Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Marlon Mack Contract Situation: Stats, Poll, & Discussion


Marlon Mack Contract Situation: Stats, Poll, & Discussion  

79 members have voted

  1. 1. In general, what are your thoughts about Mack's contract situation

    • We should extend early
    • We don't need to extend now, re-sign after the season
    • Don't extend/re-sign. Replace via draft or FA.
    • I'm indifferent on the situation, things will work themselves out
  2. 2. Assuming we extend/re-sign, how long?

    • Additional 2 years (through 2022)
    • Additional 3 years (through 2023)
    • Additional 4 years (through 2024)
  3. 3. Mack's new salary (average per year) should be?

    • Top 5 (at least $8.3M)
    • 6th - 10th range ($5.0-8.0M)
    • 11th-15th range ($4.0-4.9M)
    • 16-20th range (M3.0-3.9M)

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 02/19/2020 at 05:00 AM

Recommended Posts

There's always been differing opinions on Mack. Last year some wanted to outright replace him lol, and this year, some are saying he should get a big fat extension. I've laid out the stats and contract facts below. Please read, give your vote (poll), and tell us what you're thinking.

 

League Rank

Year / Gms / Atps / Yrds / YPG / YPA / TDs / 1stDwns / Fum / YRCV / Salary

2018     12    15th   16th    6th    19th   7th       6th            2        103

2019     14     9th    11th    9th    23rd   9th       5th            0         82        85th

 

Note: Mack will make around $2.1 in 2020, good for 26th highest paid RB

 

Current RB Salary Ranges

1-5:       $8.3-15M

6-10:     $5.0-7.8M

11-15:   $4.0-5.0M

16-20:   $3.0-3.6M

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't think we NEED to extend now, but I'm happy to extend if we get a team friendly deal.   I'd say something in the high 4s to low 5s. If he's asking for top 5, I'd let him walk as I thi

No thanks... That's top 5 pay. I love Mack, but he's not top 5. He's not top 10 either without our top 5 OL.

The more I think it through, the more I'm in favor of letting him walk after 2020. I was never against that, it's probably always been my preference. But when reports surfaced that they were talking a

I don't think we NEED to extend now, but I'm happy to extend if we get a team friendly deal.

 

I'd say something in the high 4s to low 5s. If he's asking for top 5, I'd let him walk as I think he's benefiting a lot from running behind our OL. Love him, but RBs are injury prone, and thus devalued. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I let it play out and dont extend him.  A lot of free agent running backs.  He is often injured and is not a 3 down back

He didn't have a RB injury this year. The broken hand isn't something you worry about with RBs. Aside from that, he was a workhorse attempt wise and very reliable.

 

As far as not being a 3rd down back, while I agree he's not the definition of a power back, he's been top 10 in 1st downs. Only Henry, Elliot, and Carson, had more, and all 3 played at least one more game. There are very few RBs that check all the boxes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

He didn't have a RB injury this year. The broken hand isn't something you worry about with RBs. Aside from that, he was a workhorse attempt wise and very reliable.

 

As far as not being a 3rd down back, while I agree he's not the definition of a power back, he's been top 10 in 1st downs. Only Henry, Elliot, and Carson, had more, and all 3 played at least one more game. There are very few RBs that check all the boxes.

I agree there r a few who check all the boxes. That is why i dont mind a running back by committee apparoach.  If Mack wants to much, take another this year or sign a free agent. An Indy talk show  said they would b fine with 10 mill a year.  I fell off my chair

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I think it was Kevin Bowen’s podcast where he thinks he will get between 8 and 10 million a year.

No thanks... That's top 5 pay. I love Mack, but he's not top 5. He's not top 10 either without our top 5 OL.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I agree there r a few who check all the boxes. That is why i dont mind a running back by committee apparoach.  If Mack wants to much, take another this year or sign a free agent. An Indy talk show  said they would b fine with 10 mill a year.  I fell off my chair

RB is a position I never want to pay top 5. Just inside the top 10 is fine, but not much more. I thought you were coming at it from an angle of replacing him with a big name. 

 

IMO, a lot of RBs out there can do very well behind our OL. Williams stepped into the starter's shoes for a few games and we didn't skip a beat. I'm not worried about Mack's health, I'm simply just not into paying top dollar on a RB in general. That said, I want to keep Mack, but it's got to reasonable and relative to his production (with is right around 10ish).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I think it was Kevin Bowen’s podcast where he thinks he will get between 8 and 10 million a year.

 

 


I don’t think Ballard will go that high.

 

Doubt he goes above $8.   Going higher would seem un-Ballard to me... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was torn on salary, somewhere between the upper 4's and lower 5's would be correct imo. I picked 11-15 ($4-4.9 mil) because I agree he benefits a LOT from the amazing O-line, but could am very comfortable with 6-10 ($5-8 mil) as long as it's at the lower end of that range.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dogg63 said:

I was torn on salary, somewhere between the upper 4's and lower 5's would be correct imo. I picked 11-15 ($4-4.9 mil) because I agree he benefits a LOT from the amazing O-line, but could am very comfortable with 6-10 ($5-8 mil) as long as it's at the lower end of that range.

That's where I'm at. Anything over 6M and I'd be surprised.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Mack was a pass catcher, he could command the top 5 salaries, but he isn’t involved in the passing game. Can he, idk? 
 

id be fine with offering him a 4 yr 30 million dollar contract. 12 guaranteed. I really like Mack for this offense. I loved Edge for the offense he played in.  Hines can’t replace what Mack provides. Wilkins can’t replace what Mack does. Williams can’t replace what Mack does. That means we have to draft a guy to replace Mack for 2021 if we don’t work out a reasonable deal. I’d be plenty happy to give him 6 million/yr with plenty of escalators that improve the team while making him money for reaching goals. I’m not a fan of 8-10 yr though. I’d definitely go draft route if he felt he needed 1-5 money yet he doesn’t play into the passing game. He runs well and does pass protect well enough but he doesn’t catch balls. That he has to either say throw it to me more so I can show you or accept the fact he isn’t a catcher. I’m not sure he can’t catch and just isn’t involved enough. Idk.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

If Mack was a pass catcher, he could command the top 5 salaries, but he isn’t involved in the passing game. Can he, idk? 
 

id be fine with offering him a 4 yr 30 million dollar contract. 12 guaranteed. I really like Mack for this offense. I loved Edge for the offense he played in.  Hines can’t replace what Mack provides. Wilkins can’t replace what Mack does. Williams can’t replace what Mack does. That means we have to draft a guy to replace Mack for 2021 if we don’t work out a reasonable deal. I’d be plenty happy to give him 6 million/yr with plenty of escalators that improve the team while making him money for reaching goals. I’m not a fan of 8-10 yr though. I’d definitely go draft route if he felt he needed 1-5 money yet he doesn’t play into the passing game. He runs well and does pass protect well enough but he doesn’t catch balls. That he has to either say throw it to me more so I can show you or accept the fact he isn’t a catcher. I’m not sure he can’t catch and just isn’t involved enough. Idk.  

Williams put up two 100+ yard games in a row while Mack was out. And Mack only had two 100+ yard games all year. Not saying Williams is as good or better than Mack, but he performed great in two games where we had very little passing yards and the Ds were keying on the run. In short, I don't think we can say that Williams can't. I agree on Wilkins, he's dances to much and doesn't do well in a man/power scheme. I also agree that Hines can't, but that's not really his bread and butter. 6/year is about as high as I want to go.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I said we should resign him at the of next season and for 3 years at most, we will probably have to pay between 5-8 Mil, as long as its on the lower end I'm okay.

 

But How I really feel when it comes to RBs, its better to pay the OL and occasionally draft a RB when needed instead of paying big on a RB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought Denver did a great job of making backs look MUCH better than they were. Made 6th rounders look like superstars and then traded most of them while they were so highly regarded. It was a RB-producing machine over there for years ('95-'05). I never thought it was the backs that were so amazing, but the system. Colts should consider doing the same to trade average backs for other skill position guys. 

 

Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Clinton Portis, Reuben Droughns, Tatum Bell - each ran for over a thousand yards per season.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Williams put up two 100+ yard games in a row while Mack was out. And Mack only had two 100+ yard games all year. Not saying Williams is as good or better than Mack, but he performed great in two games where we had very little passing yards and the Ds were keying on the run. In short, I don't think we can say that Williams can't. I agree on Wilkins, he's dances to much and doesn't do well in a man/power scheme. I also agree that Hines can't, but that's not really his bread and butter. 6/year is about as high as I want to go.

I should have clarified my post better. My point to none of them were as good as Mack currently was meant to be in total. Loved what I seen from Williams with those 2 big games, however he lacked the blocking aspect that Mack shows. Hines, while he is the pass catching king rb on the team, he isn’t able to get rushing yards as well and I’m not sure he is ever asked to pass block any so Mack beats him here. Wilkins is just flat out an enigma. Wilkins seems to get 6-7 yards each time he touches the ball yet is used sparingly. Not certain about his pass blocking either and he doesn’t get asked to pass catch either, just a runner but when asked, gets those burst yards in chunks and then out of the line up for awhile. His contributions are just odd to me. Has he ever seen 20-25 touches in any game we’ve had with him while Mack was hurt? 
 

so while all 4 guys excel in some form of their game, only Mack seems the most rounded of the group yet he still isn’t the complete back you pay 8+ for. If Mack adds pass catching to his game, he could probably ask 8 mil. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for no extension at this time.  Stats be dammed, if a non-power back is an unreliable receiver, then he is a backup back.  Mack is a very good runner, and is a good blocker in the passing game, but that is simply not enough to be a three down RB, IMO.  

 

I say give him this season to show us what he can do catching the ball, actually feed it to him often and let him sink or swim with it.  Then we'd have a better idea of his true value, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

I should have clarified my post better. My point to none of them were as good as Mack currently was meant to be in total. Loved what I seen from Williams with those 2 big games, however he lacked the blocking aspect that Mack shows.

I thought Williams was a good blocker. I don't recall any big flubs at all to be honest. VS Houston he did great. Vs Jax, the only missed assignment I recall was Mack whiffing on a block. Williams has also looked good catching the ball. Caught every target and turned one into a 20+ yard play. Not saying he'll be better than Mack, but I don't see a lot of holes in his game. He did nicely at Arkansas in a RB by committee approach and doesn't have the much wear on the tread. He's come back nicely from 2014 foot surgery. I think he's far more well rounded than Wilkins. And IMO, he plays with more power than Mack.

46 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

Hines, while he is the pass catching king rb on the team, he isn’t able to get rushing yards as well and I’m not sure he is ever asked to pass block any so Mack beats him here.

Hines really shouldn't be compared to Mack or the other two IMO. He's a pure APB, not a 3 down back. Best when situational. I saw an interview with Reich/Ballard where they said they looked at him as an every down back, but I'm not buying it. Regardless, he shouldn't be in the conversation anyway.

46 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

Wilkins is just flat out an enigma. Wilkins seems to get 6-7 yards each time he touches the ball yet is used sparingly. Not certain about his pass blocking either and he doesn’t get asked to pass catch either, just a runner but when asked, gets those burst yards in chunks and then out of the line up for awhile. His contributions are just odd to me. Has he ever seen 20-25 touches in any game we’ve had with him while Mack was hurt? 

Wilkins has some great slasher type ability, but he's not a tough runner, and is horrible blocking. Decent hands though. He doesn't do well in power/man blocking scheme calls, and is at his best in zone. I think the fact that Reich likes to mix it up with both schemes is what has limited his snaps. His yards after contact is pretty poor.

46 minutes ago, Jdubu said:

so while all 4 guys excel in some form of their game, only Mack seems the most rounded of the group yet he still isn’t the complete back you pay 8+ for. If Mack adds pass catching to his game, he could probably ask 8 mil. 

I think Williams is pretty close to "well rounded". Agree on Wilkins. Hines just isn't a comp to me. I don't hold out much hope for Mack in the passing game. He wasn't reliable at all even in 2018 with Luck throwing to him.

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

I voted for no extension at this time.  Stats be dammed, if a non-power back is an unreliable receiver, then he is a backup back.  Mack is a very good runner, and is a good blocker in the passing game, but that is simply not enough to be a three down RB, IMO.  

 

I say give him this season to show us what he can do catching the ball, actually feed it to him often and let him sink or swim with it.  Then we'd have a better idea of his true value, IMO.

There are very few backs that really excel in both running and catching. Not being big on the catching side of things doesn't disqualify them from being a 3 down back. Running on 3rd down requires just as much short yardage skill as catching skill, and Mack was top 10 in 1st downs.

 

He was also ranked high in attempts, ypg, etc., all while teams keyed on the run due to passing deficiencies. He's a 3 down back, he's just not as multipurpose as a few. I'd recommend looking at receiving stats for RBs in general and then check their rushing stats... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

There are very few backs that really excel in both running and catching. Not being big on the catching side of things doesn't disqualify them from being a 3 down back. Running on 3rd down requires just as much short yardage skill as catching skill, and Mack was top 10 in 1st downs.

 

He was also ranked high in attempts, ypg, etc., all while teams keyed on the run due to passing deficiencies. He's a 3 down back, he's just not as multipurpose as a few. I'd recommend looking at receiving stats for RBs in general and then check their rushing stats... 

Mack seems more shifty than powerful.  I think he'd be excellent at getting the ball in space.  

 

I think if he isn't thrown to, it telegraph's our limitations.  OTOH, when Hines is in the game, it tends to telegraph that the "RB" is a receiver more than a between the tackles runner.

 

I'd like to see Mack develop his catching skills this season, and be a multipurpose threat on all three downs.  Then he'd be a true top-10 RB, IMO.  And then have Hines strictly a PR and a near the LOS receiver, where his forte would be specialty plays on offense.

 

Mack was drafted in the 4th.  If he can't/won't catch, I'd replace him with a higher talented RB that can do anything on any down.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Mack seems more shifty than powerful.  I think he'd be excellent at getting the ball in space.

He's not a "power" back, but he's done very well on 3rd and short.

He does have the wiggle to be good in space, but let's be honest, last year we didn't have the QB to really deal the pill around, or be creative. With JB, the scheme was very limited.

7 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I think if he isn't thrown to, it telegraph's our limitations.  OTOH, when Hines is in the game, it tends to telegraph that the "RB" is a receiver more than a between the tackles runner.

Last year, teams keyed on our run regardless, so it didn't really hurt anything. The APB telegraph isn't that big of a deal. Hines did incredibly well in 2018, and simply regressed due to passing woes last year. And when you're 3rd and long, teams know you're almost always passing it, so they don't respect the run anyway. 

7 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'd like to see Mack develop his catching skills this season, and be a multipurpose threat on all three downs.  Then he'd be a true top-10 RB, IMO.  And then have Hines strictly a PR and a near the LOS receiver, where his forte would be specialty plays on offense.

While I would like Mack to develop, I'd actually like to see more of Hines in the O. In 2018 with Luck, he almost set rookie records. It's silly to limit him to just PR and near LOS WR. That would telegraph even more. He was dynamic out of the backfield in 2018, and dynamic in 2019 late when given a chance to return. Assuming we improve at QB, we need to find ways to get the ball in his hands.

7 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Mack was drafted in the 4th.  If he can't/won't catch, I'd replace him with higher talented RB that can do anything on any down.

You seem to think there's a bunch of dual threat RBs who can catch, and possess both power and shiftiness. If you rank all the RBs by all purpose yards per game, and then look at their rushing yards per game, only 7  backs have more rushing YPG. Those backs are 

McCaffery

Cook

Henry

Elliot

Chubb

Jacobs

Carson

And most of the teams don't have an APB like Hines on the roster.

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

He's not a "power" back, but he's done very well on 3rd and short.

He does have the wiggle to be good in space, but let's be honest, last year we didn't have the QB to really deal the pill around, or be creative. With JB, the scheme was very limited.

Last year, teams keyed on our run regardless, so it didn't really hurt anything. The APB telegraph isn't that big of a deal. Hines did incredibly well in 2018, and simply regressed due to passing woes last year. And when you're 3rd and long, teams know you're almost always passing it, so they don't respect the run anyway. 

While I would like Mack to develop, I'd actually like to see more of Hines in the O. In 2018 with Luck, he almost set rookie records. It's silly to limit him to just PR and near LOS WR. That would telegraph even more. He was dynamic out of the backfield in 2018, and dynamic in 2019 late when given a chance to return. Assuming we improve at QB, we need to find ways to get the ball in his hands.

You seem to think there's a bunch of dual threat RBs who can catch, and possess both power and shiftiness. If you rank all the RBs by all purpose yards per game, and then look at their rushing yards per game, only 7  backs have more rushing YPG. Those backs are 

McCaffery

Cook

Henry

Elliot

Chubb

Jacobs

Carson

And most of the teams don't have an APB like Hines on the roster.

Mack is simply not a power back.  We should be able to agree on that. 

 

So his between the tackles running, and stats, benefits more from us having a great oline than probably a RB who was more of a power back.  For guys that don't catch the ball, I'd say that Henry, Lynch...and even Gurley or Blount (younger)...and Gore (younger) would probably have even more yardage than Mack behind our line.  Those are true between the tackles runners.

 

The question you posed is about money.  There may not be many RBs that do it all, but that's the kind I would look for to spend money on.  As it stands, with our oline, I think if Mack stays kinda one dimensional, he's fairly replaceable and isn't worth a big contract, IMO.

 

And I don't think of Hines as much of a RB at all.  He's earned his keep as a PR and should really be working towards being placed on the receiving corp depth chart and not the RB depth chart, IMO.  He's not a down the field receiver, but a specialty play receiver...aka Sproles...had a role in Reich's O.

 

You harp on JB, and he certainly has his faults, but our RB corps is not great and has players that are poor fits for doing things, IMO.  I think they are pretty easily upgradeable and not worth much of a contract, as it stands today.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Williams put up two 100+ yard games in a row while Mack was out. And Mack only had two 100+ yard games all year.Not saying Williams is as good or better than Mack, but he performed great in two games where we had very little passing yards and the Ds were keying on the run. In short, I don't think we can say that Williams can't. I agree on Wilkins, he's dances to much and doesn't do well in a man/power scheme. I also agree that Hines can't, but that's not really his bread and butter. 6/year is about as high as I want to go.

 

Mack had 3 100+ yd games in 2019 and 5 in 2018.

 

Also, Williams got one of his 2 100 yard games against the Jags after Mack went out with his own 100+ yd game against them. They were worn down.

 

His other game was 26 attempts for 104. So 4.0 yds a carry. That is decent but I wouldn't call that great...

 

The following game against the Titans he rushed for 1.75 ypc

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Mack is simply not a power back.  We should be able to agree on that. 

He's not a power back, but like I said there are very few "power backs" that can do it all. And while not being a power back, he's top 10 in 1st downs, so it's not an area of concern at all, especially with our OL.

20 minutes ago, DougDew said:

So his between the tackles running, and stats, benefits more from us having a great oline than probably a RB who was more of a power back.  For guys that don't catch the ball, I'd say that Henry, Lynch...and even Gurley or Blount (younger)...and Gore (younger) would probably have even more yardage than Mack behind our line.  Those are true between the tackles runners.

Sure he's benefiting behind our OL. So do a lot of RBs. Elliot has the 4th best OL. Henry has the 8th best OL. Gurley wasn't even the top 16 this year in YPG. Not a lot of those guys out there.

20 minutes ago, DougDew said:

The question you posed is about money.  There may not be many RBs that do it all, but that's the kind I would look for to spend money on.  As it stands, with our oline, I think if Mack stays kinda one dimensional, he's fairly replaceable and isn't worth a big contract, IMO.

I doubt Ballard ever spends that kind of money on RB. That's just not what the league does these days. Our only real chance at a guy like that is through the draft. And I don't see CB drafting a RB in the 1st almost ever. Few teams do.

20 minutes ago, DougDew said:

And I don't think of Hines as much of a RB at all.  He's earned his keep as a PR and should really be working towards being placed on the receiving corp depth chart and not the RB depth chart, IMO.  He's not a down the field receiver, but a specialty play receiver...aka Sproles...had a role in Reich's O.

Hines is an APB, plane and simple. I'm not sure you understand Reich's O. The reason Hines is in there on 3rd down is to come out of the backfield. He's typically the dump guy. And it's not that he can't be a down field threat, it's that he doesn't run down field routes. Typically Reich runs a vertical slot route (mostly slot, but sometimes a TE) to do a "clear out" for a Z, TE, or X who cuts in. Whoever doesn't cut in is running downfield along with the clear out in a lot of cases. Hines is typically the dump running shallow. He has the speed to easily be downfield threat if that's what they called for him.

20 minutes ago, DougDew said:

You harp on JB, and he certainly has his faults, but our RB corps is not great and has players that are poor fits for doing things, IMO.  I think they are pretty easily upgradeable and not worth much of a contract, as it stands today.

RBs are indeed fungible in today's league, especially for a team with a good OL. But you act like our RBs stink. We have a guy that was a workhorse in attempts, and top 10 in a lot of stats. We have a backup who came in knocked off two consecutive 100 yard games when Mack got hurt. We have an APB who almost set rookie receiving records for a RB with Luck, who can also be dynamic on returns. Many teams are in far worse shape lol... Your expectations are pretty crazy. And they did all that without a passing game last year with Ds keying on the run.

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

 

Mack had 3 100+ yd games in 2019 and 5 in 2018.

Missed the one where both had 100+

40 minutes ago, USFfan said:

Also, Williams got one of his 2 100 yard games against the Jags after Mack went out with his own 100+ yd game against them. They were worn down.

Our OL was T'ing off against Jax all game. I'm not dismissing JW's yardage due to being worn out. Mack had huge holes early as well. 

40 minutes ago, USFfan said:

His other game was 26 attempts for 104. So 4.0 yds a carry. That is decent but I wouldn't call that great...

Mack had 4.0 or less YPA in half of his games this year. And Mack only averaged 2.4 yards per carry vs Houston earlier, so 4.0 from JW isn't good in comparison?

40 minutes ago, USFfan said:

The following game against the Titans he rushed for 1.75 ypc

Mack ran 2.6 vs the Titans. Also, IIRC, TN totally sold out vs our run early in that game. I think they also ran Williams right a ton, which was just pure silliness, in addition to being predictable. When we started getting pass happy, they played Wilkins who had more success. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh. I'd like to keep Mack but I don't think he's going to sign early on a team friendly deal. I'd be okay re-signing him now for three years, $9m/year (because that's the market, he's not signing for $5m/year and we all know it). I'm also okay with letting him walk after 2020. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Missed the one where both had 100+

Our OL was T'ing off against Jax all game. I'm not dismissing JW's yardage due to being worn out. Mack had huge holes early as well. 

Mack had 4.0 or less YPA in half of his games this year. And Mack only averaged 2.4 yards per carry vs Houston earlier, so 4.0 from JW isn't good in comparison?

Mack ran 2.6 vs the Titans. Also, IIRC, TN totally sold out vs our run early in that game. I think they also ran Williams right a ton, which was just pure silliness, in addition to being predictable. When we started getting pass happy, they played Wilkins who had more success. 

I didn’t say Mack played great against Houston.

 

Mack also only got 26+ carries once out of 14 games.
 

Mack finished 2018 with 4.7 ypc and 4.4 ypc in 2019. Ezekiel Elliott finished with 4.7 and 4.5 respectively for comparison.

 

Teams sold out on the run the whole season. It’s just silly to say a guy who has been waived by 3 teams and benched after his 3rd game this year is close to being as good as Mack or Wilkins. 
 

Mack would’ve easily had 200+ yards against Jax had he not broken his hand stiff arming a guy. They gave up early and Williams got the scraps, including a 48 yd run.

 

So I only really look at William’s Houston game and he played alright but that is not enough to proclaim him as something special.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was reported we are working on an extension so I guess it's going to happen.  I was actually pleasantly surprised he wasn't injured again.  Three years is probably right and not top 5 for sure.  6-10 somewhere.  I don't like our depth behind Mack at all.  I wouldn't mind Jordan Howard as a FA signing to compliment him.  Ballard said he wishes he did more on providing more depth for the team.  I'm hoping he adds another veteran RB to add a proven player to the group.

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

I didn’t say Mack played great against Houston.

Not saying you did, just pointing out Williams poor AVG vs Houston isn't really something to hang your hat on.

1 hour ago, USFfan said:

Mack also only got 26+ carries once out of 14 games.

He was top 10 in attempts per game, IIRC, 6th. Not sure what your point is on this.

1 hour ago, USFfan said:

Mack finished 2018 with 4.7 ypc and 4.4 ypc in 2019. Ezekiel Elliott finished with 4.7 and 4.5 respectively for comparison.

EE also averaged 500 yards receiving per year in 18/19

1 hour ago, USFfan said:

Teams sold out on the run the whole season. It’s just silly to say a guy who has been waived by 3 teams and benched after his 3rd game this year is close to being as good as Mack or Wilkins. 

I didn't say he was as good as Mack. He does has better hands though. I do think he's better than Wilkins in terms of being well rounded. He certainly blocks better than Wilkins, and is certainly better after first contact. As far as his history, his first year was post foot surgery (Bills). He stood little chance with Saints with both Ingram and Kamara there, not to mention the Taysom Hill packages.

1 hour ago, USFfan said:

Mack would’ve easily had 200+ yards against Jax had he not broken his hand stiff arming a guy. They gave up early and Williams got the scraps, including a 48 yd run.

Williams may have very well had 200+ as well had he played the whole game. We'll never know.

1 hour ago, USFfan said:

So I only really look at William’s Houston game and he played alright but that is not enough to proclaim him as something special.

I'm not basing my opinion on just Houston, or Jax. I watched him play in college, and thought he was good there, even in their RB by committee. He would have went higher than 5th had he not missed his last season and had foot surgery. IMO, he should have returned for his SR season. He was tagged a "sleeper" by a lot of folks.

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

Meh. I'd like to keep Mack but I don't think he's going to sign early on a team friendly deal. I'd be okay re-signing him now for three years, $9m/year (because that's the market, he's not signing for $5m/year and we all know it). I'm also okay with letting him walk after 2020. 

Is 9 really the market for a guy ranked 10ish that isn't a involved a lot in the passing game. Only 4 RBs make 9 or more. I'd do 6/year, 7 tops. I really don't see a lot of teams backing up the Brinks truck for him. If he ended up with a team that had a poor OL, that could be a career ender.

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

Is 9 really the market for a guy ranked 10ish that isn't a involved a lot in the passing game. Only 4 RBs make 9 or more. I'd do 6/year, 7 tops. I really don't see a lot of teams backing up the Brinks truck for him. If he ended up with a team that had a poor OL, that could be a career ender.

 

You wouldn't do six or seven because he wouldn't accept it. Why talk about terms that have no reasonable chance of being agreed to? 

 

The top tier backs make $15m+/year. Mack at $9-10m is clearly second tier, at two-thirds the cost of the top tier backs. If you won't go that high then the only other option is to let him walk in free agency. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

You wouldn't do six or seven because he wouldn't accept it. Why talk about terms that have no reasonable chance of being agreed to? 

 

The top tier backs make $15m+/year. Mack at $9-10m is clearly second tier, at two-thirds the cost of the top tier backs. If you won't go that high then the only other option is to let him walk in free agency. 

Only one RB makes 15m, and that's TG. 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/running-back/

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess most of the running backs making less then 9 million are on rookie contracts.  You can’t use that as a barometer in what we should pay Mack. What you should look at is what some of the top RB who have signed second contracts are making and he should get a little less then that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Superman said:

You wouldn't do six or seven because he wouldn't accept it. Why talk about terms that have no reasonable chance of being agreed to? 

Spotrac projects Carlos Hyde at $3mil/year (he got $2.8mil last year from Houston after Miller shredded his knee). He ran for over 1000 yards last season. If he got $2.8mil when they were in a pickle, and projects at $3mil by Spotrac for next year, I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers for Mack?

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/houston-texans/carlos-hyde-14467/market-value/

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chloe6124 said:

I would guess most of the running backs making less then 9 million are on rookie contracts.  You can’t use that as a barometer in what we should pay Mack. What you should look at is what some of the top RB who have signed second contracts are making and he should get a little less then that.

Here's how plays stacks out.

I'll rank them in all purpose yards per game. Rookie contracts are bolded.

 

Note: Gurly (14.4M - 2nd), David Johnson (13M - 4th), McKinnon (7.5M - 7th), Duke Johnson (5.2M - 9th), were all top 10 paid, but did not make the top 20 in yards from scrimmage..

 

RB / AGE / AVG SALARY RANK / AVG SALARY

1. McCaffrey / 23 / 13th / 4.3M

2 Cook / 24 / 32nd / 1.6M

3. Henry / 25 / UFA

4. Fournette / 25 / 8th / 6.8M

5. Elliott / 24 / 1st / 15.0M

6. Barkley / 23 / 6th / 7.8M

7. Chubb / 24 / 27th / 1.8M

8. Jacobs / 22 / 20th / 3.0M

9. Carson / 25 / 88th / 0.6M (gets bumped to 2.1M I think)

10. Jones / 25 / 80th / 0.7M (gets bumped to 2.1M)

11. Ekeler / 24 / RFA

12. Kamara / 24 / 40th / 1.0M

13. Mixon / 23 / 33rd / 1.4M

14. Ingram / 30 / 10th / 5.0M

15. Mack / 23 / 58th / 0.7M (gets bumped to 2.1M)

16. Bell / 27 / 3rd / 13.1M

17 Drake / 26 / UFA (made 1.1M on a non-rookie deal last year)

18. Sanders / 22 / 34th / 1.3M

19. Singletary / 22 / 39th / 1.M

20. Freeman / 27 / 5th / 8.3M

 

Moral of the story.... Don't pay big bucks for a running back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dogg63 said:

Spotrac projects Carlos Hyde at $3mil/year (he got $2.8mil last year from Houston after Miller shredded his knee). He ran for over 1000 yards last season. If he got $2.8mil when they were in a pickle, and projects at $3mil by Spotrac for next year, I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers for Mack?

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/houston-texans/carlos-hyde-14467/market-value/

Mack turns 24 years old this year. Hyde turns 30...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Superman said:

 

What calculation are you using where Elliott doesn't make $15m/year? 

I said there is only one RB making 15M. He's the one.

I also listed his salary above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...