It's all about the cap. Why put big money into a runningback when you can just keep getting some fresh legs every three or four years?
RB is one of the shortest lived positions and you don't see them get the franchise tag too often.
@jrry32 you list 6 out of 32 teams with the feature back. So 26 teams prefer to just keep churning the barrel.
Of course, because the vast majority of those other 26 teams don't have a guy worth paying big money to.
Why put big money into a HB? Because the good, great, and elite ones are worth it. They're so much more impactful than the "fresh legs" that you have no issue paying them what they want.
It is all about the cap. And with the cap, you have to make tough decisions on who is worth paying and who isn't. You pay a guy like Quinn because talent like his is rare and he changes games. That's the same reason why you pay a guy like Peterson or Lynch or Charles. They're the type of player that can be the difference in 2-4 wins a year...hell, Peterson at his peak was likely the difference in 4-5 wins a year.
I agree, yet here we are and Dallas has allowed Murray to enter FA, McCoy has been traded, Peterson will probably not be in Minnesota this season(asterisk or not), and Lynch hasn't been extended as yet.
10-15 years ago these guys grow old with their respective teams.
Peterson would be growing old with Minnesota if not for the whole child abuse scandal...and Minnesota wants him back. It's Peterson who wants out.
McCoy was traded...but I don't feel like that was a wise move. Keep in mind that the Colts traded Faulk and we traded Bettis. So that's not something that's new either.
Dallas let Murray enter FA because they have limited cap room and chose Dez Bryant who is younger, better, not coming off 400 touch season, and much more durable. That was just priorities. But Murray will get paid in FA.
Seattle is basically begging Lynch to accept more money and come back to them.
