Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
gianmarco

***Official Melvin "Flash" Gordon*** Thread of Love

Recommended Posts

Look, a few superstars started this "hold out" to protect themselves from injury and looking to land a big pay day because their window to make a boatload of cash is short, 7-10 years max for most. The second contract being even shorter, 3-5 max. And like Larry Fitzgerald said, "Be careful what you ask for." Things aren't all that rosey on other teams. AB wanted to be a Patriot the whole time I would imagine. He played his card to get what he wants. Lev Bell, who knows? Pittsburgh was right in the mix.

Lev Bell and AB are superstars, Flash Gordon isn't. He's good, but not that good. Now Ramsey joins the mix of complaining superstars. Personally, I'm not digging a player being bigger then the game. You sign a contract, stick to it!

I think the Chargers are correct in their decision to break off talks. They have two solid RB's right now. 

As far as fantasy is concerned. Sure, I'd like to pry Gordon from an owner for a value LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue with Gordon now IMO isn't so much the 'if' he will come back question, but when he does, why would he simply return to previously normal value (for him)?

If the holdout has shown anything, it's that LAC has barely batted an eyelash in missing him - I'd almost think they are breathing a sigh of relief that he didn't accept their $10M/year offer.  I don't think he comes back and usurps Eckler.  Justin Jackson perhaps...but I don't see a scenario where once he's back in the fold, he's an RB1.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Team Smokin' said:

Look, a few superstars started this "hold out" to protect themselves from injury and looking to land a big pay day because their window to make a boatload of cash is short, 7-10 years max for most. The second contract being even shorter, 3-5 max. And like Larry Fitzgerald said, "Be careful what you ask for." Things aren't all that rosey on other teams. AB wanted to be a Patriot the whole time I would imagine. He played his card to get what he wants. Lev Bell, who knows? Pittsburgh was right in the mix.

Lev Bell and AB are superstars, Flash Gordon isn't. He's good, but not that good. Now Ramsey joins the mix of complaining superstars. Personally, I'm not digging a player being bigger then the game. You sign a contract, stick to it!

I think the Chargers are correct in their decision to break off talks. They have two solid RB's right now. 

As far as fantasy is concerned. Sure, I'd like to pry Gordon from an owner for a value LOL.

What contract did Jalen Ramsey sign? Mel Gordon? Rookie deals that are by and large already set and slotted?

You can't hold players to their contracts coming out as rookies. It's tough to realize the NFL is a harsh machine that keeps on grinding up players for our amusement and entertainment but it's kinda true. If a QB was making $15M-$20M and was complaining that he wasn't getting $30M I would be lock n step with you but right now I'm on the players side heavy. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, TheDirtyWord said:

The issue with Gordon now IMO isn't so much the 'if' he will come back question, but when he does, why would he simply return to previously normal value (for him)?

If the holdout has shown anything, it's that LAC has barely batted an eyelash in missing him - I'd almost think they are breathing a sigh of relief that he didn't accept their $10M/year offer.  I don't think he comes back and usurps Eckler.  Justin Jackson perhaps...but I don't see a scenario where once he's back in the fold, he's an RB1.

TDW, thank you for coming out of your van today. 

If LAC is breathing a huge sigh of relief and they might...just trade him! 

I'm sorry but LAC is having their cake and eating it too in the media and NFL fans in general. I get it, the two backs they have on the roster are making folks forget about Gordon. 

And what happens when he walks in Week 8? They are going to make Gordon the alpha back for the remainder of the season? His contract and whether he is staying or going will be a distraction. 

I know we want to pat LAC on the back but even the fact it's LAC and not SDC should be enough to pull the curtain back on OZ here. I'm sorry but these NFL teams have figured out a way to convince their fans that it's OK to rape their own players of talent and not pay them fair market value. 

Owners have taken a lot of the money they are piling into Brinks and shipping it to QBs, that has come at a cost to the RBs IMHO. "We don't need to pay them. we can just get a guy in the 4th and pay him $450k a year then let him go in Year 4/5 and get another." And there are just a handful of QBs with the resume to warrant $30M+ a season but that's not what is happening. Guys are getting large sums of money on the hope they pan out...

Edited by Ministry of Pain
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

TDW, thank you for coming out of your van today. 

If LAC is breathing a huge sigh of relief and they might...just trade him! 

I'm sorry but LAC is having their cake and eating it too in the media and NFL fans in general. I get it, the two backs they have on the roster are making folks forget about Gordon. 

And what happens when he walks in Week 8? They are going to make Gordon the alpha back for the remainder of the season? His contract and whether he is staying or going will be a distraction. 

I know we want to pat LAC on the back but even the fact it's LAC and not SDC should be enough to pull the curtain back on OZ here. I'm sorry but these NFL teams have figured out a way to convince their fans that it's OK to rape their own players of talent and not pay them fair market value. 

Owners have taken a lot of the money they are piling into Brinks and shipping it to QBs, that has come at a cost to the RBs IMHO. "We don't need to pay them. we can just get a guy in the 4th and pay him $450k a year then let him go in Year 4/5 and get another." And there are just a handful of QBs with the resume to warrant $30M+ a season but that's not what is happening. Guys are getting large sums of money on the hope they pan out...

Rape their own players?  Please.  Melvin Gordon is under contract to play professional football for north of 5 million dollars.  If you want to argue that is below market value, you might be right, but the 10 million per year he was offered was certainly within market value.

Why all of the outrage for running backs by the way?  Why don't Offensive and Defensive linemen deserve more?  It can be argued that they take the most pounding in the NFL and have increased odds of CTE and ALS.

Quote

Individuals that played non-speed positions that had a history of recurrent concussions (three or more), they found, had more damage to their frontal white matter, the part of the brain where CTE takes hold. That wasn’t the case for those that played speed positions and had a history of concussions, suggesting that the way that non-speed players become concussed is different and more dangerous.

 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And one more thing for those that think Gordon isn't all that good...

Last 3 seasons with missing almost a 1/4 of all 3 years...if I told you it would be 50 Rec, 1,500 total yds and 12-13 TDs you would run to get that guy in almost any league or format. 

So when people just scoff this off like he isn't worth a dime, I have a hard time understanding that. Maybe LAC has the market on 3 quality RBs and that's fine but teams out there are struggling to run the football. Would Jax be better off with Mel Gordon vs Fournette? LAC isn't being creative, Gordon's camp was contacted by NFL teams but the asking price of 2 first rounders by LAC...it feels like a plantation owner who won't allow their contractual slave their freedom. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, brewer said:

Rape their own players?  Please.  Melvin Gordon is under contract to play professional football for north of 5 million dollars.  If you want to argue that is below market value, you might be right, but the 10 million per year he was offered was certainly within market value.

Why all of the outrage for running backs by the way?  Why don't Offensive and Defensive linemen deserve more?  It can be argued that they take the most pounding in the NFL and have increased odds of CTE and ALS.

 

Excuse me but coaches in the last season of their contracts typically are extended even if they are doing a mediocre job because it's a "tough environment" to coach when you don't know what your future holds. 

How do you think Gordon feels going into year 5? It's not that $5M, it's the $5M-$10M he would like to ensure he receives for the next 4-5 years. It's $5M vs $25M but I understand why you posted what you did. I look at it differently. 

And LT/DE get paid plenty, quality DTs are taken care of. OG and Centers can make $10M a year if they are really good.

Edited by Ministry of Pain
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Team Smokin' said:

Look, a few superstars started this "hold out" to protect themselves from injury and looking to land a big pay day because their window to make a boatload of cash is short, 7-10 years max for most. The second contract being even shorter, 3-5 max. And like Larry Fitzgerald said, "Be careful what you ask for." Things aren't all that rosey on other teams. AB wanted to be a Patriot the whole time I would imagine. He played his card to get what he wants. Lev Bell, who knows? Pittsburgh was right in the mix.

Lev Bell and AB are superstars, Flash Gordon isn't. He's good, but not that good. Now Ramsey joins the mix of complaining superstars. Personally, I'm not digging a player being bigger then the game. You sign a contract, stick to it!

I think the Chargers are correct in their decision to break off talks. They have two solid RB's right now. 

As far as fantasy is concerned. Sure, I'd like to pry Gordon from an owner for a value LOL.

 

34 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

What contract did Jalen Ramsey sign? Mel Gordon? Rookie deals that are by and large already set and slotted?

You can't hold players to their contracts coming out as rookies. It's tough to realize the NFL is a harsh machine that keeps on grinding up players for our amusement and entertainment but it's kinda true. If a QB was making $15M-$20M and was complaining that he wasn't getting $30M I would be lock n step with you but right now I'm on the players side heavy. 

That's cool, MoP. I'm just playing a fantasy game within a fantasy game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ministry of Pain said:

Excuse me but coaches in the last season of their contracts typically are extended even if they are doing a mediocre job because it's a "tough environment" to coach when you don't know what your future holds. 

How do you think Gordon feels going into year 5? It's not that $5M, it's the $5M-$10M he would like to ensure he receives for the next 4-5 years. It's $5M vs $25M but I understand why you posted what you did. I look at it differently. 

That's fair.

I just wonder why we only seem to care about those who are at the skill positions?  In a salary cap league, Melvin Gordon making 5 million more means that is 5 million that other Chargers can't have.  I think it's great for everyone to get all they can, I just think it's a bit much to say a team is 'raping' someone, when they have simply made the choice to pay it to another position instead.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, brewer said:

Rape their own players?  Please.  Melvin Gordon is under contract to play professional football for north of 5 million dollars.  If you want to argue that is below market value, you might be right, but the 10 million per year he was offered was certainly within market value.

Why all of the outrage for running backs by the way?  Why don't Offensive and Defensive linemen deserve more?  It can be argued that they take the most pounding in the NFL and have increased odds of CTE and ALS.

 

 

3 minutes ago, brewer said:

That's fair.

I just wonder why we only seem to care about those who are at the skill positions?  In a salary cap league, Melvin Gordon making 5 million more means that is 5 million that other Chargers can't have.  I think it's great for everyone to get all they can, I just think it's a bit much to say a team is 'raping' someone, when they have simply made the choice to pay it to another position instead.

It was my understanding that LAC offered Flash a new contract worth like $10 M or something? Anyway, I think it was fair. Obviously Melvin doesn't. I just don't think he has too much more bargaining to do. None of my business. I know nothing, Sergeant Schultz. 

Again, just following to perhaps pry Gordon away because he's an upgrade over say, a K Johnson type.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

If LAC is breathing a huge sigh of relief and they might...just trade him!

You don't seem to grasp that they don't want to trade him. They know he will be back later this season and value a partial season of play plus a compensatory 3rd round pick greater than what any team is willing to pay in compensation to trade for him.

Do you understand this?

 

35 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

And what happens when he walks in Week 8? They are going to make Gordon the alpha back for the remainder of the season?

This completely depends on how the other RBs are playing when he comes back. If they are still playing as well as they have in the first two games, he will walk into a committee situation. He should be fine with that, since it reduces his likelihood of getting hurt.

Also note that he will probably be eased in once he returns, since he won't be in football shape and won't have any chemistry with Rivers and the OL.

 

36 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

these NFL teams have figured out a way to convince their fans that it's OK to rape their own players

Rape? That is an offensive term given the context of what we are talking about here.

Gordon has earned $10.7M over his first 4 years and was set to earn $5.6M this season. The team has paid him in accordance with the CBA. The team has repeatedly shown faith in him and rewarded him financially.

  1. When they utilized 3 picks to trade up and draft him, which established him with the 15th highest rookie contract salary across all positions and 2nd highest for RBs in his draft class.
  2. When they stuck with him after his rookie season was a complete disaster, and did not bring in any competition that could have completely undermined his future value.
  3. When they picked up his 5th year option in the 2017 offseason, even though he had a non-trivial injury history and a career YPC of 3.8 at that point. That could have easily blown up on the Chargers, just like when they picked up the 5th year option for Jason Verrett the year before.

 

31 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

And one more thing for those that think Gordon isn't all that good...

I don't think anyone has really said this. People have said he isn't as good as he is representing with his contract demands, and they are right IMO.

 

1 hour ago, Ministry of Pain said:

So when people just scoff this off like he isn't worth a dime

No one has said that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You get paid for what you bring to the team (not so much what effort you put in). They have a salary cap and so teams pay more for the positions where the difference in players makes a difference in results. That is, above all, QBs. On that scale, teams evidently believe the studies that say RBs matter less to results and see that born out on the field. If teams thought that the difference in RB talent made as much difference in game results as the difference in QBs, they would pay RBs as much as QBs - because they would need to have the top ones to win. That just isn't the case. A team that chooses to spend their salary cap paying everyone equally is not going to compete because they will have great people at less important positions and worse people at the more critical positions.

Its just like real life, except that even the worst NFL players are making ten times (or a hundred times) what the average hard worker does.  The CEOs who make the decisions that guide corporations make a lot more than their hard working mail clerks. Paying Gordon ten million per year was in keeping with the RB salary patterns and his talent. He chooses not to accept that (perhaps wisely, depending on what this course will bring him). No bad guy. The owners are just allocating their cap as effectively to win (admitting there is also some marketing concern mixed in) as they can. Each just trying to make their best choice for their goal. The fact that Ekeler has so effectively replaced Gordon with little apparent difference in result demonstrates exactly why they shouldn't be paying Gordon more.

Edited by Catbird
grammar
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

Gordon has earned $10.7M over his first 4 years and was set to earn $5.6M this season. The team has paid him in accordance with the CBA. The team has repeatedly shown faith in him and rewarded him financially.

  1. When they utilized 3 picks to trade up and draft him, which established him with the 15th highest rookie contract salary across all positions and 2nd highest for RBs in his draft class.
  2. When they stuck with him after his rookie season was a complete disaster, and did not bring in any competition that could have completely undermined his future value.
  3. When they picked up his 5th year option in the 2017 offseason, even though he had a non-trivial injury history and a career YPC of 3.8 at that point. That could have easily blown up on the Chargers, just like when they picked up the 5th year option for Jason Verrett the year before.

 

That last part wasn't a reward for Melvin. 

I'm not blaming the Chargers here at all they are doing what's smart for them.  The system is ridiculous and will likely be addressed in the next CBA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pipes said:
25 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

Gordon has earned $10.7M over his first 4 years and was set to earn $5.6M this season. The team has paid him in accordance with the CBA. The team has repeatedly shown faith in him and rewarded him financially.

  1. When they utilized 3 picks to trade up and draft him, which established him with the 15th highest rookie contract salary across all positions and 2nd highest for RBs in his draft class.
  2. When they stuck with him after his rookie season was a complete disaster, and did not bring in any competition that could have completely undermined his future value.
  3. When they picked up his 5th year option in the 2017 offseason, even though he had a non-trivial injury history and a career YPC of 3.8 at that point. That could have easily blown up on the Chargers, just like when they picked up the 5th year option for Jason Verrett the year before.

 

That last part wasn't a reward for Melvin. 

It didn't turn out to be, but that is hindsight. At the time they picked up the option, it could have reasonably been viewed that way. It certainly turned out to be a reward for Jason Verrett when the Chargers picked up his option a year earlier.

Edited by Just Win Baby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Team Smokin' said:

 

That's cool, MoP. I'm just playing a fantasy game within a fantasy game. 

I agree that LAC holds the cards and I understand why they are praised for their stance. Facts are they offered him something, we don't know exactly but surely it was more than just this 1 yr deal, he opted not to take it. 

I'm not that dense, I understand the argument that most side with, I just have a different POV.  I respect those who back the Chargers FO on this, I just enjoy discussing the other side of this, usually there are two sides to every story. 

It's all good TS

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Just Win Baby said:

You don't seem to grasp that they don't want to trade him. They know he will be back later this season and value a partial season of play plus a compensatory 3rd round pick greater than what any team is willing to pay in compensation to trade for him.

Do you understand this?

 

This completely depends on how the other RBs are playing when he comes back. If they are still playing as well as they have in the first two games, he will walk into a committee situation. He should be fine with that, since it reduces his likelihood of getting hurt.

Also note that he will probably be eased in once he returns, since he won't be in football shape and won't have any chemistry with Rivers and the OL.

 

Rape? That is an offensive term given the context of what we are talking about here.

Gordon has earned $10.7M over his first 4 years and was set to earn $5.6M this season. The team has paid him in accordance with the CBA. The team has repeatedly shown faith in him and rewarded him financially.

  1. When they utilized 3 picks to trade up and draft him, which established him with the 15th highest rookie contract salary across all positions and 2nd highest for RBs in his draft class.
  2. When they stuck with him after his rookie season was a complete disaster, and did not bring in any competition that could have completely undermined his future value.
  3. When they picked up his 5th year option in the 2017 offseason, even though he had a non-trivial injury history and a career YPC of 3.8 at that point. That could have easily blown up on the Chargers, just like when they picked up the 5th year option for Jason Verrett the year before.

 

I don't think anyone has really said this. People have said he isn't as good as he is representing with his contract demands, and they are right IMO.

 

No one has said that.

Thanks for taking the time to engage with me and going item by item on my rant. 

I don't agree with your positions on everything, and there can't only be 1 right answer, it's all up for discussion. I respect your viewpoint and always have on Chargers issues but we're talking about an organization that fired their Head Coach after going 14-2 so there's a long track record for the Chargers. I always love their offense going back to Fouts and on thru Brees and then Rivers but they don't play in many Super Bowls. And I blame the management and owners on this issue, not the players. 

Again, you're post speaks for itself, and I purposely used words that I knew would get folks attention and maybe understand the way I view this situation.

:banned: 

Edited by Ministry of Pain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Short bench (4) spots he was dropped. Might as well drop Corey Davis and make a claim and hold till heavy byes in case he gets dealt? 

 

Only way he gets traded is if a primary ball carrier elsewhere gets hurt right? Can’t see TB making a move. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, brewer said:

.Why all of the outrage for running backs by the way?  Why don't Offensive and Defensive linemen deserve more?  It can be argued that they take the most pounding in the NFL and have increased odds of CTE and ALS.

This isn’t a CTE thread, but this is absolute made up b.s.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gottabesweet said:

Short bench (4) spots he was dropped. Might as well drop Corey Davis and make a claim and hold till heavy byes in case he gets dealt? 

Only way he gets traded is if a primary ball carrier elsewhere gets hurt right? Can’t see TB making a move. 

He won’t be dealt. And you wouldn’t want him to be. He’ll get more fantasy points with the Chargers than he would elsewhere.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

He won’t be dealt. And you wouldn’t want him to be. He’ll get more fantasy points with the Chargers than he would elsewhere.

While I agree he won't be dealt, I disagree with your last sentence.  IF traded before his reporting deadline, he would become the workhorse very quickly.  All the discussions in this thread really boil down to two things now - when Gordon will report and what will his usage be.  Let's look at each individually...

When will Gordon report?  I think we can all agree he will report in time to accrue his season, otherwise his hold out is for naught.  As I understand it, that would be 6 games, making it before the week 11 game vs KC.  If I am wrong about this, someone chime in please.  Since it's already Saturday, this week is lost - there is no way he will be suited up by tomorrow.  That leaves 7 games from weeks 4 through 10.  While I am also unsure of the exact dollar amount he loses with each passing game, the prevailing number in here is $330K, so let's roll with it.  At that rate, he has already lost $990K, and stands to lose another $2.31M before week 11.  While that amount of money sounds too good to pass up to the average joe, as long as MG hasn't pulled an MC Hammer, he is living quite comfortably right now.  Has MG already proven his worth to whatever team he ends up with next year?  The answer is yes, and I hope that is a given to everyone here, so we won't have to discuss that.  Other than money, why would MG report before week 11?  That's just 2 months from now.  I doubt he will be eating ramen noodles by then.  If anyone thinks he will report before he has to, I would love to hear why.  Maybe I am missing something.

What will MG's usage be upon return?  I guess that depends on when he returns, and in what shape he will be.  For the sake of argument, let's have him report before the week 11 game vs KC, and in peak condition.  It's still highly unlikely he sees the field IMO, and more likely they wait until after their week 12 bye (unless the entire RB corps is decimated).  MG won't need to learn the playbook - he will only need to get his timing down.  In the 11 games MG & Ekeler played last year, MG led the touch count 210 to 93.  That is 69% for MG, but I would assume the number would be closer to 60 than 70 upon return.  IMO, best case scenario for MG is taking over the helm in week 13, and getting roughly 20 touches a game.  Worst case, he shows up out of shape and disgruntled, and barely sees the field.

For redraft fantasy purposes, he is not someone I will be targeting, unless the price is low, and I have the bench space.  Since I am of the mindset he will be bench fodder for the next 10 weeks, unless you have deep benches, he will just be taking up space.  Ekeler owners should be thanking their lucky stars, and plugging him into their lineups for as long as the ride lasts. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheWinz said:

As I understand it, that would be 6 games, making it before the week 11 game vs KC.  If I am wrong about this, someone chime in please.

This has been discussed several times in this thread. He most likely needs to report prior to week 9, as explained here and here.

Based on the first linked post, if he reports later than week 9 and the Chargers are granted a roster exemption for 2 weeks, he would not be active for 6 games. In the event that 6 games is determined to be what he needs to be active for to complete performance of his contract, he would not be able to do so, and his contract would toll.

The second linked post has a different explanation with the same outcome. If he goes beyond week 9, he is putting his free agency at risk, should the Chargers choose to file a grievance, in which case he would be putting it in the hands of an arbitrator. No player has ever held out longer than 8 games and gone to arbitration over free agency, so there is no precedent for how that situation would be handled. @Maurile Tremblay also makes a good argument there that he might actually want to report prior to week 8 to ensure he reports before half of the season is gone.

Either way, he would be a fool to report later than week 9, since he would have no guarantee that doing so would avoid his contract tolling and preventing him from reaching UFA.

Edited by Just Win Baby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheWinz said:

When will Gordon report?  I think we can all agree he will report in time to accrue his season, otherwise his hold out is for naught.  As I understand it, that would be 6 games, making it before the week 11 game vs KC.  If I am wrong about this, someone chime in please.  

It's a long story, but he needs to report by week 9, and you don't want to use the word "accrue." (Accrued Seasons have nothing to do with this, but if they did, he'd have had to report by August 6. The 6 game thing is for unsigned players. Players already under contract need 16 games for an accrued season, not 6.)

2 hours ago, TheWinz said:

Other than money, why would MG report before week 11? 

Other than money, why would any player ever report at all?

I think he'll report around week 6, give or take a couple weeks, and the reason will be money. (Yes, he's already rich. How many rich people do you know who don't want any more money? We know MGIII wants more money because that's his stated reason for holding out, although at $330k per game, doing so is counterproductive.)

In terms of how the Chargers would use him upon his return, I don't think anything's significantly changed since last year. Ekeler and Jackson have reaffirmed that they're good, but the Chargers already knew that last year. Gordon still started. He'll start again when he comes back, IMO.

I think Gordon would be less productive in most other offenses around the league, possibly reverting to a sub-4.0 ypc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, brewer said:

Why all of the outrage for running backs by the way?  Why don't Offensive and Defensive linemen deserve more?  It can be argued that they take the most pounding in the NFL and have increased odds of CTE and ALS.

The short end of the stick for RBs comes from their short careers, and how quickly the league views them as used up.

A good lineman has several big contracts to look forward to in his career.  A 26-27 year old pro bowl lineman that's a 5 year workhorse is considered a young, prime piece that is going to get a massive contract.  After that deal is up a 30-31 year old pro bowl lineman that's been starting for 9 years is still considered reasonably young and a top end piece that will get another big deal.

Let's be real here, if Gordon had played out this year with another ~300 touches then as an about to turn 27 year old pro bowl RB that has been a 5 year workhorse he would have been viewed by the league as pretty much used up before he even had a chance to negotiate his FIRST contract that wasn't set by the CBA.  He will have gone right through his young/prime years before even being able to negotiate a single deal.  And there is certainly no next contract of substance on the horizon beyond that when he's 30-31.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2019 at 8:04 AM, Team Smokin' said:

You sign a contract, stick to it!

That might be valid if it also applied to the team. As we all know, players get cut anytime the team deems it better for them, contract be damned. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

It's a long story, but he needs to report by week 9, and you don't want to use the word "accrue." (Accrued Seasons have nothing to do with this, but if they did, he'd have had to report by August 6. The 6 game thing is for unsigned players. Players already under contract need 16 games for an accrued season, not 6.)

Thanx for the clarification.  Before week 9 it is.  In this case, put me in the boat that says he will report then.  A few missed paychecks - no big deal at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

Let's be real here, if Gordon had played out this year with another ~300 touches then as an about to turn 27 year old pro bowl RB that has been a 5 year workhorse he would have been viewed by the league as pretty much used up before he even had a chance to negotiate his FIRST contract that wasn't set by the CBA.

I don't agree with this narrative. IMO the difference in him playing a full season, maybe 320 touches, and playing a half season, maybe 140 touches, isn't going to change anything in the big picture for Gordon. Either way, he will still be nearly 27 and viewed as a RB with a high career workload (including college) and a non-trivial injury history. He will also have played in 16 games 1 time in 5 pro seasons. NFL teams will also know about the weaknesses in his game... he isn't the same caliber RB as Elliott, Barkley, Gurley, and Bell.

Gordon has forfeited roughly $2M so far in fines and game checks. Meanwhile, the Chargers RBs have 42/240/2 rushing (5.7 ypc) and 14/172/2 receiving (12.3 ypr), making him look expendable. What has that done for his market?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

I don't agree with this narrative. IMO the difference in him playing a full season, maybe 320 touches, and playing a half season, maybe 140 touches, isn't going to change anything in the big picture for Gordon. Either way, he will still be nearly 27 and viewed as a RB with a high career workload (including college) and a non-trivial injury history. He will also have played in 16 games 1 time in 5 pro seasons. NFL teams will also know about the weaknesses in his game... he isn't the same caliber RB as Elliott, Barkley, Gurley, and Bell.

Gordon has forfeited roughly $2M so far in fines and game checks. Meanwhile, the Chargers RBs have 42/240/2 rushing (5.7 ypc) and 14/172/2 receiving (12.3 ypr), making him look expendable. What has that done for his market?

Since he obviously won't be returning to the Chargers, I would have to say very little.  The market will be determined by who is available, not by how good a single team's rushing attack will be in 2019.  I didn't check to see all the 2020 FA RB's, but I have to assume they will determine the prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Just Win Baby said:

I don't agree with this narrative. IMO the difference in him playing a full season, maybe 320 touches, and playing a half season, maybe 140 touches, isn't going to change anything in the big picture for Gordon. Either way, he will still be nearly 27 and viewed as a RB with a high career workload (including college) and a non-trivial injury history. He will also have played in 16 games 1 time in 5 pro seasons. NFL teams will also know about the weaknesses in his game... he isn't the same caliber RB as Elliott, Barkley, Gurley, and Bell.

Gordon has forfeited roughly $2M so far in fines and game checks. Meanwhile, the Chargers RBs have 42/240/2 rushing (5.7 ypc) and 14/172/2 receiving (12.3 ypr), making him look expendable. What has that done for his market?

Oh no doubt. My intent wasn't to compare his prospects based on a full season this year vs half. My intent was to justify him having greater reason to do everything he could to try and get paid before this season than an offensive lineman would, and dispute the notion that linemen are as screwed over by the way things work in the league as RBs. 

I can see how my phrasing was unclear on that, but I was mainly replying to brewer's argument that we should feel the same way for linemen as we do for RBs in terms of how much the current structure of things screws them over. 

Edited by FreeBaGeL
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, TheWinz said:
1 hour ago, Just Win Baby said:

the Chargers RBs have 42/240/2 rushing (5.7 ypc) and 14/172/2 receiving (12.3 ypr), making him look expendable. What has that done for his market?

Since he obviously won't be returning to the Chargers, I would have to say very little.  The market will be determined by who is available, not by how good a single team's rushing attack will be in 2019.

Well, it has been 2 games, so obviously a lot remains to be seen. But if Gordon had not held out, he would have gotten the lion's share of those touches. I doubt he would have done as much with them (for example, no way he scores on that 55 yard catch and run Ekeler scored on in week 1), but he would still presumably be putting up good numbers, and Ekeler and Jackson would be playing complementary roles. So it would look like Gordon is a key to the offense, which would theoretically be good for his market value.

Now, at least if Ekeler (a UDFA) and Jackson (a 7th round pick) keep this up, it looks like Gordon was just getting what the offense gave him... or maybe he was getting less than what the offense gave him. :shrug:

Again, there are 15+ weeks to go, and Gordon will get his chance. It just hasn't started out looking very good for his 2020 free agency market IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maurile has convinced me to start throwing at buy low in leagues where I'm 2-0 with strong teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

Well, it has been 2 games, so obviously a lot remains to be seen. But if Gordon had not held out, he would have gotten the lion's share of those touches. I doubt he would have done as much with them (for example, no way he scores on that 55 yard catch and run Ekeler scored on in week 1), but he would still presumably be putting up good numbers, and Ekeler and Jackson would be playing complementary roles. So it would look like Gordon is a key to the offense, which would theoretically be good for his market value.

Now, at least if Ekeler (a UDFA) and Jackson (a 7th round pick) keep this up, it looks like Gordon was just getting what the offense gave him... or maybe he was getting less than what the offense gave him. :shrug:

Again, there are 15+ weeks to go, and Gordon will get his chance. It just hasn't started out looking very good for his 2020 free agency market IMO.

As I said, teams have already seen enough of MG to make up their minds on how good he is.  Did Conner's good season have a major impact on how much Bell got from the Jets?  In a funny twist, guess who he will be competing with in the FA market next year?  Austin Ekeler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody knows definitively when Melvin needs to report for his season not to toll.  Everybody's opinions are just theories.  Even Melvin and his agent do not know for sure.  The CBA does not explicitly say so it is all interpretation and/or precedent.  Joey Galloway held out in 1999 for 101 days or 9 weeks.  He played 8 weeks.  The arbitrator did not toll his contract but the arbitrator also did not specify how long a player could hold out without his contract tolling.  So precedent says that Melvin would be safe holding out until after week 8 since it would allow him to play 8 games.  That would be good timing for the Chargers since they play the Packers and the Bears 4 days apart in weeks 9 and 10.

One other aspect that could affect the day Melvin needs to report is the Chargers' ability to put him on an exempt list where he wouldn't officially be on the roster for up to 3 weeks after showing up.  If they really wanted to play hardball, the Chargers could maybe use that to say he didn't show up until 3 weeks later than he actually did.  So maybe Melvin has to report after week 5 to cover his bases 100%.  And since this is the Chargers, there is probably a good chance he shows up after week 5 because he doesn't want them to have any angle to screw him over.

Edited by Don Hutson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheWinz said:

As I said, teams have already seen enough of MG to make up their minds on how good he is.  Did Conner's good season have a major impact on how much Bell got from the Jets?  In a funny twist, guess who he will be competing with in the FA market next year?  Austin Ekeler

It isn't clear that Bell's market went beyond a single team - the Jets. They may have outbid themselves. And they won't be in the market next offseason as a result. It only takes one team, but I also think there is a trend that is driven by recent big RB contracts and injuries that will dampen his market quite a bit in comparison to Bell.

Other than Elliott and Bell, who are 2 games into their new contracts, here are the most recent RBs who signed big contracts: Gurley, Freeman, McKinnon, and Johnson. None of those look like good value for their teams so far. And Bell's own head coach questioned whether or not they should have paid him what they did this offseason. Given their team and its prospects, it seems like they wasted that cap space.

As for Ekeler, I fully expect the Chargers to re-sign him in the early free agency period, assuming he will sign for a much more modest contract than Gordon is demanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Don Hutson said:

One other aspect that could affect the day Melvin needs to report is the Chargers' ability to put him on an exempt list where he wouldn't officially be on the roster for up to 3 weeks after showing up.

I think there's a roughly 0% chance that the Chargers' decision to put Gordon on the exempt list would be interpreted as Gordon making himself unavailable to the team for tolling purposes. I don't think the exempt list matters at all. It may deprive him of pay for a few weeks, but it would not toll his contract since that's the team's decision, not his.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I think there's a roughly 0% chance that the Chargers' decision to put Gordon on the exempt list would be interpreted as Gordon making himself unavailable to the team for tolling purposes. I don't think the exempt list matters at all.

Maybe Melvin and his lawyer could argue that if they go to arbitration.  And the Chargers could counter that Melvin wasn't in good enough shape to play when he reported therefore he was unavailable in reality.  Nothing is black and white with this tolling issue.  There is no 0% chance.  I don't think Melvin wants to go to arbitration and risk his contract tolling so he will report on the last day where there is no risk of tolling.  And the Chargers ability to keep him off the active roster for 3 weeks after he reports definitely enters into that equation.

Edited by Don Hutson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Don Hutson said:

Maybe Melvin and his lawyer could argue that if they go to arbitration.  And the Chargers could counter that Melvin wasn't in good enough shape to play when he reported therefore he was unavailable in reality.  Nothing is black and white with this tolling issue.  There is no 0% chance.

I disagree. Gordon is not required to be in shape in order to avoid having his contract tolled. The language in the standard player contract is pretty clear about what triggers tolling. It's stuff like retiring or joining the army. It's not being placed on the exempt list at the team's option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Maurile Tremblay said:

I disagree. Gordon is not required to be in shape in order to avoid having his contract tolled. The language in the standard player contract is pretty clear about what triggers tolling. It's stuff like joining the army or retiring. It's not being placed on the exempt list.

He needs to be available to play a certain number of games in order to not have his contract tolled.  The Chargers have the ability to keep him off of the active roster for up to 3 weeks and not being in shape is one reason to keep him off the active roster.  I don't know what is 100% true and what is 100% not true.  But some reputable reporters have mentioned the Chargers ability to keep him off the active roster as a factor for what date he needs to report.  Do you have any links or support for what you are arguing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Don Hutson said:

He needs to be available to play a certain number of games in order to not have his contract tolled.  The Chargers have the ability to keep him off of the active roster for up to 3 weeks and not being in shape is one reason to keep him off the active roster.  I don't know what is 100% true and what is 100% not true.  But some reputable reporters have mentioned the Chargers ability to keep him off the active roster as a factor for what date he needs to report.  Do you have any links or support for what you are arguing?

I have a few decades of experience drafting, interpreting, and litigating contractual language. That's my day job. I've read the relevant provision in the standard player contract (which I quoted and linked to earlier in the thread). It's clear to me that the contract won't be tolled if the team, rather than the player, chooses to make the player unavailable.

Some reporters might have said that the exempt list matters. Many reporters are also talking about accrued seasons and needing six games on full-pay status. Reporters as a group have been bungling this whole thing all along.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So once and for all, what week does Gordon need to hit the field by? And does he need to build in some cushion if he got hurt?

Edited by rawdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rawdog said:

So once and for all, what week does Gordon need to hit the field by? And does he need to build in some cushion if he got hurt?

Maurile is an admin, and he says MG must report by week 9.  He also said if this is not correct, you can file a FBG grievance and get an additional $50 spending money in next year's subscriber contest.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/09/22/melvin-gordons-holdout-extends-to-three-weeks/

For something that presents itself as no new news, this is the most optimistic take on when Gordon has to report I have seen.

“Which means that, given the team’s Week 12 bye, Gordon needs to show up after Week Five and before Week Six, since a three-week roster exemption would expire before Week Nine and make him eligible for eight games on the active roster, which would make him a free agent in 2020.”

While it would still take some time to get him on the field, could this situation actually be resolved two weeks from tomorrow the Monday after Week 5?

 

Edited by rawdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, rawdog said:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/09/22/melvin-gordons-holdout-extends-to-three-weeks/

For something that presents itself as no new news, this is the most optimistic take on when Gordon has to report I have seen.

“Which means that, given the team’s Week 12 bye, Gordon needs to show up after Week Five and before Week Six, since a three-week roster exemption would expire before Week Nine and make him eligible for eight games on the active roster, which would make him a free agent in 2020.”

While it would still take some time to get him on the field, could this situation actually be resolved two weeks from tomorrow the Monday after Week 5?

Reporter is just guessing, like all of us, so I will continue to believe he will see the field no earlier than week 9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess my point is this isn’t really guessing if you accept two premises 

1) he needs to be eligible for 8 games to get his service time 

2) he has to account for the Chargers getting a 3-week roster exemption for him 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rawdog said:

I guess my point is this isn’t really guessing if you accept two premises 

1) he needs to be eligible for 8 games to get his service time 

2) he has to account for the Chargers getting a 3-week roster exemption for him 

The exemption shouldn't count against him.  He has to be available for 8 games, that's it.  Whether the Chargers choose to use him is their decision.  At least that's how I understand Maurile explained it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheWinz said:

Reporter is just guessing, like all of us, so I will continue to believe he will see the field no earlier than week 9.

Going with the ostrich approach eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Weebs210 said:

Going with the ostrich approach eh?

I can't seem to swindle the MG owner, so it's what I have to believe

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.