What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Bryce Brown anything to see here? (1 Viewer)

I know everyone loves the shiny and new but barring injuries (plural) this isn't his year.
People can question the Fred Jackson extension and attempt to rationalize that it doesn't affect Bryce Brown. But it has to. Clearly they trust Jackson, at least as a security blanket. He's 33 yo, but so what, just got paid. This puts a wet blanket on the Bryce Brown train, at least short term.
I don't see that at all. Jackson's ext doesn't effect brown at all IMO. I think they see Jackson as a good team player, leader and someone who knows the offense to be a role player. He is not going to be a work horse back anymore.
Sure thing but he'll see the field more than Brown this year.
Maybe but I wouldn't bet either way at this point. Brown had some amazing runs and really good overall games as a rookie. Jackson has had one good year to go with a lot of mediocre ones and injury filled ones.

 
I saw the news of the "extension", but what guaranteed money is there (both this year and next)? Did this free up any money for Buffalo this season? I'm a huge F Jax fan, and saying this as a guy who has Spiller - but did Buffalo just give him more money this year and the guarantee that he'll be on the team next year as well? Given his age, and I fully understand that he's the most complete RB on their roster, I'm not sure I get that.

 
I know everyone loves the shiny and new but barring injuries (plural) this isn't his year.
People can question the Fred Jackson extension and attempt to rationalize that it doesn't affect Bryce Brown. But it has to. Clearly they trust Jackson, at least as a security blanket. He's 33 yo, but so what, just got paid. This puts a wet blanket on the Bryce Brown train, at least short term.
I don't see that at all. Jackson's ext doesn't effect brown at all IMO. I think they see Jackson as a good team player, leader and someone who knows the offense to be a role player. He is not going to be a work horse back anymore.
Sure thing but he'll see the field more than Brown this year.
Maybe but I wouldn't bet either way at this point. Brown had some amazing runs and really good overall games as a rookie. Jackson has had one good year to go with a lot of mediocre ones and injury filled ones.
I can't agree with the bolded. He's had 4 seasons of 1,000+ yards from scrimmage. No one is calling him Adrian Peterson, but he's a very solid player. In fact last year he had just as many total TDs as he had in the previous two seasons combined (and only 1 less than the aforementioned Peterson and did so with three fewer fumbles).

 
I really don't get the Fred extension...
He produces, he's their best inside runner, perhaps their best receiver, they trust him and he put up 1,280 yards and 10 TDs last season with a 4.3 YPC and an 8.2 YPR. Aside from that I totally agree.
Regardless of productivity, he is 32 and under contract for a season where anything, including injury, can happen. He could fall off a cliff literally or figuratively. As a GM, why extend now?
lol brown's dynasty owners gettin' feisty!
Even if you ignore Brown and his fantasy relevance, I don't understand why they'd extend Jackson from a team standpoint.

This year they have Spiller and Jackson and traded for Brown. Both Spiller and Jackson could be gone next year so it makes sense to trade for Brown now to see what you have in him. Jackson has been productive but he's 33 now. He could be productive again this season and if he is, then extend him. Why extend him now when you don't know what you're going to get from him this year?

I just don't get it from a team standpoint. If Brown falls flat this year and Jackson looks good, extend him. If both look bad, then you can look in the draft or FA. If Brown looks good and Jackson hits the wall this year, you're stuck with Jackson for no reason.

I just don't see what Buffalo gains out of extending Jackson right now?

Are they really that worried that the market will be super hot for a 34 year old RB next year?
So you think they should have extended Jackson during next off season when he turns 34, if he produces this year, because extending him before this season makes no sense because he's 33 now and they don't know what they are going to get out of him?

:confused:
I don't think its that hard to follow. He's 33 now. If he looks good this year and they feel like they need him next year then sign/extend him then. Why extend him before this season? What do the Buffalo Bills gain by extending him right now? The market will not be hot for him next year so it's not like they are worried about having to compete and over pay to keep him.
That makes absolutely no sense. What is the difference between that and paying him this year after he looked good last year? So you can pay him next year after he looks good this year?

You would make the exact same argument next year only you would say "He's 34 now" instead of "He's 33 now."

He did show them, he did look good and they felt like they needed to extend him now.

 
I really don't get the Fred extension...
He produces, he's their best inside runner, perhaps their best receiver, they trust him and he put up 1,280 yards and 10 TDs last season with a 4.3 YPC and an 8.2 YPR. Aside from that I totally agree.
Regardless of productivity, he is 32 and under contract for a season where anything, including injury, can happen. He could fall off a cliff literally or figuratively. As a GM, why extend now?
lol brown's dynasty owners gettin' feisty!
Even if you ignore Brown and his fantasy relevance, I don't understand why they'd extend Jackson from a team standpoint.

This year they have Spiller and Jackson and traded for Brown. Both Spiller and Jackson could be gone next year so it makes sense to trade for Brown now to see what you have in him. Jackson has been productive but he's 33 now. He could be productive again this season and if he is, then extend him. Why extend him now when you don't know what you're going to get from him this year?

I just don't get it from a team standpoint. If Brown falls flat this year and Jackson looks good, extend him. If both look bad, then you can look in the draft or FA. If Brown looks good and Jackson hits the wall this year, you're stuck with Jackson for no reason.

I just don't see what Buffalo gains out of extending Jackson right now?

Are they really that worried that the market will be super hot for a 34 year old RB next year?
So you think they should have extended Jackson during next off season when he turns 34, if he produces this year, because extending him before this season makes no sense because he's 33 now and they don't know what they are going to get out of him?

:confused:
I don't think its that hard to follow. He's 33 now. If he looks good this year and they feel like they need him next year then sign/extend him then. Why extend him before this season? What do the Buffalo Bills gain by extending him right now? The market will not be hot for him next year so it's not like they are worried about having to compete and over pay to keep him.
That makes absolutely no sense. What is the difference between that and paying him this year after he looked good last year? So you can pay him next year after he looks good this year?

You would make the exact same argument next year only you would say "He's 34 now" instead of "He's 33 now."

He did show them, he did look good and they felt like they needed to extend him now.
If he looks good this year then it's a wash whether you sign him this year or next year.

If he looks bad this year then you don't have to sign him.

You win nothing by signing him now and you only risk losing. I'm not sure how else I can explain this.

 
Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter
Bills announced that RB Fred Jackson has signed a contract extension. True warrior.
Ian Rapoport @RapSheet
#Bills RB Fred Jackson just signed a one-year extension worth $2.6M with $1M additional in incentives, source says.
Wonder how this affects the outlook of the Bills RB situation... Not as clear a path to starter touches next season for Bryce Brown? Or just additional insurance if they can't get a good enough deal w/ Spiller.
I'd still say that the biggest question mark next year for Brown will be whether Spiller stays with the team. I don't foresee Jackson getting a sizable number of touches in 2015.
I agree. In my mind, the FJax extension doesn't have an impact on Bryce at all. It could have been a 10 year extension, and it wouldn't change anything. The fact of the matter is that FJax will be a role player sooner rather than later.
Even if he's a role player next year, that's worse for Brown than if he wasn't even on the team, which was the expectation prior to this extension. I suppose you could argue that it helps Brown if it makes it less likely that they now resign Spiller, but I don't think signing FJax for another year will impact that decision.
Oh, ok. I see your point. I guess, as a Bills fan, I was never expecting him to leave, regardless of current (past) contract situation.

 
I know everyone loves the shiny and new but barring injuries (plural) this isn't his year.
People can question the Fred Jackson extension and attempt to rationalize that it doesn't affect Bryce Brown. But it has to. Clearly they trust Jackson, at least as a security blanket. He's 33 yo, but so what, just got paid. This puts a wet blanket on the Bryce Brown train, at least short term.
I don't see that at all. Jackson's ext doesn't effect brown at all IMO. I think they see Jackson as a good team player, leader and someone who knows the offense to be a role player. He is not going to be a work horse back anymore.
Sure thing but he'll see the field more than Brown this year.
Maybe but I wouldn't bet either way at this point. Brown had some amazing runs and really good overall games as a rookie. Jackson has had one good year to go with a lot of mediocre ones and injury filled ones.
I agree that health is a concern but Jackson has been far better than mediocre. He has put up great numbers in a time share situation.

And Brown has lost yardage on 18% of his career carries (worst in the league) while having those good games.

I am not saying Brown is bad but it seems pretty obvious that this season the plan is for him to be the #3 guy behind Jackson and Spiller. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise (or at least make that argument using logic rather than hope) I also agree with many in here that 2015 Brown's value is likely for 2015.

 
I really don't get the Fred extension...
He produces, he's their best inside runner, perhaps their best receiver, they trust him and he put up 1,280 yards and 10 TDs last season with a 4.3 YPC and an 8.2 YPR. Aside from that I totally agree.
Regardless of productivity, he is 32 and under contract for a season where anything, including injury, can happen. He could fall off a cliff literally or figuratively. As a GM, why extend now?
lol brown's dynasty owners gettin' feisty!
Even if you ignore Brown and his fantasy relevance, I don't understand why they'd extend Jackson from a team standpoint.

This year they have Spiller and Jackson and traded for Brown. Both Spiller and Jackson could be gone next year so it makes sense to trade for Brown now to see what you have in him. Jackson has been productive but he's 33 now. He could be productive again this season and if he is, then extend him. Why extend him now when you don't know what you're going to get from him this year?

I just don't get it from a team standpoint. If Brown falls flat this year and Jackson looks good, extend him. If both look bad, then you can look in the draft or FA. If Brown looks good and Jackson hits the wall this year, you're stuck with Jackson for no reason.

I just don't see what Buffalo gains out of extending Jackson right now?

Are they really that worried that the market will be super hot for a 34 year old RB next year?
So you think they should have extended Jackson during next off season when he turns 34, if he produces this year, because extending him before this season makes no sense because he's 33 now and they don't know what they are going to get out of him?

:confused:
I don't think its that hard to follow. He's 33 now. If he looks good this year and they feel like they need him next year then sign/extend him then. Why extend him before this season? What do the Buffalo Bills gain by extending him right now? The market will not be hot for him next year so it's not like they are worried about having to compete and over pay to keep him.
That makes absolutely no sense. What is the difference between that and paying him this year after he looked good last year? So you can pay him next year after he looks good this year?

You would make the exact same argument next year only you would say "He's 34 now" instead of "He's 33 now."

He did show them, he did look good and they felt like they needed to extend him now.
If he looks good this year then it's a wash whether you sign him this year or next year.

If he looks bad this year then you don't have to sign him.

You win nothing by signing him now and you only risk losing. I'm not sure how else I can explain this.
You get your possible starting RB with a proven history in your system/organization for $2.6M. That's about $1m less than other veteran RBs received on similar short term deals, most of which were with new teams where they are unproven.

 
I really don't get the Fred extension...
He produces, he's their best inside runner, perhaps their best receiver, they trust him and he put up 1,280 yards and 10 TDs last season with a 4.3 YPC and an 8.2 YPR. Aside from that I totally agree.
Regardless of productivity, he is 32 and under contract for a season where anything, including injury, can happen. He could fall off a cliff literally or figuratively. As a GM, why extend now?
lol brown's dynasty owners gettin' feisty!
Even if you ignore Brown and his fantasy relevance, I don't understand why they'd extend Jackson from a team standpoint.

This year they have Spiller and Jackson and traded for Brown. Both Spiller and Jackson could be gone next year so it makes sense to trade for Brown now to see what you have in him. Jackson has been productive but he's 33 now. He could be productive again this season and if he is, then extend him. Why extend him now when you don't know what you're going to get from him this year?

I just don't get it from a team standpoint. If Brown falls flat this year and Jackson looks good, extend him. If both look bad, then you can look in the draft or FA. If Brown looks good and Jackson hits the wall this year, you're stuck with Jackson for no reason.

I just don't see what Buffalo gains out of extending Jackson right now?

Are they really that worried that the market will be super hot for a 34 year old RB next year?
So you think they should have extended Jackson during next off season when he turns 34, if he produces this year, because extending him before this season makes no sense because he's 33 now and they don't know what they are going to get out of him?

:confused:
I don't think its that hard to follow. He's 33 now. If he looks good this year and they feel like they need him next year then sign/extend him then. Why extend him before this season? What do the Buffalo Bills gain by extending him right now? The market will not be hot for him next year so it's not like they are worried about having to compete and over pay to keep him.
That makes absolutely no sense. What is the difference between that and paying him this year after he looked good last year? So you can pay him next year after he looks good this year?

You would make the exact same argument next year only you would say "He's 34 now" instead of "He's 33 now."

He did show them, he did look good and they felt like they needed to extend him now.
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.

That being said, it isn't a ton of money we're talking about, and even if he slows down it's probably worth it from a locker room perspective. It also comes down to the guaranteed money, and I haven't seen that listed anywhere- this may all be moot.

 
I like the idea of extending Jackson at a reasonable salary. He is a solid veteran on a young team. He has earned every cent he has been paid in the NFL and it's not a huge contract. There are very few teams running a single RB these days and Jackson seems to be a nice piece in a time share.

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
:lmao:

 
Well, if the Bills did not include any guaranteed money in 2015 they could save against the cap this year by converting his salary to a signing bonus (not much, less than a million since he's still have to make vets minimum) with no effect in 2015 other than the prorated cap hit.

Why would it make sense to borrow against next years cap?

1) if they are extending other players - this has been mentioned

2) to insure against Fred having a great year and being more expensive next year

3) to insure against Fred leaving for greener pastures next year regardless of the offer

It ain't much. As far as I can tell there isn't anything out on the values etc. so I can't come up with something more compelling than this

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
If Graham was the oldest TE in the league then yes, I'd agree. Jackson is the oldest RB in the league.

I'm not sure why people are cherry picking around things here. Nobody in here is denying that Jackson isn't talented and what he did last year at the age of 32 is pretty incredible. But he is still mortal and expecting him to do the same at age 34 is pretty silly. Can anybody pull up anything about RB's aged 33 or older in the past? Have there been any RB's aged 34 in the league that have received significant carries?

I think people defending him in here are just thinking that people like me questioning this move is because we are worried about Bryce Brown's value. I'm not really that concerned. If Brown is any good, he'll get his carries this year or next since he's a decade younger than Jackson. I just don't understand from a team perspective how this makes sense when they could just wait and see? Is a 34 year old Fred Jackson really going to be a hot commodity next year if the Bills didn't extend him now?

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
:lmao:
It is a poor comparison but the notion of extending a reliable veteran who is still producing at a high level at a reasonable price makes tons of sense for the Bills. He doesn't need to produce at his career best levels for this to be a good deal for the Bills.

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
:lmao:
Remove the second sentence of my response and answer just the first one. Players all the time are paid for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do. Sure, F Jax is old for a RB, but I think last year may have been his most productive season in the NFL. It isn't huge money we're talking about here, and it may have helped them with their cap this year (and next year if they were going to keep him in 2015 anyway).

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
:lmao:
It is a poor comparison but the notion of extending a reliable veteran who is still producing at a high level at a reasonable price makes tons of sense for the Bills. He doesn't need to produce at his career best levels for this to be a good deal for the Bills.
Poor isn't the word for it.

Like I said, it really isn't a big deal, but why do you think it makes a ton of sense? Do you think it's likely that they look back on this extension as a steal? Even if he does really well, he has $1 mil in incentives as well, so he won't come cheaply. I think best case scenario is that it's fair value, worst case is they just threw money away (again, it all depends on the guaranteed portion, and there may not be much if any).

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
:lmao:
Remove the second sentence of my response and answer just the first one. Players all the time are paid for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do. Sure, F Jax is old for a RB, but I think last year may have been his most productive season in the NFL. It isn't huge money we're talking about here, and it may have helped them with their cap this year (and next year if they were going to keep him in 2015 anyway).
Why didn't you remove that sentence since it's so ridiculous?

Sure, players are paid all the time for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do, and it's risky. It's even more so in a case like this- he isn't just old for a RB, he's the oldest RB in the NFL, and he's missed almost half the season and ended up on IR in 2 out of the last 3 years.

I'm not saying it's a horrible move by any stretch, I've said it isn't a lot of money and it may be worth it simply from a locker room perspective, and it may all just be for show especially if there isn't much guaranteed money. I just think the timing was questionable and skews the risk towards the team.

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
:lmao:
Remove the second sentence of my response and answer just the first one. Players all the time are paid for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do. Sure, F Jax is old for a RB, but I think last year may have been his most productive season in the NFL. It isn't huge money we're talking about here, and it may have helped them with their cap this year (and next year if they were going to keep him in 2015 anyway).
Why didn't you remove that sentence since it's so ridiculous?

Sure, players are paid all the time for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do, and it's risky. It's even more so in a case like this- he isn't just old for a RB, he's the oldest RB in the NFL, and he's missed almost half the season and ended up on IR in 2 out of the last 3 years.

I'm not saying it's a horrible move by any stretch, I've said it isn't a lot of money and it may be worth it simply from a locker room perspective, and it may all just be for show especially if there isn't much guaranteed money. I just think the timing was questionable and skews the risk towards the team.
Given all the bad publicity many NFL players have received recently, I think it's a great show of goodwill (albeit not a very big one) from the organization to a player who keeps his head down and works hard without ever having his name in the news for the wrong reasons. Really I haven't heard anything, good or bad, about F Jax outside of football for his entire career. Has he ever complained about any contract issues? Ever?

 
Have there been any RB's aged 34 in the league that have received significant carries?
Here are the top 20 rushing seasons by running backs 34 or older:

Rk Player Year Age Draft Tm Lg G GS Att Yds Y/A TD Y/G

1 John Riggins* 1983 34 1-6 WAS NFL 15 15 375 1347 3.59 24 89.8

2 John Riggins* 1984 35 1-6 WAS NFL 14 14 327 1239 3.79 14 88.5

3 John Henry Johnson* 1964 35 2-18 PIT NFL 14 0 235 1048 4.46 7 74.9

4 Emmitt Smith* 2004 35 1-17 ARI NFL 15 15 267 937 3.51 9 62.5

5 Marcus Allen* 1995 35 1-10 KAN NFL 16 15 207 890 4.30 5 55.6

6 Marcus Allen* 1996 36 1-10 KAN NFL 16 15 206 830 4.03 9 51.9

7 John Henry Johnson* 1963 34 2-18 PIT NFL 12 0 186 773 4.16 4 64.4

8 Marcus Allen* 1994 34 1-10 KAN NFL 13 13 189 709 3.75 7 54.5

9 Tony Dorsett* 1988 34 1-2 DEN NFL 16 13 181 703 3.88 5 43.9

10 John Riggins* 1985 36 1-6 WAS NFL 12 11 176 677 3.85 8 56.4

11 Joe Perry* 1961 34 BAL NFL 13 0 168 675 4.02 3 51.9

12 Earnest Byner 1996 34 10-280 BAL NFL 16 8 159 634 3.99 4 39.6

13 MacArthur Lane 1976 34 1-13 KAN NFL 14 14 162 542 3.35 5 38.7

14 Walter Payton* 1987 34 1-4 CHI NFL 12 12 146 533 3.65 4 44.4

15 Marcus Allen* 1997 37 1-10 KAN NFL 16 0 124 505 4.07 11 31.6

16 Ricky Williams 2011 34 1-5 BAL NFL 16 0 108 444 4.11 2 27.8

17 Dorsey Levens 2004 34 5-149 PHI NFL 15 5 94 410 4.36 4 27.3

18 Ollie Matson* 1964 34 1-3 PHI NFL 12 0 96 404 4.21 4 33.7

19 Joe Perry* 1962 35 BAL NFL 12 0 94 359 3.82 0 29.9

20 Rocky Bleier 1980 34 16-417 PIT NFL 16 6 78 340 4.36 1 21.3

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Have there been any RB's aged 34 in the league that have received significant carries?
Here are the top 20 rushing seasons by running backs 34 or older:

Rk Player Year Age Draft Tm Lg G GS Att Yds Y/A TD Y/G

1 John Riggins* 1983 34 1-6 WAS NFL 15 15 375 1347 3.59 24 89.8

2 John Riggins* 1984 35 1-6 WAS NFL 14 14 327 1239 3.79 14 88.5

3 John Henry Johnson* 1964 35 2-18 PIT NFL 14 0 235 1048 4.46 7 74.9

4 Emmitt Smith* 2004 35 1-17 ARI NFL 15 15 267 937 3.51 9 62.5

5 Marcus Allen* 1995 35 1-10 KAN NFL 16 15 207 890 4.30 5 55.6

6 Marcus Allen* 1996 36 1-10 KAN NFL 16 15 206 830 4.03 9 51.9

7 John Henry Johnson* 1963 34 2-18 PIT NFL 12 0 186 773 4.16 4 64.4

8 Marcus Allen* 1994 34 1-10 KAN NFL 13 13 189 709 3.75 7 54.5

9 Tony Dorsett* 1988 34 1-2 DEN NFL 16 13 181 703 3.88 5 43.9

10 John Riggins* 1985 36 1-6 WAS NFL 12 11 176 677 3.85 8 56.4

11 Joe Perry* 1961 34 BAL NFL 13 0 168 675 4.02 3 51.9

12 Earnest Byner 1996 34 10-280 BAL NFL 16 8 159 634 3.99 4 39.6

13 MacArthur Lane 1976 34 1-13 KAN NFL 14 14 162 542 3.35 5 38.7

14 Walter Payton* 1987 34 1-4 CHI NFL 12 12 146 533 3.65 4 44.4

15 Marcus Allen* 1997 37 1-10 KAN NFL 16 0 124 505 4.07 11 31.6

16 Ricky Williams 2011 34 1-5 BAL NFL 16 0 108 444 4.11 2 27.8

17 Dorsey Levens 2004 34 5-149 PHI NFL 15 5 94 410 4.36 4 27.3

18 Ollie Matson* 1964 34 1-3 PHI NFL 12 0 96 404 4.21 4 33.7

19 Joe Perry* 1962 35 BAL NFL 12 0 94 359 3.82 0 29.9

20 Rocky Bleier 1980 34 16-417 PIT NFL 16 6 78 340 4.36 1 21.3
Only 2 backs in the past 10 years. I'll give FJax credit though, he looks like he is in great shape. One a first ballot HOF'er and the all time rushing leader and the other a guy who would/could be a HOF'er had he not lost significant time in his prime and guys I have used in my examples in the past. I have come down some off my initial BB high though as they gave Dixon the nod as #3, perhaps in motivation but happening none the less. I agree with others the contract doesn't make sense unless the FO views it as a compliment to FJax for what he's meant to Buffalo and before a new ownership group takes over and potentially blows up the structure at the top.

 
Have there been any RB's aged 34 in the league that have received significant carries?
Here are the top 20 rushing seasons by running backs 34 or older:

Rk Player Year Age Draft Tm Lg G GS Att Yds Y/A TD Y/G

1 John Riggins* 1983 34 1-6 WAS NFL 15 15 375 1347 3.59 24 89.8

2 John Riggins* 1984 35 1-6 WAS NFL 14 14 327 1239 3.79 14 88.5

3 John Henry Johnson* 1964 35 2-18 PIT NFL 14 0 235 1048 4.46 7 74.9

4 Emmitt Smith* 2004 35 1-17 ARI NFL 15 15 267 937 3.51 9 62.5

5 Marcus Allen* 1995 35 1-10 KAN NFL 16 15 207 890 4.30 5 55.6

6 Marcus Allen* 1996 36 1-10 KAN NFL 16 15 206 830 4.03 9 51.9

7 John Henry Johnson* 1963 34 2-18 PIT NFL 12 0 186 773 4.16 4 64.4

8 Marcus Allen* 1994 34 1-10 KAN NFL 13 13 189 709 3.75 7 54.5

9 Tony Dorsett* 1988 34 1-2 DEN NFL 16 13 181 703 3.88 5 43.9

10 John Riggins* 1985 36 1-6 WAS NFL 12 11 176 677 3.85 8 56.4

11 Joe Perry* 1961 34 BAL NFL 13 0 168 675 4.02 3 51.9

12 Earnest Byner 1996 34 10-280 BAL NFL 16 8 159 634 3.99 4 39.6

13 MacArthur Lane 1976 34 1-13 KAN NFL 14 14 162 542 3.35 5 38.7

14 Walter Payton* 1987 34 1-4 CHI NFL 12 12 146 533 3.65 4 44.4

15 Marcus Allen* 1997 37 1-10 KAN NFL 16 0 124 505 4.07 11 31.6

16 Ricky Williams 2011 34 1-5 BAL NFL 16 0 108 444 4.11 2 27.8

17 Dorsey Levens 2004 34 5-149 PHI NFL 15 5 94 410 4.36 4 27.3

18 Ollie Matson* 1964 34 1-3 PHI NFL 12 0 96 404 4.21 4 33.7

19 Joe Perry* 1962 35 BAL NFL 12 0 94 359 3.82 0 29.9

20 Rocky Bleier 1980 34 16-417 PIT NFL 16 6 78 340 4.36 1 21.3
This is why I love this forum and most of the users here. Thanks for posting that. Like someone above said, it seems like kind of a long shot for a 34 year old to be productive, but I wouldn't be shocked to see Fred do it. He looked strong last year and expecting him to take a huge nose dive in a year or two would seem unlikely.

That being said, I stand by my point...why extend him now?

Unless it's because it's not guaranteed or it's to pay him respects for what he's done or something else that is "behind the scenes" that we don't know about, I just don't see how it makes sense for the Bills organization to extend him right now. It doesn't make sense from a football perspective.

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
:lmao:
Remove the second sentence of my response and answer just the first one. Players all the time are paid for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do. Sure, F Jax is old for a RB, but I think last year may have been his most productive season in the NFL. It isn't huge money we're talking about here, and it may have helped them with their cap this year (and next year if they were going to keep him in 2015 anyway).
Why didn't you remove that sentence since it's so ridiculous?

Sure, players are paid all the time for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do, and it's risky. It's even more so in a case like this- he isn't just old for a RB, he's the oldest RB in the NFL, and he's missed almost half the season and ended up on IR in 2 out of the last 3 years.

I'm not saying it's a horrible move by any stretch, I've said it isn't a lot of money and it may be worth it simply from a locker room perspective, and it may all just be for show especially if there isn't much guaranteed money. I just think the timing was questionable and skews the risk towards the team.
Given all the bad publicity many NFL players have received recently, I think it's a great show of goodwill (albeit not a very big one) from the organization to a player who keeps his head down and works hard without ever having his name in the news for the wrong reasons. Really I haven't heard anything, good or bad, about F Jax outside of football for his entire career. Has he ever complained about any contract issues? Ever?
Okay, but this is an entirely different argument than what you were making before. I agree that he's a good face of the organization.

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
:lmao:
Remove the second sentence of my response and answer just the first one. Players all the time are paid for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do. Sure, F Jax is old for a RB, but I think last year may have been his most productive season in the NFL. It isn't huge money we're talking about here, and it may have helped them with their cap this year (and next year if they were going to keep him in 2015 anyway).
Why didn't you remove that sentence since it's so ridiculous?

Sure, players are paid all the time for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do, and it's risky. It's even more so in a case like this- he isn't just old for a RB, he's the oldest RB in the NFL, and he's missed almost half the season and ended up on IR in 2 out of the last 3 years.

I'm not saying it's a horrible move by any stretch, I've said it isn't a lot of money and it may be worth it simply from a locker room perspective, and it may all just be for show especially if there isn't much guaranteed money. I just think the timing was questionable and skews the risk towards the team.
Given all the bad publicity many NFL players have received recently, I think it's a great show of goodwill (albeit not a very big one) from the organization to a player who keeps his head down and works hard without ever having his name in the news for the wrong reasons. Really I haven't heard anything, good or bad, about F Jax outside of football for his entire career. Has he ever complained about any contract issues? Ever?
Okay, but this is an entirely different argument than what you were making before. I agree that he's a good face of the organization.
What argument I was making before? I said he was worth it, I'm still saying that.

 
Have there been any RB's aged 34 in the league that have received significant carries?
Here are the top 20 rushing seasons by running backs 34 or older:

Rk Player Year Age Draft Tm Lg G GS Att Yds Y/A TD Y/G

1 John Riggins* 1983 34 1-6 WAS NFL 15 15 375 1347 3.59 24 89.8

2 John Riggins* 1984 35 1-6 WAS NFL 14 14 327 1239 3.79 14 88.5

3 John Henry Johnson* 1964 35 2-18 PIT NFL 14 0 235 1048 4.46 7 74.9

4 Emmitt Smith* 2004 35 1-17 ARI NFL 15 15 267 937 3.51 9 62.5

5 Marcus Allen* 1995 35 1-10 KAN NFL 16 15 207 890 4.30 5 55.6

6 Marcus Allen* 1996 36 1-10 KAN NFL 16 15 206 830 4.03 9 51.9

7 John Henry Johnson* 1963 34 2-18 PIT NFL 12 0 186 773 4.16 4 64.4

8 Marcus Allen* 1994 34 1-10 KAN NFL 13 13 189 709 3.75 7 54.5

9 Tony Dorsett* 1988 34 1-2 DEN NFL 16 13 181 703 3.88 5 43.9

10 John Riggins* 1985 36 1-6 WAS NFL 12 11 176 677 3.85 8 56.4

11 Joe Perry* 1961 34 BAL NFL 13 0 168 675 4.02 3 51.9

12 Earnest Byner 1996 34 10-280 BAL NFL 16 8 159 634 3.99 4 39.6

13 MacArthur Lane 1976 34 1-13 KAN NFL 14 14 162 542 3.35 5 38.7

14 Walter Payton* 1987 34 1-4 CHI NFL 12 12 146 533 3.65 4 44.4

15 Marcus Allen* 1997 37 1-10 KAN NFL 16 0 124 505 4.07 11 31.6

16 Ricky Williams 2011 34 1-5 BAL NFL 16 0 108 444 4.11 2 27.8

17 Dorsey Levens 2004 34 5-149 PHI NFL 15 5 94 410 4.36 4 27.3

18 Ollie Matson* 1964 34 1-3 PHI NFL 12 0 96 404 4.21 4 33.7

19 Joe Perry* 1962 35 BAL NFL 12 0 94 359 3.82 0 29.9

20 Rocky Bleier 1980 34 16-417 PIT NFL 16 6 78 340 4.36 1 21.3
So 1 guy in the last 18 years of the NFL had carried for over 450 yards in a season at age 34. One guy, once. And that was the all time yardage leader in the history of football. The odds of being the second guy are not very good. I think the extension was clearly a reward to FJax and maybe a way to say, 'We aren't fazing you out. As long as you are productive we want you to be a Bill.'

As it effects Brown, it might imply they aren't fully counting on him taking over, but all it really means, to me, is he still has to prove he deserves a role and that role will be whatever he earns. I don't think the team has committed to anything more than that, nor should they. If he isn't good (and depending on Spiller's year) they will get someone else in free agency or next year's draft. I think that is the entire plan. Whether you like Brown should depend on whether you like his talent. The opportunity is there and nothing is guaranteed.

 
humpback said:
The part you're leaving out is that he's already under contract for this year. They're paying him right now for 2015, which is risky because we don't know what he's going to do in 2014. The equivalent argument would be if they were talking about an extension into 2016 next off season, not 2015.
So no team should give a player a deal more than 1 year into the future? New Orleans really messed by by signing Graham to a 4 year deal.....
:lmao:
Remove the second sentence of my response and answer just the first one. Players all the time are paid for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do. Sure, F Jax is old for a RB, but I think last year may have been his most productive season in the NFL. It isn't huge money we're talking about here, and it may have helped them with their cap this year (and next year if they were going to keep him in 2015 anyway).
Why didn't you remove that sentence since it's so ridiculous?

Sure, players are paid all the time for things they've already done without knowing what they are going to do, and it's risky. It's even more so in a case like this- he isn't just old for a RB, he's the oldest RB in the NFL, and he's missed almost half the season and ended up on IR in 2 out of the last 3 years.

I'm not saying it's a horrible move by any stretch, I've said it isn't a lot of money and it may be worth it simply from a locker room perspective, and it may all just be for show especially if there isn't much guaranteed money. I just think the timing was questionable and skews the risk towards the team.
Given all the bad publicity many NFL players have received recently, I think it's a great show of goodwill (albeit not a very big one) from the organization to a player who keeps his head down and works hard without ever having his name in the news for the wrong reasons. Really I haven't heard anything, good or bad, about F Jax outside of football for his entire career. Has he ever complained about any contract issues? Ever?
Okay, but this is an entirely different argument than what you were making before. I agree that he's a good face of the organization.
What argument I was making before? I said he was worth it, I'm still saying that.
You first made a ridiculous comparison to Jimmy Graham. Then you said people get paid based on past performance all the time and he played well last year, and maybe it helped their cap space. Then you said it's a goodwill move. Every time I reply to your posts, you ignore it and come up with a different argument- let's just move on.

 
Grigs Allmoon said:
humpback said:
Grigs Allmoon said:
Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter
Bills announced that RB Fred Jackson has signed a contract extension. True warrior.
Ian Rapoport @RapSheet
#Bills RB Fred Jackson just signed a one-year extension worth $2.6M with $1M additional in incentives, source says.
Wonder how this affects the outlook of the Bills RB situation... Not as clear a path to starter touches next season for Bryce Brown? Or just additional insurance if they can't get a good enough deal w/ Spiller.
I'd still say that the biggest question mark next year for Brown will be whether Spiller stays with the team. I don't foresee Jackson getting a sizable number of touches in 2015.
I agree. In my mind, the FJax extension doesn't have an impact on Bryce at all. It could have been a 10 year extension, and it wouldn't change anything. The fact of the matter is that FJax will be a role player sooner rather than later.
Even if he's a role player next year, that's worse for Brown than if he wasn't even on the team, which was the expectation prior to this extension. I suppose you could argue that it helps Brown if it makes it less likely that they now resign Spiller, but I don't think signing FJax for another year will impact that decision.
Oh, ok. I see your point. I guess, as a Bills fan, I was never expecting him to leave, regardless of current (past) contract situation.
Yeah, I'm talking about it from a fantasy perspective, and I think most Brown owners/watchers were counting on FJax being gone/done after the season.

 
Like someone above said, it seems like kind of a long shot for a 34 year old to be productive, but I wouldn't be shocked to see Fred do it. He looked strong last year and expecting him to take a huge nose dive in a year or two would seem unlikely.
I don't want to be one to doubt Jackson since he's always been one to surprise people, but the fact that he looked so strong last year, doesn't mean that he won't just fall apart this year. The call it "falling off a cliff" for a reason.

Obviously that list shows how rare it is for a back over 33 years old to contribute - his owners (and the Bills) will need to hope he has some John Riggins of Marcus Allen in him.

 
One guy, once. And that was the all time yardage leader in the history of football.
Who was also being force-fed the ball as more of a publicity stunt by what was then a pathetic organization that was only looking to bring fans into the stadium.

 
I own Bryce in a few places and I'm genuinely not bothered by Fred's extension, not in the least, if anything I view it as a positive for a few reasons. Spiller is another matter entirely, if he resigned I'm not sure I'd continue to roster Brown.

I do realize that two national beat writers both left Bills camp and mused on possiblity of them moving a RB. Peter King and La Confora. Likely nothing to see here but I can't help but wonder if they got some type of insider info into the Bills thinking that would cause them both to mention this after visits to Bills camp. Can't help but think if they move a back Spiller would far and away be the most logical candidate due to what he would net and fact he has one year left on his deal. Also keeping in mind what they gave for Watkins and need to recoup some picks. I don't predict this happens, due mainly to job security of Bills staff, but a possibility and a possibilitly I feel has a slightly stronger chance of happening with Fred's extension which is just one of many reasons I think his resigning is a positive.

The only negative I've had concerning Bryce the past few days was him showing up as #4 on the initial depth chart. That was a bummer. Not sure if it's because Dixon has looked solid or they want to keep Bryce grounded and make him earn it but that was a disapointment, especially after the early camp buzz from Brown.

 
Fred Jackson's one-year, $2.6 million extension includes no guaranteed money.

In other words, there's no real risk for the Bills. It's a symbolic gesture for a team leader, and an affordable option if F-Jax turns in a strong 2014. Heading into his age-33 campaign, there's no guarantee Jackson is back in Buffalo for 2015.


Source: Adam Caplan on Twitter
Jul 31 - 5:03 PM

 
Fred Jackson's one-year, $2.6 million extension includes no guaranteed money.

In other words, there's no real risk for the Bills. It's a symbolic gesture for a team leader, and an affordable option if F-Jax turns in a strong 2014. Heading into his age-33 campaign, there's no guarantee Jackson is back in Buffalo for 2015.


Source: Adam Caplan on Twitter
Jul 31 - 5:03 PM
And, there we go.

 
I was puzzled not just at extending Fred Jackson but the timing.

If the numbers indicate no guaranteed money and zero risk then it would appear to be basically meaningless since the Bills can cut him without any consequence.

Most would say that their isn't any difference other than adding one non-guaranteed year and I would agree but if they wind up wanting to keep F-Jax they now can't cut his salary so signing an extension makes sense on Jackson's part.

The caveat is if Fred slips in his play because now he has a contract so the Bills have no room to negotiate his salary downwards.

Seems they painted themselves into a corner. So I'm back to being puzzled.

Here is Fantasy Guru's take:

-------------------------------------

FantasyGuru.com@Fantasy_Guru · Jul 30

I feel like we can place C.J. Spiller on another roster in 2015 with Fred Jackson signing 1-year extension thru 2015 and Bryce Brown added.
 
Brown still 4th at best on the depth chart.

Spiller got one carry, followed by a few from Jackson. Since then it's all Dixon.
Lol @ at best.

And since then, it's been all Brown, who has looked very good (keeping in mind it's limited action in the 1st pre-season game).

 
When I saw that Dixon was getting heavy reps ahead of him, I just hoped that he would do well when he inevitably got his chance. He has looked pretty good. We already knew he could get to the edge, but apparently the Giants forgot about that. I want to see him used on more inside runs. He did have one pretty decent run where he started towards the outside and eventually made a cut back towards the inside to take a modest gain. That's good to see from him because his reputation is that he always tries to bounce everything outside. Probably a function of his inexperience, as he has hardly any carries in his NCAA+NFL career compared to most guys his age.

 
When I saw that Dixon was getting heavy reps ahead of him, I just hoped that he would do well when he inevitably got his chance. He has looked pretty good. We already knew he could get to the edge, but apparently the Giants forgot about that. I want to see him used on more inside runs. He did have one pretty decent run where he started towards the outside and eventually made a cut back towards the inside to take a modest gain. That's good to see from him because his reputation is that he always tries to bounce everything outside. Probably a function of his inexperience, as he has hardly any carries in his NCAA+NFL career compared to most guys his age.
Less than 300 carries since high school, pretty amazing.

 
When I saw that Dixon was getting heavy reps ahead of him, I just hoped that he would do well when he inevitably got his chance. He has looked pretty good. We already knew he could get to the edge, but apparently the Giants forgot about that. I want to see him used on more inside runs. He did have one pretty decent run where he started towards the outside and eventually made a cut back towards the inside to take a modest gain. That's good to see from him because his reputation is that he always tries to bounce everything outside. Probably a function of his inexperience, as he has hardly any carries in his NCAA+NFL career compared to most guys his age.
Less than 300 carries since high school, pretty amazing.
Yeah it is. Then again that doesn't keep happening by accident.

 
I was puzzled not just at extending Fred Jackson but the timing.

If the numbers indicate no guaranteed money and zero risk then it would appear to be basically meaningless since the Bills can cut him without any consequence.

Most would say that their isn't any difference other than adding one non-guaranteed year and I would agree but if they wind up wanting to keep F-Jax they now can't cut his salary so signing an extension makes sense on Jackson's part.

The caveat is if Fred slips in his play because now he has a contract so the Bills have no room to negotiate his salary downwards.

Seems they painted themselves into a corner. So I'm back to being puzzled.

Here is Fantasy Guru's take:

-------------------------------------

FantasyGuru.com@Fantasy_Guru · Jul 30

I feel like we can place C.J. Spiller on another roster in 2015 with Fred Jackson signing 1-year extension thru 2015 and Bryce Brown added.
If he plays well then they don't have to worry about losing him next year and it's still a relatively cheap contract for a veteran player.

Interesting stats about Fred Jackson:

Jackson has the 18th most rushing yards after age 28. He needs less than 1100 more yards to pass Fred Taylor to have the 7th most.

Of the RB's with more yards, only Barber, Holmes, Taylor, and Sanders have a higher YPC than Jackson's 4.47.

 
11 for 64 rushing and 2 for 18 receiving. Didn't catch the game, did he look as good as his stats or was it against the 3rd stringers?

From his stats, it looks like he was a lot more effective than Dixon with his carries but I know that doesn't mean much on such a small sample size and when it's just the preseason.

 
11 for 64 rushing and 2 for 18 receiving. Didn't catch the game, did he look as good as his stats or was it against the 3rd stringers?

From his stats, it looks like he was a lot more effective than Dixon with his carries but I know that doesn't mean much on such a small sample size and when it's just the preseason.
Spiller/Jackson rotated for about 1.5 quarters. Then Brown came in for the Spiller role, and Dixon played the Jackson role.

 
11 for 64 rushing and 2 for 18 receiving. Didn't catch the game, did he look as good as his stats or was it against the 3rd stringers?

From his stats, it looks like he was a lot more effective than Dixon with his carries but I know that doesn't mean much on such a small sample size and when it's just the preseason.
Spiller/Jackson rotated for about 1.5 quarters. Then Brown came in for the Spiller role, and Dixon played the Jackson role.
The Spiller role? Didn't expect that.

Thanks.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top