 13:13:04 GMT -5
This is smart. Let’s keep a player in part to keep fans coming to the games. Earth to TEM, fans will go to games if Tweedledum and Tweedledee were playing. Barkley missed most of last season. A show of hands, did anyone tune the games out due to Barkley being out? It’s been proven time and time again. Do not sign a running back to a big contract. If you want to go against the grain, so be it. You’ll be like the Cowboys who are scrambling to get under the cap. Don't back track .You are saying don't pay a player if he preforms ,has all pro numbers, or helps put a trophy in the case. By you even suggesting that. You are contradicting your entire I hate losing narrative. Are you saying it is ok to lose as long as the players I do not want on roster fail to preform because if they help us win. We may have to pay them This comical irony at its best. "don't pay winners" Again, what the hell are you talking about? There is no back tracking, I’ve been on don’t pay Barkley from the jump. You’re talking about all pros and Super Bowls with Barkley. What’s your argument? I’ll stick to reality, while you draw up more hypotheticals. The comical part is you’re making a case to pay Barkley strictly on assumptions, while the rest of us are basing our opinions on facts. Might as well pay Jones while we’re at it. Since we’re basing this whole conversation off supposition.
|
|
|
Post by Martin on May 21, 2021 13:19:46 GMT -5
TEM let me preface this with that you are one of the posters that I follow here on this board due to your intelligence and respect for others. Not to say I always agree with you. In this case I wanted to point out that RB's have the lowest lifespan of any position and after they surpass 2.57 years you now have the odds against you. RB's as you know take a beating and I am in the camp of being extremely cautious about paying them after there rookie contract. In this case Barkley has blocking issues which compounds the problem. Your scenario about SB playing great and being part of a trophy is a difficult one. The old school me says you keep him. Would you get rid of Mickey Mantle? No. I miss the old days of sports and player loyalty to your team. The new school me says you can't take on a salary with the odds against you that he will break down or get injured due to he has well surpassed 2.57 years. If lifespan injuries are an issue . Why did we just reward a WR coming off a hip injury. Why ?????? Because ownership the GM and the HC all agreed he is worth the risk on what he brings. I feel the same about you Martin also. I am going to say this again. I do not give a crap about lifespans of players . Everyone of them is a injury away from it all ending. Here is my rant: I could care F-ing less about who is wearing the blue hat with the white NY on the side of it. Who picket that player. How we obtained that player. Who whine because we have that player. Or how much that player costs. All I want is the best players that we have, If anyone thinks letting a play walk that is a the top of the game at his position because some internet talking head idiot states the position he plays does not warrant that pay. If Barkley puts up top of the heap numbers and helps this team out of perpetual losing cluster F we have . I say pay the man if we have to. Golladay is a valid point and I understand where you coming from. A main problem I have is that SB has blocking issues which are fundamental to this position. If they don't get ironed out then it's a no brainer. He must protect the QB.
|
|
|
Post by Nick6475 on May 21, 2021 13:21:08 GMT -5
TEM let me preface this with that you are one of the posters that I follow here on this board due to your intelligence and respect for others. Not to say I always agree with you. In this case I wanted to point out that RB's have the lowest lifespan of any position and after they surpass 2.57 years you now have the odds against you. RB's as you know take a beating and I am in the camp of being extremely cautious about paying them after there rookie contract. In this case Barkley has blocking issues which compounds the problem. Your scenario about SB playing great and being part of a trophy is a difficult one. The old school me says you keep him. Would you get rid of Mickey Mantle? No. I miss the old days of sports and player loyalty to your team. The new school me says you can't take on a salary with the odds against you that he will break down or get injured due to he has well surpassed 2.57 years. If lifespan injuries are an issue . Why did we just reward a WR coming off a hip injury. Why ?????? Because ownership the GM and the HC all agreed he is worth the risk on what he brings. I feel the same about you Martin also. I am going to say this again. I do not give a crap about lifespans of players . Everyone of them is a injury away from it all ending. Here is my rant: I could care F-ing less about who is wearing the blue hat with the white NY on the side of it. Who picket that player. How we obtained that player. Who whine because we have that player. Or how much that player costs. All I want is the best players that we have, If anyone thinks letting a play walk that is a the top of the game at his position because some internet talking head idiot states the position he plays does not warrant that pay. If Barkley puts up top of the heap numbers and helps this team out of perpetual losing cluster F we have . I say pay the man if we have to. The Steelers and the Rams just did this with LeVeon Bell and Todd Gurley.
|
|
|
Post by giantlegacy on May 21, 2021 13:21:18 GMT -5
I don’t have much faith that he will stay healthy. There’s something about this generation of phenomenally built athletes that once the start going south they kind of stay there physically. Look at JJ Watt. You would think with the crazy physique some of these guys have that wouldn’t be the case, but it is. Something to be said about too much muscle mass Looks at how fast all the big bodied WRs fall off a cliff (Hakeem Nicks a prime example) Dez Bryant .. I have a bad feeling Metcalf once he starts getting injuries it will be a Nicks like free fall because of how tightly wound up his body is(a long term deal would be highly dangerous for him unfortunately)
|
|
|
Post by giantlegacy on May 21, 2021 13:22:09 GMT -5
If lifespan injuries are an issue . Why did we just reward a WR coming off a hip injury. Why ?????? Because ownership the GM and the HC all agreed he is worth the risk on what he brings. I feel the same about you Martin also. I am going to say this again. I do not give a crap about lifespans of players . Everyone of them is a injury away from it all ending. Here is my rant: I could care F-ing less about who is wearing the blue hat with the white NY on the side of it. Who picket that player. How we obtained that player. Who whine because we have that player. Or how much that player costs. All I want is the best players that we have, If anyone thinks letting a play walk that is a the top of the game at his position because some internet talking head idiot states the position he plays does not warrant that pay. If Barkley puts up top of the heap numbers and helps this team out of perpetual losing cluster F we have . I say pay the man if we have to. The Steelers and the Rams just did this with LeVeon Bell and Todd Gurley. Gurley was shot though
|
|
|
Post by Nick6475 on May 21, 2021 13:24:29 GMT -5
The Steelers and the Rams just did this with LeVeon Bell and Todd Gurley. Gurley was shot though Sure, but Barkley has similar injury concerns so even if he performs well he still has that hanging over his head. And the Steelers basically just did it again by letting go of Conners and drafting Harris.
|
|
|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 13:27:26 GMT -5
Don't back track .You are saying don't pay a player if he preforms ,has all pro numbers, or helps put a trophy in the case. By you even suggesting that. You are contradicting your entire I hate losing narrative. Are you saying it is ok to lose as long as the players I do not want on roster fail to preform because if they help us win. We may have to pay them This comical irony at its best. "don't pay winners" Again, what the hell are you talking about? There is no back tracking, I’ve been on don’t pay Barkley from the jump. You’re talking about all pros and Super Bowls with Barkley. What’s your argument? I’ll stick to reality, while you draw up more hypotheticals. The comical part is you’re making a case to pay Barkley strictly on hypotheticals, while the rest of us are basing our opinions on facts. Might as well pay Jones while we’re at it. Since we’re basing this whole conversation off supposition. I am doing the same thing the rest you are. Just from a different perspective. At the same timed exposing hypocrisy . This the difference between me and you . I do not play that " I don't want to pay him because I don't agree with him being on the roster. I want the best players that help us win on the roster period. I make it about a blue helmet with the white NY. That is my where my allegiance lies. If Barkley is playing good and helped dig us out of the hole when it is contract time. Pay the man.
|
|
|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 13:29:58 GMT -5
If lifespan injuries are an issue . Why did we just reward a WR coming off a hip injury. Why ?????? Because ownership the GM and the HC all agreed he is worth the risk on what he brings. I feel the same about you Martin also. I am going to say this again. I do not give a crap about lifespans of players . Everyone of them is a injury away from it all ending. Here is my rant: I could care F-ing less about who is wearing the blue hat with the white NY on the side of it. Who picket that player. How we obtained that player. Who whine because we have that player. Or how much that player costs. All I want is the best players that we have, If anyone thinks letting a play walk that is a the top of the game at his position because some internet talking head idiot states the position he plays does not warrant that pay. If Barkley puts up top of the heap numbers and helps this team out of perpetual losing cluster F we have . I say pay the man if we have to. Golladay is a valid point and I understand where you coming from. A main problem I have is that SB has blocking issues which are fundamental to this position. If they don't get ironed out then it's a no brainer. He must protect the QB. I want my weapons with the ball not blocking. If he has be held behind the line to help an inept o-line . We have bigger issues than "our RB can't block"
|
|
|
Post by giantlegacy on May 21, 2021 13:33:56 GMT -5
Golladay is a valid point and I understand where you coming from. A main problem I have is that SB has blocking issues which are fundamental to this position. If they don't get ironed out then it's a no brainer. He must protect the QB. I want my weapons with the ball not blocking. If he has be held behind the line to help an inept o-line . We have bigger issues than "our RB can't block" I tend to agree here but he should still be able to at least in an emergency pick up a leaker if nessesarily
|
|
|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 13:36:51 GMT -5
So what if he is an all pro for the next 2 seasons and we put a trophy in the case . He is a fundamental part of that. You let him walk? If things go to plan ...might make some gag Toney has blossomed We start regularly drafting and developing outside dynamic playmakers like we should have been doing (on a BPA basis BTW and not forcing a pick ),which is also a symptom of Jones being a top qb that can help develop young pkaymakers .. If Barkley starts putting up Marshall Faulk numbers and stays healthy delete Golladay (as he would have served his purpose)and draft another playmaker to cycle in early... It's against the concept of winning to let player walk if they are part of the solution. Barkley has two more seasons to build his case on what he is worth.
|
|
|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 13:39:09 GMT -5
I want my weapons with the ball not blocking. If he has be held behind the line to help an inept o-line . We have bigger issues than "our RB can't block" I tend to agree here but he should still be able to at least in an emergency pick up a leaker if nessesarily Yeah he can pick up a corner or a safety. With a chip . You can not expect a RB to stop and edge rusher of a DT. Anyone that thinks he should be able to . Does not understand the physics of football.
|
|
|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 13:45:08 GMT -5
If lifespan injuries are an issue . Why did we just reward a WR coming off a hip injury. Why ?????? Because ownership the GM and the HC all agreed he is worth the risk on what he brings. I feel the same about you Martin also. I am going to say this again. I do not give a crap about lifespans of players . Everyone of them is a injury away from it all ending. Here is my rant: I could care F-ing less about who is wearing the blue hat with the white NY on the side of it. Who picket that player. How we obtained that player. Who whine because we have that player. Or how much that player costs. All I want is the best players that we have, If anyone thinks letting a play walk that is a the top of the game at his position because some internet talking head idiot states the position he plays does not warrant that pay. If Barkley puts up top of the heap numbers and helps this team out of perpetual losing cluster F we have . I say pay the man if we have to. The Steelers and the Rams just did this with LeVeon Bell and Todd Gurley. Gurley was diagnosed with a degenerative knee condition. Bell wanted to sit out instead of wanting to play. Both bad examples to Barkley's contract in 2 years.
|
|
|
Post by Kruunch on May 21, 2021 14:00:19 GMT -5
Again, what the hell are you talking about? There is no back tracking, I’ve been on don’t pay Barkley from the jump. You’re talking about all pros and Super Bowls with Barkley. What’s your argument? I’ll stick to reality, while you draw up more hypotheticals. The comical part is you’re making a case to pay Barkley strictly on hypotheticals, while the rest of us are basing our opinions on facts. Might as well pay Jones while we’re at it. Since we’re basing this whole conversation off supposition. I am doing the same thing the rest you are. Just from a different perspective. At the same timed exposing hypocrisy . This the difference between me and you . I do not play that " I don't want to pay him because I don't agree with him being on the roster. I want the best players that help us win on the roster period. I make it about a blue helmet with the white NY. That is my where my allegiance lies. If Barkley is playing good and helped dig us out of the hole when it is contract time. Pay the man. You’re making an argument against yourself. You want the “best players that help us win.” With Barkley healthy and playing we’re 8-23 in three seasons. We’re doing a whole lot of losing with him. I want to win period.. And since we aren’t doing that with Barkley, might as well do it with the next guy. Bad teams invest heavily into an injury prone running back. Good teams know when to say good bye.
|
|
|
Post by imgrate on May 21, 2021 14:00:26 GMT -5
Thanks Big Ben. I’m speaking more when his contract is up. Three seasons in, two of them riddled with injures. This should be the easiest decision amongst the fan base. Thanks for the big head commercials, and jumping out of a pool demonstration. Enjoy your second part of your career for another franchise. So what if he is an all pro for the next 2 seasons and we put a trophy in the case . He is a fundamental part of that. You let him walk? You pay people for what you think they're going to do, not for what they've already done.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Hulk on May 21, 2021 14:01:02 GMT -5
You just gave the entire board a heart attack with your thread title I just read that title... I DO NOT want to give Barkley a second contract. Tie him up for two extra years on the franchise tag and let him move on. 7 years with the gmen.
|
|
|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 14:17:31 GMT -5
So what if he is an all pro for the next 2 seasons and we put a trophy in the case . He is a fundamental part of that. You let him walk? You pay people for what you think they're going to do, not for what they've already done. So if a player sucks and you think that trend will not continue. Reward him a big contract. Good luck with that logic.
|
|
|
Post by TEM on May 21, 2021 14:23:08 GMT -5
I am doing the same thing the rest you are. Just from a different perspective. At the same timed exposing hypocrisy . This the difference between me and you . I do not play that " I don't want to pay him because I don't agree with him being on the roster. I want the best players that help us win on the roster period. I make it about a blue helmet with the white NY. That is my where my allegiance lies. If Barkley is playing good and helped dig us out of the hole when it is contract time. Pay the man. You’re making an argument against yourself. You want the “best players that help us win.” With Barkley healthy and playing we’re 8-23 in three seasons. We’re doing a whole lot of losing with him. I want to win period.. And since we aren’t doing that with Barkley, might as well do it with the next guy. Bad teams invest heavily into an injury prone running back. Good teams know when to say good bye. I absolutely am not. I have stated from the beginning his contract is 2 years off. You are and others are the ones who stated no matter if he helps dig us out of the hole win a Sb or has pro bowl numbers. Don't pay him period . Here is a bit of advice. Allow the book to be written before you read it.
|
|
|
Post by BigBlueDog42 on May 21, 2021 14:31:54 GMT -5
You just gave the entire board a heart attack with your thread title Ha! Martin made my heart stop. I took this in a different direction. "highest paid in HISTORY" is really off the rails before it starts. It is irrelevant. The highest paid EVER is the next great RB who signs his second contract. "NFL history", in theses case, lasts a year or two at most. Remember when Eli was the "highest paid" QB ever? That lasted about a year. All highest paid means is said player had a great or record breaking year during his contract year someone will pay up. Look at Landon Collins he just had a decent year and was the highest paid safety in history of the league. Not sure if he still is or did the teams come to their senses and let Landon and Washington hold on to that crown.
|
|
|
Post by imgrate on May 21, 2021 14:35:33 GMT -5
You pay people for what you think they're going to do, not for what they've already done. So if a player sucks and you think that trend will not continue. Reward him a big contract. Good luck with that logic. Right, like we did with Plaxico.
|
|