RB Market where Supply >>>>Demand (1 Viewer)

[loose circuits]

Seems to me like this year could be a very odd shake up in RB values across the board. The draft class is one of the deeper classes I can ever remember (by most accounts) and there seems to be many free agent RB's headed to the street. What will the impact be? Will free agents like Ingram, Ridley, Vereen, etc.. be met with a tough market? Free agency has failed for RB's for the most part. This article has some great research & facts in it looking back at past free agent RB's.

Is it best to try to ship off any free agent RB's before they end up headed no where?

Here is a list of free agents sorted by salary cap figure. I assume most if not all RFAs stick with there teams as I can't remember a significant RFA signing ever. We also know there is a chance Adrian and Marshawn (among others) could be cut and headed else where further watering down the market.

Thoughts?

 

[MattFancy]

Definitely a interesting offseason coming up for the RB position. There aren't many elite RBs anymore and if some change teams, they could be even fewer. The rookies coming up look good, but alot depends on where they land.

 

[zamboni]

With the glut of FAs and the rookie draft, I think we're going to see more muddled RB situations with even fewer bellcow backs.

Teams that seemingly have little or no need for RB help may be in a position to draft or sign a quality RB on the cheap, and FAs may have no choice but to go to a committee setting if the market is not that hot for RB services.

In terms of FF, I think it means the fewer and fewer bellcows are going to be even more valuable.

 

[MattFancy]

With the glut of FAs and the rookie draft, I think we're going to see more muddled RB situations with even fewer bellcow backs.

Teams that seemingly have little or no need for RB help may be in a position to draft or sign a quality RB on the cheap, and FAs may have no choice but to go to a committee setting if the market is not that hot for RB services.

In terms of FF, I think it means the fewer and fewer bellcows are going to be even more valuable.

Agreed. I think if you can land one of those top 5 or so RBs next year, you'll be in great shape. There's just so much upheaval at RB right now that it's hard to say what is what right now. We'll definitely have a better idea after the draft/FA. But right now, outside of Bell, Charles, Lacy, McCoy, who would you really feel confident in ushing a high pick on next year? Could throw Murray in there, but who knows where he ends up.

 

[loose circuits]

With the glut of FAs and the rookie draft, I think we're going to see more muddled RB situations with even fewer bellcow backs.

Teams that seemingly have little or no need for RB help may be in a position to draft or sign a quality RB on the cheap, and FAs may have no choice but to go to a committee setting if the market is not that hot for RB services.

In terms of FF, I think it means the fewer and fewer bellcows are going to be even more valuable.

Agreed. I think if you can land one of those top 5 or so RBs next year, you'll be in great shape. There's just so much upheaval at RB right now that it's hard to say what is what right now. We'll definitely have a better idea after the draft/FA. But right now, outside of Bell, Charles, Lacy, McCoy, who would you really feel confident in ushing a high pick on next year? Could throw Murray in there, but who knows where he ends up.

If Lynch stays in Seattle does he belong in that conversation? He performed like it this year

 

[QuizGuy66]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

 

[loose circuits]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

I think we may see a case where the free agents don't find jobs until after the draft or we may end up with a team taking BPA and ending up with 2 very good RBs

 

[QuizGuy66]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

I think we may see a case where the free agents don't find jobs until after the draft or we may end up with a team taking BPA and ending up with 2 very good RBs

Bernard and Sankey were those two picks (Hill was one pick after Sankey) Leveon Bell was a #48 pick. If there's really that many good RBs this year and a glut overall at the position I just think the likelihood is that it'll drop all of their stocks. That everyone will wait.

I guess the practical question is what teams are dying at RB to the point they'd consider taking a guy early.

A quick look at NFL.com 's list of top-3 needs for each team shows the follow teams with RB as a top-3 positional need:

Jax

StL

Min

Bal

possible NE

I'd add maybe the Jets based on the Chris Johnson situation.

Perhaps Dallas if they lose Demarco and think they need to draft a replacement.

I cannot see Jacksonville or St Louis spending that first rounder. Minnesota may be the most viable but again I think they'd sooner invest a 2nd rounder.

And if there are 5 guys that are comparable on some basis? I just don't see more than 1 going in round 1 and that would be late in the round. I think it's more likely that round 2 will be the start of teams drafting RBs.

Don't forget we're all not that far away from the Trent Richardson disaster pick.

-QG

 

[zamboni]

With the glut of FAs and the rookie draft, I think we're going to see more muddled RB situations with even fewer bellcow backs.

Teams that seemingly have little or no need for RB help may be in a position to draft or sign a quality RB on the cheap, and FAs may have no choice but to go to a committee setting if the market is not that hot for RB services.

In terms of FF, I think it means the fewer and fewer bellcows are going to be even more valuable.

Agreed. I think if you can land one of those top 5 or so RBs next year, you'll be in great shape. There's just so much upheaval at RB right now that it's hard to say what is what right now. We'll definitely have a better idea after the draft/FA. But right now, outside of Bell, Charles, Lacy, McCoy, who would you really feel confident in ushing a high pick on next year? Could throw Murray in there, but who knows where he ends up.

Also Forte, but father time is probably going to catch up to him soon.

 

[matttyl]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

Are either of those guys better than Ingram or Spiller or *gasp* Peterson who they can get without using a 1st round pick?

 

[zamboni]

I guess the practical question is what teams are dying at RB to the point they'd consider taking a guy early.

In this day and age, perhaps very few if any. Between late round/undrafted guys emerging at RB and past early-pick disasters like Trent Richardson, it seems like teams are more and more willing to wait at RB. Which will only complicate things if a guy like Gordon or Gurley slip to a team that doesn't have a need at RB but has the luxury to grab him.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I think the dynamic here may not be to sell on the FA RBs, but rather the guys that don't have a strong hold on their jobs but still have value as a starting RB right now. Guys like Ellington, Miller, and Mason. Maybe even Alfred Morris. With so many RBs available what are the odds that a pretty decent one doesn't end up coming into those types of places?

 

[loose circuits]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

Are either of those guys better than Ingram or Spiller or *gasp* Peterson who they can get without using a 1st round pick?

the way the rookie draft is set up, isn't it cheaper (financially) to pick the young guy?

 

[loose circuits]

With the glut of FAs and the rookie draft, I think we're going to see more muddled RB situations with even fewer bellcow backs.

Teams that seemingly have little or no need for RB help may be in a position to draft or sign a quality RB on the cheap, and FAs may have no choice but to go to a committee setting if the market is not that hot for RB services.

In terms of FF, I think it means the fewer and fewer bellcows are going to be even more valuable.

Agreed. I think if you can land one of those top 5 or so RBs next year, you'll be in great shape. There's just so much upheaval at RB right now that it's hard to say what is what right now. We'll definitely have a better idea after the draft/FA. But right now, outside of Bell, Charles, Lacy, McCoy, who would you really feel confident in ushing a high pick on next year? Could throw Murray in there, but who knows where he ends up.

Also Forte, but father time is probably going to catch up to him soon.

...and Foster

 

[MattFancy]

With the glut of FAs and the rookie draft, I think we're going to see more muddled RB situations with even fewer bellcow backs.

Teams that seemingly have little or no need for RB help may be in a position to draft or sign a quality RB on the cheap, and FAs may have no choice but to go to a committee setting if the market is not that hot for RB services.

In terms of FF, I think it means the fewer and fewer bellcows are going to be even more valuable.

Agreed. I think if you can land one of those top 5 or so RBs next year, you'll be in great shape. There's just so much upheaval at RB right now that it's hard to say what is what right now. We'll definitely have a better idea after the draft/FA. But right now, outside of Bell, Charles, Lacy, McCoy, who would you really feel confident in ushing a high pick on next year? Could throw Murray in there, but who knows where he ends up.

If Lynch stays in Seattle does he belong in that conversation? He performed like it this year

Definitely. But, we don't know for sure if he'll be back or not. If he is, he's top 10 for sure. If not, depends where he lands.

With the glut of FAs and the rookie draft, I think we're going to see more muddled RB situations with even fewer bellcow backs.

Teams that seemingly have little or no need for RB help may be in a position to draft or sign a quality RB on the cheap, and FAs may have no choice but to go to a committee setting if the market is not that hot for RB services.

In terms of FF, I think it means the fewer and fewer bellcows are going to be even more valuable.

Agreed. I think if you can land one of those top 5 or so RBs next year, you'll be in great shape. There's just so much upheaval at RB right now that it's hard to say what is what right now. We'll definitely have a better idea after the draft/FA. But right now, outside of Bell, Charles, Lacy, McCoy, who would you really feel confident in ushing a high pick on next year? Could throw Murray in there, but who knows where he ends up.

Also Forte, but father time is probably going to catch up to him soon.

Yup. He's pushing 30 and will in a new offense next season. He could still have a solid year, but again, there's questions there.

 

[MattFancy]

With the glut of FAs and the rookie draft, I think we're going to see more muddled RB situations with even fewer bellcow backs.

Teams that seemingly have little or no need for RB help may be in a position to draft or sign a quality RB on the cheap, and FAs may have no choice but to go to a committee setting if the market is not that hot for RB services.

In terms of FF, I think it means the fewer and fewer bellcows are going to be even more valuable.

Agreed. I think if you can land one of those top 5 or so RBs next year, you'll be in great shape. There's just so much upheaval at RB right now that it's hard to say what is what right now. We'll definitely have a better idea after the draft/FA. But right now, outside of Bell, Charles, Lacy, McCoy, who would you really feel confident in ushing a high pick on next year? Could throw Murray in there, but who knows where he ends up.

Also Forte, but father time is probably going to catch up to him soon.

...and Foster

Foster for sure. He's always banged up. Even though he missed games this year, he still produced when he played. You just don't know how many games he can give you.

 

[QuizGuy66]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

Are either of those guys better than Ingram or Spiller or *gasp* Peterson who they can get without using a 1st round pick?

the way the rookie draft is set up, isn't it cheaper (financially) to pick the young guy?

It can be - but it's not like FA RBs are getting big $ long term contracts.

-QG

 

[MattFancy]

Here's the top 15 RBs from one of my PPR leagues this season.

Bell - should be #1 RB again next year or close to it

Murray - if back in Dallas, could repeat. where he lands is paramount to his value in 2015

Forte - wiill be 30 towards the end of next season and will have a new offense

Lynch - turns 29 in April. Will he be back with Seattle?

Foster - turns 29 next season. Hasn't played a full 16 games since 2012.

Lacy - should be in the top 5 next year

Charles - turns 29 in December. Should be top 10 next season

Forsett - was 2014 a fluke? have to think Ravens address RB in offseason

Miller - finally looks to be the lead guy there. should be top 10 again.

Anderson - what does Denver do next season if Manning doesn't come back? New coach now too. Plus Ball and Hillman.

Hill - what happens with Gio?

McCoy - think 2014 was a fluke and he'll return to top 5-10.

JBell - most underrated RB. Bush probably gone next year, but they could also add a RB in offseason.

Asiata - all his stats seemed to come from a few games. McKinnon back next season and who knows with Peterson

Ingram - where does he land next season? a good situation could put him in top 10 for sure

So out of those guys, just a few seem to be cemeted in their top 10 status next year.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

Are either of those guys better than Ingram or Spiller or *gasp* Peterson who they can get without using a 1st round pick?

the way the rookie draft is set up, isn't it cheaper (financially) to pick the young guy?

But if the supply is so much greater than the demand for RBs the price of those FA RBs come down to the point where they become a bargain. Let's also not forget "opportunity cost" - if a team drafts a RB in the first round, they can not draft an OT or a CB or a WR, etc. with that pick, all of whom they'd also get at a discounted price.

 

[cstu]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

Are either of those guys better than Ingram or Spiller or *gasp* Peterson who they can get without using a 1st round pick?

the way the rookie draft is set up, isn't it cheaper (financially) to pick the young guy?

Cheaper, yes, but there's no guarantee they will play well and it's a pick they can use on another position.

With the glut of free agent RB's I think will cause RB's to slide even further in the draft than they have already. There should be at least 5 RB's taken in the first 2 rounds but guys who are potential 2nd round picks will end up in the 3rd or maybe 4th.

 

[cstu]

Miller - finally looks to be the lead guy there. should be top 10 again.

Maybe not a high one, but the Dolphins will draft a RB. They also have to be looking ahead to 2016 when Miller is an UFA.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I also don't necessarily believe the supply is so much greater than the demand necessarily. Let's not forget that all of these FA RBs are leaving a hole at the position on the team they are leaving.

 

[zamboni]

I also don't necessarily believe the supply is so much greater than the demand necessarily. Let's not forget that all of these FA RBs are leaving a hole at the position on the team they are leaving.

Outside of Murray, I think New Orleans (Ingram) and Buffalo (Spiller) already have guys on hand that can fill the gap, or teams will just address in the middle rounds.

We're going to be on pins and needles all through the draft since some seemingly clear-cut RBs are going to see their values dissipate in rapid fashion.

 

[ex-ghost]

Forsett is a good example of a cheap Rb that worked out. Serviceable backs can work in a good system.

 

[matttyl]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

Are either of those guys better than Ingram or Spiller or *gasp* Peterson who they can get without using a 1st round pick?

the way the rookie draft is set up, isn't it cheaper (financially) to pick the young guy?

But if the supply is so much greater than the demand for RBs the price of those FA RBs come down to the point where they become a bargain. Let's also not forget "opportunity cost" - if a team drafts a RB in the first round, they can not draft an OT or a CB or a WR, etc. with that pick, all of whom they'd also get at a discounted price.

Exactly what I meant. Get the young player at another position (and one that may be easier to transition into the NFL) and get a FA veteran RB. Lets say Indy or Dallas for instance is in the RB market, do they let some rookie pass protect for their franchise QB, or do they get someone who's proven to be able to pass protect in the NFL already?

 

[matttyl]

I also don't necessarily believe the supply is so much greater than the demand necessarily. Let's not forget that all of these FA RBs are leaving a hole at the position on the team they are leaving.

Not sure Spiller or Ingram are doing this.

 

[QuizGuy66]

I also don't necessarily believe the supply is so much greater than the demand necessarily. Let's not forget that all of these FA RBs are leaving a hole at the position on the team they are leaving.

Not sure Spiller or Ingram are doing this.

In many cases the guy is getting supplanted by a cheaper late round/FA back (See Herron, Boom)

-QG

 

[Chaka]

A quick look at NFL.com 's list of top-3 needs for each team shows the follow teams with RB as a top-3 positional need:

Jax

StL

Min

Bal

possible NE

I'd add maybe the Jets based on the Chris Johnson situation.

Perhaps Dallas if they lose Demarco and think they need to draft a replacement.

I am not sure I agree with NFL.com's list at all.

Robinson, Mason & McKinnon are all young exciting players and Forsett fits Kubs offense in Baltimore as well as any back not named Arian Foster.

IMO Arizona, Atlanta, Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, Houston, Indy, New Orleans, NYJ, Oakland, San Diego, Seattle, Tampa Bay & Tennessee are all teams that either currently need help at the position or may need help depending on what happens in FA.

 

[QuizGuy66]

A quick look at NFL.com 's list of top-3 needs for each team shows the follow teams with RB as a top-3 positional need:

Jax

StL

Min

Bal

possible NE

I'd add maybe the Jets based on the Chris Johnson situation.

Perhaps Dallas if they lose Demarco and think they need to draft a replacement.

I am not sure I agree with NFL.com's list at all.

Robinson, Mason & McKinnon are all young exciting players and Forsett fits Kubs offense in Baltimore as well as any back not named Arian Foster.

IMO Arizona, Atlanta, Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, Houston, Indy, New Orleans, NYJ, Oakland, San Diego, Seattle, Tampa Bay & Tennessee are all teams that either currently need help at the position or may need help depending on what happens in FA.

That list seems a bit long.

FWIW Walter Football had 2 RBs in the first round mock and 3 RBs in the second.

But that's not worth a ton I realize.

I just think it's a down position for drafting - they slide - guys are found. It's like the opposite of QB.

-QG

 

[msudaisy26]

A quick look at NFL.com 's list of top-3 needs for each team shows the follow teams with RB as a top-3 positional need:

Jax

StL

Min

Bal

possible NE

I'd add maybe the Jets based on the Chris Johnson situation.

Perhaps Dallas if they lose Demarco and think they need to draft a replacement.

I am not sure I agree with NFL.com's list at all.Robinson, Mason & McKinnon are all young exciting players and Forsett fits Kubs offense in Baltimore as well as any back not named Arian Foster.

IMO Arizona, Atlanta, Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, Houston, Indy, New Orleans, NYJ, Oakland, San Diego, Seattle, Tampa Bay & Tennessee are all teams that either currently need help at the position or may need help depending on what happens in FA.

This list needs clarification. Are we taking they need 3rd stringers that play special teams? A lead back? A 3rd down back? High draft pick? Low pick? Free agent?

 

[loose circuits]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

Are either of those guys better than Ingram or Spiller or *gasp* Peterson who they can get without using a 1st round pick?

the way the rookie draft is set up, isn't it cheaper (financially) to pick the young guy?

Cheaper, yes, but there's no guarantee they will play well and it's a pick they can use on another position.

With the glut of free agent RB's I think will cause RB's to slide even further in the draft than they have already. There should be at least 5 RB's taken in the first 2 rounds but guys who are potential 2nd round picks will end up in the 3rd or maybe 4th.

did you click on the link I provided in the original post that showed signing a free agent Rb has a significant failure rate?

 

[ratbast]

Last year I handcuffed Gio with Hill and it payed off big time! I think the concept of owning an NFL team's running game is something to be considered a a positive strategy. I have always done it but it might be even more important now. And you should be able to do it on the cheap with many teams. Yes you have to take up roster slots but my leagues tend to hoard rbs anyway.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

1st RB off board at pick 37 in 2013.

1st RB off board at pick 54 in 2014.

If there's a glut at the position and with all of the FA guys available it wouldn't be surprising to see this happen again.

-QG

Gordon and Gurley seem better than the rest though, right? Either deserve 1st round based off my eyes. Not T-Rich top 5 type of pick, but if Murray bolts why wouldn't Dallas for instance take a chance on one of those guys?

Are either of those guys better than Ingram or Spiller or *gasp* Peterson who they can get without using a 1st round pick?

the way the rookie draft is set up, isn't it cheaper (financially) to pick the young guy?

Cheaper, yes, but there's no guarantee they will play well and it's a pick they can use on another position.

With the glut of free agent RB's I think will cause RB's to slide even further in the draft than they have already. There should be at least 5 RB's taken in the first 2 rounds but guys who are potential 2nd round picks will end up in the 3rd or maybe 4th.

did you click on the link I provided in the original post that showed signing a free agent Rb has a significant failure rate?

I'm sure an article discussing highly drafted rookie RBs would show similar results. The article also glosses over the successful signings in favor of the "busts". For example it shows Detroit signing Reggie Bush as a "bust" (although he did have a good season in 2013) but fails to acknowledge that Miami signing him before that was a major success.

I'm not advocating signing a free agent RB to big money, I don't think it's a great strategy - I just don't think either way is cut and dried, and it comes down to the players either way as to what makes sense.

Signing Shonn Greene was idiotic, signing Mark Ingram may not be.

 

[Chaka]

A quick look at NFL.com 's list of top-3 needs for each team shows the follow teams with RB as a top-3 positional need:

Jax

StL

Min

Bal

possible NE

I'd add maybe the Jets based on the Chris Johnson situation.

Perhaps Dallas if they lose Demarco and think they need to draft a replacement.

I am not sure I agree with NFL.com's list at all.Robinson, Mason & McKinnon are all young exciting players and Forsett fits Kubs offense in Baltimore as well as any back not named Arian Foster.

IMO Arizona, Atlanta, Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, Houston, Indy, New Orleans, NYJ, Oakland, San Diego, Seattle, Tampa Bay & Tennessee are all teams that either currently need help at the position or may need help depending on what happens in FA.

This list needs clarification. Are we taking they need 3rd stringers that play special teams? A lead back? A 3rd down back? High draft pick? Low pick? Free agent?

I am not saying all those teams will definitely target a new lead RB but they all have potential question marks at the position.

Arizona - They definitely need a workhorse, the Ellington experiment failed and everything else looked like smoke and mirrors.

Atlanta - They may be okay but SJax is pretty much at the end, Freeman didn't flash as a rookie and Smith was a big play guy who got injured. A lot depends on the new coaching staff and the talent seems to be there to turn things around in a hurry.

Buffalo - A lot is up in the air for this team with a new coaching staff FA CJ Spiller and FJax another year older. Dixon and BB (who I know many people around here love) may be the answer but they also look like they could be JAGs

Carolina - They may not add a RB but JStew, despite his nice end of season run, cannot be relied upon for 16 and neither can DeAngelo who looks to be on his last legs.

Chicago - Love Forte but he is a year older, lost Trestman and there is zero depth behind him.

Dallas - Depends on whether or not the keep Murray, even if they do I would think they would want an upgrade behind him.

Detroit - Maybe, maybe not. Joique may be the answer but he was only okay, Reggie had trouble staying healthy (again), Theo does not look like a lead guy and Caldwell didn't draft any of them.

Houston - Maybe Blue figures it out but as of today they need something much better behind Foster

Indy - Richardson is done and Bradshaw is great but cannot be relied upon for 16. The question is has Herron shown enough to go into next season as the lead guy? Possibly.

New Orleans - Presumably Ingram is leaving as a FA and Payton favored him over Khiry. I can't see a situation where Payton doesn't bring in another RB after losing Ingram. Regardless of what they do, for fantasy purposes who cares?

NYJ - Lots of upheaval here. It is hard to say how good CJ and Ivory (who I like more than CJ) really are at this point but this team has a dearth of big play talent on offense and needs to do something about it. WR seems more important but if a big time RB is available in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th round then I could easily see them making the move.

Oakland - I love what Murray flashed but MJD and DMac look to have no gas left. It's the Raiders so maybe they keep all three but if they dump DMac and MJD then they absolutely need another back who can carry a significant load.

San Diego - I live in SD and all the talk radio around here (plenty of whom have inside sources in Chargers park) seems to agree that Matthews is done here because he cannot be relied upon for 16. Donald Brown is JAG and Brandon Oliver fell back to earth quick, fast and in a hurry.

Seattle - Even if they lose Lynch they will probably not prioritize the RB position with Michael and Turbin already on the roster. But Pete Carrol will draft BPA and if it's a RB then that's what he'll do.

Tampa Bay - Hard to judge on such a bad team but Martin, Rainey, Sims & James all either looked mediocre (at best) or couldn't hold onto the ball to save their jobs. But as a group they are young and Koetter may feel he can turn one or two of them into legitimate RBs (or at least solid enough stop gaps) so they may not be looking.

Tennessee - Sankey didn't impress (but he could easily turn it around) and Shonne Green is JAG who seems to have trouble staying healthy. That is too little punch in today's NFL.

 

[zamboni]

NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reports the Cowboys have had a four-year deal worth "more than" $16 million on the table for impending free agent DeMarco Murray.

If this Rotoworld report is true, this could have big implications for the RB landscape in terms of teams signing proven guys or drafting top tier rookies on the cheap.

 

[MattFancy]

NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reports the Cowboys have had a four-year deal worth "more than" $16 million on the table for impending free agent DeMarco Murray.

If this Rotoworld report is true, this could have big implications for the RB landscape in terms of teams signing proven guys or drafting top tier rookies on the cheap.

That seems like a pretty cheap deal for Murray. Not sure he would see much better, but seems like a better deal for Dallas than Murray. Gerhart was able to get 3/10.5 last year from te Jags. I'd say Murray is WAY better.

 

[zamboni]

NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reports the Cowboys have had a four-year deal worth "more than" $16 million on the table for impending free agent DeMarco Murray.

If this Rotoworld report is true, this could have big implications for the RB landscape in terms of teams signing proven guys or drafting top tier rookies on the cheap.

That seems like a pretty cheap deal for Murray. Not sure he would see much better, but seems like a better deal for Dallas than Murray. Gerhart was able to get 3/10.5 last year from te Jags. I'd say Murray is WAY better.

Murray is undoubtedly way better, but teams are probably looking at contracts like the ones given to Gerhart, Donald Brown, etc. and deciding that it's not worth it to overpay for an RB when you can find good ones in later rounds or even on practice squads.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reports the Cowboys have had a four-year deal worth "more than" $16 million on the table for impending free agent DeMarco Murray.

If this Rotoworld report is true, this could have big implications for the RB landscape in terms of teams signing proven guys or drafting top tier rookies on the cheap.

That seems like a pretty cheap deal for Murray. Not sure he would see much better, but seems like a better deal for Dallas than Murray. Gerhart was able to get 3/10.5 last year from te Jags. I'd say Murray is WAY better.

Murray is undoubtedly way better, but teams are probably looking at contracts like the ones given to Gerhart, Donald Brown, etc. and deciding that it's not worth it to overpay for an RB when you can find good ones in later rounds or even on practice squads.

Dallas also has serious cap restraints. Their offer may have been much better if they had the means - but agree with the overall premises of your post and this thread that it could be a soft market.

 

[humpback]

NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reports the Cowboys have had a four-year deal worth "more than" $16 million on the table for impending free agent DeMarco Murray.

If this Rotoworld report is true, this could have big implications for the RB landscape in terms of teams signing proven guys or drafting top tier rookies on the cheap.

That seems like a pretty cheap deal for Murray. Not sure he would see much better, but seems like a better deal for Dallas than Murray. Gerhart was able to get 3/10.5 last year from te Jags. I'd say Murray is WAY better.

Murray is undoubtedly way better, but teams are probably looking at contracts like the ones given to Gerhart, Donald Brown, etc. and deciding that it's not worth it to overpay for an RB when you can find good ones in later rounds or even on practice squads.

Dallas also has serious cap restraints. Their offer may have been much better if they had the means - but agree with the overall premises of your post and this thread that it could be a soft market.

It's definitely a soft market for RBs due to the increasingly plug-and-play nature, but this particular offer is much more due to their cap issues IMO. I'd guess he's going to sign for closer to twice that amount.

 

[Cjw_55106]

Personally I dont see any team paying a RB 8M a year anymore. The game has changed so much in the past decade. RBs value isnt what it once was. The Vikings rushed for under 20 yards a game more with AP than without. Is 18 yards a game worth millions of dollars? I think most teams say no.

 

[humpback]

Personally I dont see any team paying a RB 8M a year anymore. The game has changed so much in the past decade. RBs value isnt what it once was. The Vikings rushed for under 20 yards a game more with AP than without. Is 18 yards a game worth millions of dollars? I think most teams say no.

Even if you could isolate how much "production" was due to any one player, you'd have to look beyond yards per game to really analyze it- was he responsible for more TDs? Most importantly, more wins? Other things like PR, marketability, etc., come into play as well.

In today's NFL, the reality is that there just isn't a huge gap between most RBs in these measures, so it doesn't make sense to overpay for them. Guys the OP talked about like Ingram, Vereen, and Ridley are closer to JAGs than they are true difference makers. I do think someone like Murray will stand out and get a pretty nice contract.

 

[msudaisy26]

NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reports the Cowboys have had a four-year deal worth "more than" $16 million on the table for impending free agent DeMarco Murray.

If this Rotoworld report is true, this could have big implications for the RB landscape in terms of teams signing proven guys or drafting top tier rookies on the cheap.

Wow is that cheap. I could see Atlanta or another team offering him 4 years at 26 million or so.

 

[msudaisy26]

A quick look at NFL.com 's list of top-3 needs for each team shows the follow teams with RB as a top-3 positional need:

Jax

StL

Min

Bal

possible NE

I'd add maybe the Jets based on the Chris Johnson situation.

Perhaps Dallas if they lose Demarco and think they need to draft a replacement.

I am not sure I agree with NFL.com's list at all.Robinson, Mason & McKinnon are all young exciting players and Forsett fits Kubs offense in Baltimore as well as any back not named Arian Foster.

IMO Arizona, Atlanta, Buffalo, Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, Houston, Indy, New Orleans, NYJ, Oakland, San Diego, Seattle, Tampa Bay & Tennessee are all teams that either currently need help at the position or may need help depending on what happens in FA.

This list needs clarification. Are we taking they need 3rd stringers that play special teams? A lead back? A 3rd down back? High draft pick? Low pick? Free agent?

I am not saying all those teams will definitely target a new lead RB but they all have potential question marks at the position.

Arizona - They definitely need a workhorse, the Ellington experiment failed and everything else looked like smoke and mirrors.

Atlanta - They may be okay but SJax is pretty much at the end, Freeman didn't flash as a rookie and Smith was a big play guy who got injured. A lot depends on the new coaching staff and the talent seems to be there to turn things around in a hurry.

Buffalo - A lot is up in the air for this team with a new coaching staff FA CJ Spiller and FJax another year older. Dixon and BB (who I know many people around here love) may be the answer but they also look like they could be JAGs

Carolina - They may not add a RB but JStew, despite his nice end of season run, cannot be relied upon for 16 and neither can DeAngelo who looks to be on his last legs.

Chicago - Love Forte but he is a year older, lost Trestman and there is zero depth behind him.

Dallas - Depends on whether or not the keep Murray, even if they do I would think they would want an upgrade behind him.

Detroit - Maybe, maybe not. Joique may be the answer but he was only okay, Reggie had trouble staying healthy (again), Theo does not look like a lead guy and Caldwell didn't draft any of them.

Houston - Maybe Blue figures it out but as of today they need something much better behind Foster

Indy - Richardson is done and Bradshaw is great but cannot be relied upon for 16. The question is has Herron shown enough to go into next season as the lead guy? Possibly.

New Orleans - Presumably Ingram is leaving as a FA and Payton favored him over Khiry. I can't see a situation where Payton doesn't bring in another RB after losing Ingram. Regardless of what they do, for fantasy purposes who cares?

NYJ - Lots of upheaval here. It is hard to say how good CJ and Ivory (who I like more than CJ) really are at this point but this team has a dearth of big play talent on offense and needs to do something about it. WR seems more important but if a big time RB is available in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th round then I could easily see them making the move.

Oakland - I love what Murray flashed but MJD and DMac look to have no gas left. It's the Raiders so maybe they keep all three but if they dump DMac and MJD then they absolutely need another back who can carry a significant load.

San Diego - I live in SD and all the talk radio around here (plenty of whom have inside sources in Chargers park) seems to agree that Matthews is done here because he cannot be relied upon for 16. Donald Brown is JAG and Brandon Oliver fell back to earth quick, fast and in a hurry.

Seattle - Even if they lose Lynch they will probably not prioritize the RB position with Michael and Turbin already on the roster. But Pete Carrol will draft BPA and if it's a RB then that's what he'll do.

Tampa Bay - Hard to judge on such a bad team but Martin, Rainey, Sims & James all either looked mediocre (at best) or couldn't hold onto the ball to save their jobs. But as a group they are young and Koetter may feel he can turn one or two of them into legitimate RBs (or at least solid enough stop gaps) so they may not be looking.

Tennessee - Sankey didn't impress (but he could easily turn it around) and Shonne Green is JAG who seems to have trouble staying healthy. That is too little punch in today's NFL.

Arizona - Agree I think a power back like Ingram or a two down back would fit perfectly Ellington

Atlanta - Jackson is done, I don't know if Smith or Freeman is the answer, but they need to bring in a guy to compete with them.

Buffalo - Should take a wait and see approach.

Chicago - I like the rookie behind Forte, I think they need to have a wait and see approach too.

Dallas - Agree with this

Detroit - I think they are good at running back even if they cut Bush. Bell can be the guy, Riddick is a perfect clone of what Bush was this year, and Wynn filled in nicely in the game that Bell missed.

Houston - I think they are fine for next year, draft a guy if he slips to them in the 4th round or later, but no need to go get a free agent.

Indy - Agree here, I think Herron has a role, but I am not sure what it is. They need to bring in a free agent or a high pick.

New Orleans - they will do what they always do, let Ingram walk and they will sign an undrafted guy or late round back and role with Robinson, Thomas and Cadet next year.

Jets - I think Johnson is gone and they draft someone high or bring in a big name free agent. Ingram, Spiller, Murray or something.

Oakland - I am not going to pretend like I know what they will do, but they at least need competition with Murray.

San Diego - I will defer to you, but I think they should draft a guy and roll with Oliver, Woodhead, and Brown and whoever they draft.

Seattle - Agree here, I don't think they have a need.

Tampa - Wait and see, if they take a quarterback in the first I would roll with these guys and hope something sticks.

Tennessee - They need another guy. I like giving Sankey another year, I don't mind McCluster for what he is.

 

[cstu]

Chicago - Love Forte but he is a year older, lost Trestman and there is zero depth behind him.

Writing off Carey already?

 

[Chaka]

Chicago - Love Forte but he is a year older, lost Trestman and there is zero depth behind him.

Writing off Carey already?

Not entirely as Trestman has a history of riding one back so maybe Carey that's why he saw so little action this season. Perhaps he can be the guy in the future but we didn't see enough to have confidence that he is anything special. Either way when Forte is done in Chicago they will need to bring in another back who can carry the load if need be, one back is not enough.

 

[fantasy stud]

Read a blurb about spiller being excited about the idea of reuniting with Chan Gailey in New York. I think we would be looking at an instant bump in his dynasty value.