RBs should stop complaining and listen to what NFL is saying: You're not that valuable.
INDIANAPOLIS – Is this where we’re supposed to get upset about the wages of NFL running backs? Or are we allowed to think for ourselves, use that thing we call a “brain” and try to apply something known as “logic” to a situation that’s not exactly breaking my heart?
Jonathan Taylor, this is not about you. Not really. Well maybe a little bit.
For starters, and I say this with respect: Stop complaining. Stop whining. Stop going onto social media to lament the career choice you’ve made, where by the end of the 2025 NFL season you will have earned $30 million.
Before you turn 26.
Can I say all that? Can someone be the voice of reason, the voice of capitalism — America! — and stand in front of this self-pitying locomotive driven by New York Giants running back Saquon Barkley as the national media rides shotgun?
Or maybe this is where I prove my bona fides as A Man Of The People and climb aboard a cardboard box — where Barkley might have to live, if he doesn’t get his due — and insist the Giants pay Barkley (more) and the Colts pay Taylor (more). Otherwise the NFL had better change the way it treats its running backs, or we’re going to have a problem.
Couldn’t we just pass a hat instead?
'Doesn’t matter, you’re a RB': Jonathan Taylor responds to RBs not getting contracts
Let’s see what Saquon Barkley stands to earn, between now and next year, when he will finally become an unrestricted free agent. Give me a minute while I do that math. Let’s see, says here Barkley’s rookie contract in 2018, plus the team extension in 2022, was for five years and $38.3 million. If he and the Giants don’t agree to an extension between now and 2025, if the Giants give Barkley that Draconian thing called a “franchise tag,” he stands to earn about $10.1 million in ’23 and $12.1 million in ’24.
For Barkley, since entering the NFL in 2018, that’s seven years for a total of about $60 million.
We’re going to need a bigger hat.
NFL's franchise tag caused this mess
There is a larger topic here, the only one I’m willing to hear: The franchise tag was designed to let NFL teams hang onto a star quarterback for more than four years. The NFL and NFLPA couldn’t possibly negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with one set of rules for one position, and another set of rules for everyone else, so the franchise tag is applied to players all over the field.
Even — and I know this will sound harsh — to running backs.
Now that we’ve seen the unintended consequences of the tag, the way it has married with the shorter career span – and replaceability — of running backs to suppress their contracts relative to other positions, perhaps the NFL and NFLPA could come to an agreement, though I’ll be damned if I see one that would work for the league as a whole.
Because whatever happens with Barkley, with Taylor, with the running back position as a whole, the rules have to work for everyone at that position. Does it make sense, both logical and compassionate, for mileage-heavy players as great as Barkley and Taylor to be able to hit the free agent market a little sooner than, say, a kicker? Sure it does.
But to do that for Barkley and Taylor, the NFL and NFLPA would have to do that for all running backs. Even the lesser-known guys, the reserves, the ones waiting for their chance to get carries. The ones who’ve not taken a beating, is my point. And there are a lot more of those guys in the NFL. Should every running back reach the market faster than mileage-heavy receivers and linemen and cornerbacks, when most NFL running backs get less than 50 carries a year?
That doesn’t seem right.
Should the NFL and NFLPA change the franchise tag rules to lump running backs, receivers and tight ends into the same category? That’s another theory. In another words, ignore reality and pretend that receivers and tight ends are as replaceable as running backs, even though they are not.
And it’s tempting to do something, I’ll give you that. Because I’m so sick of hearing Saquon Barkley whine about the $60 million he’ll earn before he turns 29. And it’s not setting right, watching someone as admirable as Jonathan Taylor go onto social media and seek reassurance from his followers — average salary in Indiana: $48,253 — that the Colts owe him more than the $30 million he stands to make before his 26th birthday.
Let me tell you a story about Trent Richardson.
'Doesn’t matter, you’re a RB': Colts Jonathan Taylor responds to RBs not getting contracts
Colts won more with Trent Richardson than Jonathan Taylor
Trent Richardson is a punch line now, and it’s not his fault. He didn’t pick himself No. 3 overall in the 2012 NFL draft. That was the Cleveland Browns. He didn’t trade himself one year later for a first-round pick in the 2014 NFL draft. That was the Colts.
Richardson’s career didn’t last long here, or anywhere. He hasn’t played in the NFL since 2014, when the Colts released him. In 14 games here in 2013, he averaged 2.9 yards per carry. In 15 games in 2014, he averaged 3.3 yards per carry.
He was not very good.
The Colts went 11-5 both years. Know why? Because running backs don’t matter that much. Not when Andrew Luck is playing quarterback.
Colts record with Trent Richardson: 21-9. (He debuted in third game of 2013.)
Colts record with Jonathan Taylor: 24-25-1.
You know that weird run of quarterbacks we’ve seen around here since 2017, how the Colts are about to enter their seventh consecutive season with a new starter at quarterback? You know why it’s such a big deal? Because the Colts have won just one playoff game in that time.
Doyel in 2022: Colts stink because they keep getting their QB at a garage sale
Nobody talks about the weird run of running backs in Kansas City in 2018, where the Chiefs have had a different rushing leader from one season to the next. Know why it’s not a big deal? BECAUSE THEY'VE WON TWO SUPER BOWLS AND REACHED FIVE STRAIGHT AFC TITLE GAMES.
BECAUSE THEY HAVE PAT MAHOMES AT QUARTERBACK.
Sorry. That’s not me yelling. That’s the facts.
AND THE FACT IS, NFL RUNNING BACKS AREN’T THAT VALUABLE.
Are they fun? Sure. Jonathan Taylor was a blast in 2021 when he led the league in rushing. He was a threat to score every time he touched the ball. That was entertaining.
The Colts missed the playoffs that season because they weren’t good enough at quarterback, left tackle, receiver, pass rush or cornerback. You know, the positions that make all the money.
JONATHAN TAYLOR HAD AN ALL-TIME GREAT SEASON AND THE COLTS MISSED THE PLAYOFFS.
Leading rushers for the Colts’ past six playoff teams: Donald Brown (2010), Vick Ballard (’12), Brown (’13), Richardson (’14), Marlon Mack (’18), Taylor (’20).
The Donald Brown era was great wasn’t it?
Here’s the thing about capitalism and fair-market value: It’s OK when quarterbacks get contracts that read like an obscenity, like the $50 (bleeping) million Aaron Rodgers will earn this season in New York. It’s OK when a No. 1 receiver like Davante Adams and A.J. Brown sign nine-figure contracts, because they’re that rare. Same goes for a left tackle, a defensive end, a cornerback. The market says the 49ers’ Trent Williams ($138 million contract), the Chargers’ Khalil Mack ($141 million) and Cleveland’s Denzel Ward ($100.5 million) are worth it.
The market says Saquon Barkley is worth $22.2 million over the next two years. Not bad for the leading rusher of a team that has gone 28-53-1 since he arrived.
The market says Josh Jacobs of the Raiders is worth $10.9 million this season. Not bad for someone who led the league in rushing, and his team to a 6-11 mark.
The market, whether contract extension or franchise tag, will determine what Jonathan Taylor is worth to the Colts in 2024. Whatever happens, he’ll earn at least $10 million in ’24.
When the market speaks, you listen. Because I’m not the only one shouting.
Find IndyStar columnist Gregg Doyel on Twitter at @GreggDoyelStar or at www.facebook.com/greggdoyelstar.
This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: NFL running back market is speaking to Saquon Barkley, Jonathan Taylor
