RB Josh Jacobs, GB (1 Viewer)

[eighsse2]

I've never wished injury to anyone and never will, but I would like Jacobs to not play this week. He has killed me all season in my regular season matchups with the teams i'm playing in the playoffs. A simple Out status would be appreciated.

what? the guy has played amazing every week he has rested and is the number 1 rb in the league. That's crazy talk

I'm saying this because I am playing him this week.

Somebody shirt this guy.

Shirt?

Ok so I've seen that emoticon on here several times, I guess it's time for me to finally learn lol. What does it mean? I can't even tell what's depicted on the shirt.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

I've never wished injury to anyone and never will, but I would like Jacobs to not play this week. He has killed me all season in my regular season matchups with the teams i'm playing in the playoffs. A simple Out status would be appreciated.

what? the guy has played amazing every week he has rested and is the number 1 rb in the league. That's crazy talk

I'm saying this because I am playing him this week.

Somebody shirt this guy.

Shirt?

Ok so I've seen that emoticon on here several times, I guess it's time for me to finally learn lol. What does it mean? I can't even tell what's depicted on the shirt.

See number 9: https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/free-for-all-faq.319399/

Though the link to the original thread there doesn’t seem to work

 

[ShamrockPride]

I've never wished injury to anyone and never will, but I would like Jacobs to not play this week. He has killed me all season in my regular season matchups with the teams i'm playing in the playoffs. A simple Out status would be appreciated.

what? the guy has played amazing every week he has rested and is the number 1 rb in the league. That's crazy talk

I'm saying this because I am playing him this week.

Somebody shirt this guy.

Shirt?

Ok so I've seen that emoticon on here several times, I guess it's time for me to finally learn lol. What does it mean? I can't even tell what's depicted on the shirt.

See number 9: https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/free-for-all-faq.319399/

Though the link to the original thread there doesn’t seem to work

Gotcha covered: original thread

Classic

@eighsse2

 

[Desert_Power]

I've never wished injury to anyone and never will, but I would like Jacobs to not play this week. He has killed me all season in my regular season matchups with the teams i'm playing in the playoffs. A simple Out status would be appreciated.

what? the guy has played amazing every week he has rested and is the number 1 rb in the league. That's crazy talk

I'm saying this because I am playing him this week.

Somebody shirt this guy.

Shirt?

Ok so I've seen that emoticon on here several times, I guess it's time for me to finally learn lol. What does it mean? I can't even tell what's depicted on the shirt.

See number 9: https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/free-for-all-faq.319399/

Though the link to the original thread there doesn’t seem to work

Gotcha covered: original thread

Classic

@eighsse2

Who is keeping this website alive?

 

[Dickies]

I've never wished injury to anyone and never will, but I would like Jacobs to not play this week. He has killed me all season in my regular season matchups with the teams i'm playing in the playoffs. A simple Out status would be appreciated.

what? the guy has played amazing every week he has rested and is the number 1 rb in the league. That's crazy talk

I'm saying this because I am playing him this week.

Somebody shirt this guy.

Shirt?

Ok so I've seen that emoticon on here several times, I guess it's time for me to finally learn lol. What does it mean? I can't even tell what's depicted on the shirt.

See number 9: https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/free-for-all-faq.319399/

Though the link to the original thread there doesn’t seem to work

Gotcha covered: original thread

Classic

@eighsse2

Who is keeping this website alive?

He must be making sales

 

[kface]

Is it crazy to sit jacobs in the championship game for zach moss?

New qb, against sf....i feel like his ceiling is maybe 5pts

 

[electric Ape]

Is it crazy to sit jacobs in the championship game for zach moss?

New qb, against sf....i feel like his ceiling is maybe 5pts

It’s not “crazy” to sit Jacobs as this is a terrible spot for him and his scoring expectation is as low as it’s been all season. Beyond the problems of the 49ers D and Stidham the Raiders have questionable motivation this week with their playoff chances all but extinguished and a popular team leader benched.

But let’s consider your decision. You want to sit this year’s fantasy MVP because his offense might be dysfunctional for a way less talented player in another offense that’s also dysfunctional? It would be a bold move based more on intuition than data. Jacobs could get even less than 5 points but his ceiling is not 5, there are scenarios where he has a good game

 

[kface]

Is it crazy to sit jacobs in the championship game for zach moss?

New qb, against sf....i feel like his ceiling is maybe 5pts

It’s not “crazy” to sit Jacobs as this is a terrible spot for him and his scoring expectation is as low as it’s been all season. Beyond the problems of the 49ers D and Stidham the Raiders have questionable motivation this week with their playoff chances all but extinguished and a popular team leader benched.

But let’s consider your decision. You want to sit this year’s fantasy MVP because his offense might be dysfunctional for a way less talented player in another offense that’s also dysfunctional? It would be a bold move based more on intuition than data. Jacobs could get even less than 5 points but his ceiling is not 5, there are scenarios where he has a good game

This is great logic for sure...

My only thought is the giants are pretty easy to run against...

 

[Rubi]

Is it crazy to sit jacobs in the championship game for zach moss?

New qb, against sf....i feel like his ceiling is maybe 5pts

It’s not “crazy” to sit Jacobs as this is a terrible spot for him and his scoring expectation is as low as it’s been all season. Beyond the problems of the 49ers D and Stidham the Raiders have questionable motivation this week with their playoff chances all but extinguished and a popular team leader benched.

But let’s consider your decision. You want to sit this year’s fantasy MVP because his offense might be dysfunctional for a way less talented player in another offense that’s also dysfunctional? It would be a bold move based more on intuition than data. Jacobs could get even less than 5 points but his ceiling is not 5, there are scenarios where he has a good game

This is great logic for sure...

My only thought is the giants are pretty easy to run against...

First off if you're considering benching Jacobs for Moss I want to be playing you today for a title.
Yes The Giants D is easier to run on than The Niners.
Did you bench Jacobs at any time during the season because of a less than favorable matchup? As a Jacobs owner I'll answer that..no.
Studs are given that monicker for a reason. If they're healthy you start them. Sure he could lay an egg. Any player on any given Sunday could lay an egg.
But his upside is too high to bench him. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

 

[kface]

Is it crazy to sit jacobs in the championship game for zach moss?

New qb, against sf....i feel like his ceiling is maybe 5pts

It’s not “crazy” to sit Jacobs as this is a terrible spot for him and his scoring expectation is as low as it’s been all season. Beyond the problems of the 49ers D and Stidham the Raiders have questionable motivation this week with their playoff chances all but extinguished and a popular team leader benched.

But let’s consider your decision. You want to sit this year’s fantasy MVP because his offense might be dysfunctional for a way less talented player in another offense that’s also dysfunctional? It would be a bold move based more on intuition than data. Jacobs could get even less than 5 points but his ceiling is not 5, there are scenarios where he has a good game

This is great logic for sure...

My only thought is the giants are pretty easy to run against...

First off if you're considering benching Jacobs for Moss I want to be playing you today for a title.
Yes The Giants D is easier to run on than The Niners.
Did you bench Jacobs at any time during the season because of a less than favorable matchup? As a Jacobs owner I'll answer that..no.
Studs are given that monicker for a reason. If they're healthy you start them. Sure he could lay an egg. Any player on any given Sunday could lay an egg.
But his upside is too high to bench him. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

I'm a believer in ride your studs for sure...so many warning signs today for the raiders though

 

[Rubi]

Is it crazy to sit jacobs in the championship game for zach moss?

New qb, against sf....i feel like his ceiling is maybe 5pts

It’s not “crazy” to sit Jacobs as this is a terrible spot for him and his scoring expectation is as low as it’s been all season. Beyond the problems of the 49ers D and Stidham the Raiders have questionable motivation this week with their playoff chances all but extinguished and a popular team leader benched.

But let’s consider your decision. You want to sit this year’s fantasy MVP because his offense might be dysfunctional for a way less talented player in another offense that’s also dysfunctional? It would be a bold move based more on intuition than data. Jacobs could get even less than 5 points but his ceiling is not 5, there are scenarios where he has a good game

This is great logic for sure...

My only thought is the giants are pretty easy to run against...

First off if you're considering benching Jacobs for Moss I want to be playing you today for a title.
Yes The Giants D is easier to run on than The Niners.
Did you bench Jacobs at any time during the season because of a less than favorable matchup? As a Jacobs owner I'll answer that..no.
Studs are given that monicker for a reason. If they're healthy you start them. Sure he could lay an egg. Any player on any given Sunday could lay an egg.
But his upside is too high to bench him. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

I'm a believer in ride your studs for sure...so many warning signs today for the raiders though

Then you must do what you feel you must do

 

[stlrams]

Is it crazy to sit jacobs in the championship game for zach moss?

New qb, against sf....i feel like his ceiling is maybe 5pts

It’s not “crazy” to sit Jacobs as this is a terrible spot for him and his scoring expectation is as low as it’s been all season. Beyond the problems of the 49ers D and Stidham the Raiders have questionable motivation this week with their playoff chances all but extinguished and a popular team leader benched.

But let’s consider your decision. You want to sit this year’s fantasy MVP because his offense might be dysfunctional for a way less talented player in another offense that’s also dysfunctional? It would be a bold move based more on intuition than data. Jacobs could get even less than 5 points but his ceiling is not 5, there are scenarios where he has a good game

This is great logic for sure...

My only thought is the giants are pretty easy to run against...

First off if you're considering benching Jacobs for Moss I want to be playing you today for a title.
Yes The Giants D is easier to run on than The Niners.
Did you bench Jacobs at any time during the season because of a less than favorable matchup? As a Jacobs owner I'll answer that..no.
Studs are given that monicker for a reason. If they're healthy you start them. Sure he could lay an egg. Any player on any given Sunday could lay an egg.
But his upside is too high to bench him. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

I'm a believer in ride your studs for sure...so many warning signs today for the raiders though

Then you must do what you feel you must do

Leaving jacobs in here over montgomery. Have Eckler and b robinson too.

 

[Faust]

Josh Jacobs rushed 17 times for 69 yards and a touchdown in the Raiders' Week 17 loss to the 49ers, adding four catches for 26 yards.​

Jacobs left this game in the first half with a hip injury. He got checked out in the medical tent before heading to the locker room, only to come back a few minutes later. He was listed as probable to return and did so after missing roughly a drive. Outside of those few plays, he dominated the Raiders' backfield, per usual. His one-yard touchdown plunge late in the fourth quarter also pushed the game to overtime with a little help from a missed field goal by Robbie Gould. Still seeing elite usage, Jacobs will rank as a strong RB1 option in Week 18 against the Chiefs.
Jan 1, 2023, 8:47 PM ET

 

[Faust]

Nick Bosa lauds Josh Jacobs after Raiders test 49ers defense: 'Best running back I've played against'

 

[Mitchie]

(thehuddle) The Las Vegas Raiders are expected to retain RB Josh Jacobs for the 2023 season, either through a contract extension or by giving him the franchise tag, rather than allowing him to leave via free agency. Analysis: Jacobs, who will be 25 by the start of next season, currently leads the league in rushing attempts (323) and rushing yards (1,608) and has reached the end zone 12 times through his first 16 games. He should be viewed as a must-start option in all fantasy leagues when healthy.

 

[Faust]

Raiders RB Josh Jacobs (questionable, hip) will play in Week 18 vs Kansas City.​

Jacobs missed practice this week for a personal matter. He's also been dealing with multiple injuries the last few weeks and will play through a questionable tag. Jacobs leads the NFL with 1,608 yards and will look to wrap up the rushing title in Week 18. Inactive for the Raiders are QB Derek Carr, LB Darien Butler, WR Chris Lacy, RB Brittain Brown, G Netane Muti, DT Matthew Butler and DE Tashawn Bower.
SOURCE: NFL.com
Jan 7, 2023, 2:42 PM ET

 

[Faust]

The Athletic's Tashan Reed reports Raiders running back Josh Jacobs is not interested in playing on the franchise tag in 2023.​

Jacobs responded with three words when asked if he would play on the franchise tag in 2023 if the two sides could not reach a multi-year deal - "Hero turned villain." Jacobs said that the two sides had not yet opened contract discussions but that he expected negotiations to begin in the coming week. Jacobs is coming off his most productive season as a professional, leading the league with 1,653 yards on the ground and finishing with 12 touchdowns and more than 2,000 yards from scrimmage.
SOURCE: Tashan Reed on Twitter
Feb 4, 2023, 4:27 PM ET

 

[Faust]

Raiders RB Josh Jacobs said, "This is where I want to be," when questioned about his impending free agency.​

Jacobs fielded plenty of questions about his 2023 offseason during the Pro Bowl. The soon-to-be free agent is fresh off leading the league in rushing (340-1653-12) and is poised for a big payday. While Jacobs was also quoted as saying he controls the proverbial ship amid contract discussions, the fact remains the Raiders could franchise tag him for just over $10 million. Jacobs could always try to hold out or force a trade on the tag, but the team will need to come to a decision on him in the near future. It's worth noting, the Raiders could have brought Jacobs back for a fifth season on his rookie deal, but opted not to exercise the fifth-year of his deal.
SOURCE: The Athletic
Feb 6, 2023, 8:38 AM ET

 

[kface]

Long time owner here...i like jacobs enough but he has never given me the warm fuzzies around being great. I'm not sure what I would pay that guy

 

[Mitchie]

Long time owner here...i like jacobs enough but he has never given me the warm fuzzies around being great. I'm not sure what I would pay that guy

Have to disagree a bit here, think was misused some under Gruden, now if you want to make the argument not to overpay for a RB that's fine but think this guy is right up there with almost anyone outside of the top tier guys, and only 24.

 

[travdogg]

Long time owner here...i like jacobs enough but he has never given me the warm fuzzies around being great. I'm not sure what I would pay that guy

Have to disagree a bit here, think was misused some under Gruden, now if you want to make the argument not to overpay for a RB that's fine but think this guy is right up there with almost anyone outside of the top tier guys, and only 24.

I'd call Jacobs a top tier guy at this point.

 

[Mitchie]

Long time owner here...i like jacobs enough but he has never given me the warm fuzzies around being great. I'm not sure what I would pay that guy

Have to disagree a bit here, think was misused some under Gruden, now if you want to make the argument not to overpay for a RB that's fine but think this guy is right up there with almost anyone outside of the top tier guys, and only 24.

I'd call Jacobs a top tier guy at this point.

Fair enough, added that in just to mean he's prob not a top 3 RB but right up there.

 

[fatness]

I don't think the addition of Scott Turner to the offensive staff is going to help Jacobs's value, if Turner is calling plays. In Washington Turner would frequently take RB's out of the game in 1st and goal from the 3 or 4, and try to pass repeatedly.

 

[travdogg]

I don't think the addition of Scott Turner to the offensive staff is going to help Jacobs's value, if Turner is calling plays. In Washington Turner would frequently take RB's out of the game in 1st and goal from the 3 or 4, and try to pass repeatedly.

I'd be pretty surprised if McDaniels wasn't calling plays.

 

[TampaMike19]

Dude is a stud...he needs to go to a contender ASAP. Elite runner and a above average receiver- studly.

 

[Faust]

Josh Jacobs told Pro Football Talk he'd play on the franchise tag "if the team loaded up at all other positions and added players around him."​

So, if they acquire Aaron Rodgers, then? Jacobs added "if you want me to come back as the hero, you better pay me like a hero." It's a fair assessment of his value after he led the NFL in rushing last season. Jacobs also noted that he'd prefer to play somewhere tax free if things can't work out with the Raiders.
SOURCE: Chris Simms on Twitter
Feb 9, 2023, 2:48 PM ET

 

[Faust]

Josh Jacobs hopes to stay with Raiders long term: 'It's definitely a place that I want to be'

 

[Faust]

NFL Network's Tom Pelissero reports the Raiders plan to place the franchise tag on Josh Jacobs if no deal is reached by Tuesday's deadline.​

Jacobs has already hinted he'd possibly play on the tag if the Raiders "loaded up" around him. The Raiders still have plenty to figure out about their offseason and Jacobs, the NFL's leading rusher last season, is only going to make $10.091 million on the tag. It probably makes sense for the Raiders to figure out where they are before deciding if they want to commit to Jacobs for multiple seasons.
SOURCE: Tom Pelissero on Twitter
Mar 3, 2023, 3:06 PM ET

 

[IHEARTFF]

tagged

 

[Faust]

tagged

NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reports the Raiders placed the franchise tag on Josh Jacobs.​

After declining the fifth-year option on Jacobs' rookie deal last offseason, the Raiders will now pay Jacobs $10.091 million on the tag in 2023 -- assuming the two sides don't agree on a new contract. Jacobs emerged to lead the league in rushing last season, posting a rushing line of 340-1653-12 while catching 53 passes for 400 additional yards. Heading into his age-25 season, Jacobs should have a few more productive years ahead of him before hitting the age cliff. While he and the Raiders now have all offseason to negotiate a new deal, Jacobs is already on record saying he'd play on the franchise tag if the team added other talented players around him.
SOURCE: Ian Rapoport on Twitter
Mar 6, 2023, 4:26 PM ET

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Next Gen Stats
https://twitter.com/NFL
@NextGenStats
After the acquisition of Davante Adams, defenses aligned in two-high safety shells against the Raiders on 62.8% of plays in 2022. Josh Jacobs took advantage, becoming the first player since 2016 to rush for more than 700 yards against two-high shells (1,032).
LINK to chart

 

[Faust]

Raiders GM Dave Ziegler said RB Josh Jacobs has not signed his franchise tag and will not participate in the voluntary offseason program.​

Jacobs is not allowed to participate in the voluntary offseason program until he signs his franchise tag or the two sides agree on a long-term contract. He previously said he was willing to play on the franchise tag but only if the Raiders added extra talent around him. The team has since added Jakobi Meyers. Ziegler said they are working through "that situation" with Jacobs but didn't seem concerned by the matter. For now, we expect Jacobs to play out the 2023 season on the tag and hit the open market next offseason.
SOURCE: Paul Gutierrez on Twitter
Apr 21, 2023, 3:43 PM ET

 

[Faust]

Raiders head coach Josh McDaniels said RB Josh Jacobs is not under contract. ​

Jacobs still has not signed the team's franchise tag and will not participate in mandatory OTAs. Jacobs said this offseason that he was willing to sign the tag if the Raiders added talent to the offense. That has certainly not happened during a disastrous offseason for Vegas. Jacobs, entering his age-25 season, will likely come to terms with the Raiders later this summer. It's a situation to monitor closely, however.
SOURCE: Omar Ruiz on Twitter
Jun 6, 2023, 12:57 PM ET

 

[Scoresman]

So far, the consensus projections for this guy is about a 25% cut to his carries and I'm trying to understand why such a drastic cut unless they are anticipating a holdout and baking that in.

Is it that the change to Garappolo will make opposing defenses instead key in on Jacobs more?

 

[JoeKappBudGrant]

So far, the consensus projections for this guy is about a 25% cut to his carries and I'm trying to understand why such a drastic cut unless they are anticipating a holdout and baking that in.

Is it that the change to Garappolo will make opposing defenses instead key in on Jacobs more?

Last year Jacobs averaged 25.5 carries in wins and 17 carries in losses. He averaged 143 rushing yards in wins and 72 in losses. He scored 1.25 TDs in wins and .36 in losses. The Raiders have a harder schedule this year. The divisional teams have improved and they play the AFC East. They might go 2-8 in those 10 games.

 

[Largent]

2nd round, taking him every time

 

[Scoresman]

So far, the consensus projections for this guy is about a 25% cut to his carries and I'm trying to understand why such a drastic cut unless they are anticipating a holdout and baking that in.

Is it that the change to Garappolo will make opposing defenses instead key in on Jacobs more?

Last year Jacobs averaged 25.5 carries in wins and 17 carries in losses. He averaged 143 rushing yards in wins and 72 in losses. He scored 1.25 TDs in wins and .36 in losses. The Raiders have a harder schedule this year. The divisional teams have improved and they play the AFC East. They might go 2-8 in those 10 games.

Good stat. So worst case assuming 0-16, and outside of injuries is about 1200 yards, 6 TDs. That's a fairly solid floor at that ADP, no? There's no other indication they aren't going to run him into the ground again this year, so I only see upside from there.

 

[Dez]

If he plays

 

[Faust]

2023 Fantasy Football Player Profile: Josh Jacobs looks to build on career year

 

[Faust]

Could the Raiders let RB Josh Jacobs walk after the 2023 NFL season?

 

[Faust]

FOX5 Las Vegas reports unsigned Raiders franchise player Josh Jacobs plans to skip the beginning of training camp if the sides do not reach a long-term agreement by Monday’s deadline.

If the Raiders and Jacobs don’t ink a multi-year pact by Monday, his only 2023 option is the franchise tag. Since he has yet to sign, he can skip as much camp as he likes without incurring fines. That would change once the regular season begins, of course. It is fairly standard practice for unsigned franchise players to skip some, if not all, of camp, though it has anecdotally always felt like they then go on to underperform during the regular campaign. There has been little indication the Raiders are making a meaningful effort to lock up Jacobs ahead of next week.

 

[Faust]

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports the Raiders and unsigned franchise player Josh Jacobs are not expected to agree to a long-term contract by Monday’s deadline.

At least that’s the “feeling” around the league. Jacobs has been telegraphing he will not report for training camp next week without an extension, but the problem for him is that no extension is possible after Monday. The only thing that will be accomplished by holding out is sending a message. The question would then become if Jacobs is willing to sit out regular season games. We strongly suspect Jacobs would report before Week 1 in that scenario.

 

[Harry Frogfish]

So far, the consensus projections for this guy is about a 25% cut to his carries and I'm trying to understand why such a drastic cut unless they are anticipating a holdout and baking that in.

Is it that the change to Garappolo will make opposing defenses instead key in on Jacobs more?

Last year Jacobs averaged 25.5 carries in wins and 17 carries in losses. He averaged 143 rushing yards in wins and 72 in losses. He scored 1.25 TDs in wins and .36 in losses. The Raiders have a harder schedule this year. The divisional teams have improved and they play the AFC East. They might go 2-8 in those 10 games.

Christ that's a good post.

 

[eighsse2]

So far, the consensus projections for this guy is about a 25% cut to his carries and I'm trying to understand why such a drastic cut unless they are anticipating a holdout and baking that in.

Is it that the change to Garappolo will make opposing defenses instead key in on Jacobs more?

Last year Jacobs averaged 25.5 carries in wins and 17 carries in losses. He averaged 143 rushing yards in wins and 72 in losses. He scored 1.25 TDs in wins and .36 in losses. The Raiders have a harder schedule this year. The divisional teams have improved and they play the AFC East. They might go 2-8 in those 10 games.

Christ that's a good post.

Then again, the Raiders went 6-11 last year. How much worse can you realistically project them at?

 

[JoeKappBudGrant]

So far, the consensus projections for this guy is about a 25% cut to his carries and I'm trying to understand why such a drastic cut unless they are anticipating a holdout and baking that in.

Is it that the change to Garappolo will make opposing defenses instead key in on Jacobs more?

Last year Jacobs averaged 25.5 carries in wins and 17 carries in losses. He averaged 143 rushing yards in wins and 72 in losses. He scored 1.25 TDs in wins and .36 in losses. The Raiders have a harder schedule this year. The divisional teams have improved and they play the AFC East. They might go 2-8 in those 10 games.

Christ that's a good post.

Then again, the Raiders went 6-11 last year. How much worse can you realistically project them at?

It is just not all losses, blowout losses make it worse. Jacobs scored 50 points PPR in their two 1 point losses last year. They will continue to run if the game is close. The raiders have lost 7 games by double digits the last two years. Jacobs is averaging less than 10.5 points in those games. Daniel Carlson is at risk also. He is averaging under 3.5 points in the 7 blowout losses, while averaging 9.7 in the other 27 games. That projects to 125 points for Carlson if they lose 6 games by double digits. That may sound like a lot of big losses, but the defending Super Bowl Champs lost 8 games by double digits last year. Five of those games were before Stafford and Kupp were lost for the season. Gay averaged almost 4 points per game less in the 8 big losses than the other 9 games. We can debate about the Raiders prospects for this year, but things really could go south for them based on holdouts and injuries.

 

[Faust]

NFL Network’s Ian Rapoport reports the Raiders and Josh Jacobs did not come to terms on a long-term deal ahead of the franchise tag deadline.

Jacobs has yet to sign his franchise tag tender, and as Rapoport notes, it’s “unclear when he’ll show to play on the tag,” but playing on the tag is the only option Jacobs is left with at this time. In a market that’s been down for running backs all offseason, not even last year’s rushing champion could secure a long-term deal with his own team. Jacobs will now earn $10.1 million on the franchise tag this season and will have to try to secure a long-term deal next offseason. Much like last season, Jacobs is expected to handle the majority of the touches for the Raiders and is on the RB1 radar in fantasy.

 

[Faust]

Raiders Rumors: Josh Jacobs Not Expected at Training Camp; Could Be Out 'Long Time'

 

[Faust]

Davante Adams on RB Josh Jacobs' importance in Raiders offense: 'We're gonna need that guy' on the field

 

[Harry Frogfish]

So far, the consensus projections for this guy is about a 25% cut to his carries and I'm trying to understand why such a drastic cut unless they are anticipating a holdout and baking that in.

Is it that the change to Garappolo will make opposing defenses instead key in on Jacobs more?

Last year Jacobs averaged 25.5 carries in wins and 17 carries in losses. He averaged 143 rushing yards in wins and 72 in losses. He scored 1.25 TDs in wins and .36 in losses. The Raiders have a harder schedule this year. The divisional teams have improved and they play the AFC East. They might go 2-8 in those 10 games.

Christ that's a good post.

Then again, the Raiders went 6-11 last year. How much worse can you realistically project them at?

I'm not projecting anything, just saying the guy made a good point. What's yours?

 

[eighsse2]

So far, the consensus projections for this guy is about a 25% cut to his carries and I'm trying to understand why such a drastic cut unless they are anticipating a holdout and baking that in.

Is it that the change to Garappolo will make opposing defenses instead key in on Jacobs more?

Last year Jacobs averaged 25.5 carries in wins and 17 carries in losses. He averaged 143 rushing yards in wins and 72 in losses. He scored 1.25 TDs in wins and .36 in losses. The Raiders have a harder schedule this year. The divisional teams have improved and they play the AFC East. They might go 2-8 in those 10 games.

Christ that's a good post.

Then again, the Raiders went 6-11 last year. How much worse can you realistically project them at?

I'm not projecting anything, just saying the guy made a good point. What's yours?

Well my post was more commenting on JoeKapp's post. But the first time I saw his post was in the quote in your post, so I was commenting along with you. Anyway, he seemed to be indicating that Jacobs' fantasy production depended to some extent on the Raiders winning, and that they could be primed for a worse season (indicating a likelihood of Jacobs having a worse season). My point was that the Raiders didn't exactly do a lot of winning last year, so what is their expected record this year, to be particularly down on Jacobs? 4-13? 3-14? Seemed untealistic.

But then he responded that it's not so much about the win-loss record, but about the degree of the losses. Which makes a lot of sense.

So I agree now that it was a very good post.