Najee Speaks

[Captain Lemming]

Thoughts?

[WindyCitySteel]

nO DiSTrAcTiOnS ThiS cAMp

[feltdizz]

he’s 100% correct.

you dont value the position? Stop giving me 250 touches a year.

[Captain Lemming]

nO DiSTrAcTiOnS ThiS cAMp

It is interesting but when the reporters brought it up, Najee went out of his way to NOT make it about the Steelers.

They kept trying to pull him that way and he was resisting it.

He said “word got out” implying he did not intentionally make it public,

He seemed to be trying his best NOT to make it a distraction.

I do not see this at all like the Bell thing.

[Captain Lemming]

he’s 100% correct.

you dont value the position? Stop giving me 250 touches a year.

Even here he spoke of other backs or the position in general. But I do disagree with both of you. I will post later.

[Northern_Blitz]

This is not surprising.

Najee isn't one to filter his opinion. But he's also not being super emotional or spiteful here IMO.

But he is confusing two ideas: "the running back position isn't important" (which is not true) with "paying top dollar for RBs with 4-6 years of experience is a bad bet relative to drafting a new one" (which is true).

It's not that the position isn't important. It's that the position is easily replacable.

This has always been true for positions like Kicker. These guys score more points than anyone on the team. But if you're not a top 5 or so kicker in the league, most teams could replace you with someone off the street and not be all that much worse.

It's just new to see it come for positions that feel like they are more important. To guys who feel like kind of the embodiment of what a "football player" is.

[feltdizz]

It is interesting but when the reporters brought it up, Najee went out of his way to NOT make it about the Steelers.

They kept trying to pull him that way and he was resisting it.

He said “word got out” implying he did not intentionally make it public,

He seemed to be trying his best NOT to make it a distraction.

I do not see this at all like the Bell thing.

they will try, and his contract year will be no different than DJ, Watt, etc..

regardless of what he does the media is going to try and make it more than it is.

but Najee is 100% correct.

Look at Najee’s production in 2 years compared to DJ’s production in 4 years. Somehow DJ is worth 4 times what Najee is worth financially?

That’s crazy.

DJ: 3464 yards and 20 TD’s
Najee: 2930 yards and 20 TD’s

DJ has played 2 more seasons than Najee and lookat their production.

Yet DJ is worth $18 mill per and I bet most who argue against paying RB’s would give Najee $6 to 7M per year if they were Khan.

[feltdizz]

This is not surprising.

Najee isn't one to filter his opinion. But he's also not being super emotional or spiteful here IMO.

But he is confusing two ideas: "the running back position isn't important" (which is not true) with "paying top dollar for RBs with 4-6 years of experience is a bad bet relative to drafting a new one" (which is true).

It's not that the position isn't important. It's that the position is easily replacable.

This has always been true for positions like Kicker. These guys score more points than anyone on the team. But if you're not a top 5 or so kicker in the league, most teams could replace you with someone off the street and not be all that much worse.

It's just new to see it come for positions that feel like they are more important. To guys who feel like kind of the embodiment of what a "football player" is.

not true about kickers.

a FG kicker misses 3 or 4 in a row they are gone quick fast.

Its a tough gig but they only do 1 thing so they better do it well.

[Captain Lemming]

he’s 100% correct.

you dont value the position? Stop giving me 250 touches a year.

I knew this would be your take as it is your EXACT reasoning on the matter.

But your relative VALUE is not about workload. Being more irreplaceable makes you more valuable.

If Najee gets 300 touches, but I can easily replace him with someone elses 300 touches, or even platoon guys to the same or better effect, his value will be no greater than the replacement.

Workload is not the primary factor.

If a back has averages only 5 touches a game because he does nothing but return punts but he averages 2 scores a game, I pay him the most money of any back in history.

Low workload but high irreplaceable value.

Backs dont get paid because they are easily replaced.

[Captain Lemming]

they will try, and his contract year will be no different than DJ, Watt, etc..

regardless of what he does the media is going to try and make it more than it is.

but Najee is 100% correct.

Look at Najee’s production in 2 years compared to DJ’s production in 4 years. Somehow DJ is worth 4 times what Najee is worth financially?

That’s crazy.

DJ: 3464 yards and 20 TD’s
Najee: 2930 yards and 20 TD’s

DJ has played 2 more seasons than Najee and lookat their production.

Yet DJ is worth $18 mill per and I bet most who argue against paying RB’s would give Najee $6 to 7M per year if they were Khan.

Do you read this forum? I assure you most would not pay DJ 18 mil either.

[Northern_Blitz]

not true about kickers.

a FG kicker misses 3 or 4 in a row they are gone quick fast.

Its a tough gig but they only do 1 thing so they better do it well.

But it's similar in that supply is greater than demand.

For kickers it's even worse since few teams keep 2 and there's probably not much difference between the 16th best kicker in the world and the 33rd.

For RBs, most teams have probably 3 who are genuine RBs (plus some ST type guys). So the guy on the street is "only" the 120th best guy in the world or something.

And unlike a kicker, it's probably better to have 2 average guys vs. one somewhat above average guy. Because your kicker probably isn't going to get hurt mid-season.

And once you find a good kicker, their skill probably diminish fairly slowly (if we knew a guy was 35 and playing in the NFL, we'd probably guess QB, kicker, or punter I think).

I agree that RBs have to do more than kickers, so the position is more valuable.

[Northern_Blitz]

I knew this would be your take as it is your EXACT reasoning on the matter.

But your relative VALUE is not about workload. Being more irreplaceable makes you more valuable.

If Najee gets 300 touches, but I can easily replace him with someone elses 300 touches, or even platoon guys to the same or better effect, his value will be no greater than the replacement.

Workload is not the primary factor.

If a back has averages only 5 touches a game because he does nothing but return punts but he averages 2 scores a game, I pay him the most money of any back in history.

Low workload but high irreplaceable value.

Backs dont get paid because they are easily replaced.

This is what I was trying to say.

Value of the position is much different than value of the person playing it.

Center is also a good example.

I think having a terrible center is one of the best ways for your offense to suck.

But once your C is above some threshold of "doesn't suck", your offense can be pretty good.

I think that's why they're the lest paid of the OL. Even though their position is critically important to the team.

[SteelerOfDeVille]

This is not surprising.

Najee isn't one to filter his opinion. But he's also not being super emotional or spiteful here IMO.

But he is confusing two ideas: "the running back position isn't important" (which is not true) with "paying top dollar for RBs with 4-6 years of experience is a bad bet relative to drafting a new one" (which is true).

It's not that the position isn't important. It's that the position is easily replacable.

This has always been true for positions like Kicker. These guys score more points than anyone on the team. But if you're not a top 5 or so kicker in the league, most teams could replace you with someone off the street and not be all that much worse.

It's just new to see it come for positions that feel like they are more important. To guys who feel like kind of the embodiment of what a "football player" is.

The only thing I disagree with here is: I don't think he's confusing the two. He's a smart kid. He full-well understands. Yet he knows that's the best argument they have to influence their value.

He's not doing anything different than any of us would do - sorry dizz - but, even at our own jobs.

If someone started a push saying teachers/carpenters/IT/whatever your profession is underpaid and the majority of people in that trade were on the bandwagon... I think most of us would support that effort that ultimately was to put more $$ in our own pocket.

[Captain Lemming]

Dizz you are in marketing? There are very few fields with as great a range of pay.

Is highest dollar tied AT ALL to workload?

A great marketer can make more in a weeks work than most make in a year.

Not about workload. It is bringing unique value towards a goal. If that goal is championships a late round draft pick will do. Just ask the Chiefs.

[Northern_Blitz]

The only thing I disagree with here is: I don't think he's confusing the two. He's a smart kid. He full-well understands. Yet he knows that's the best argument they have to influence their value.

He's not doing anything different than any of us would do - sorry dizz - but, even at our own jobs.

If someone started a push saying teachers/carpenters/IT/whatever your profession is underpaid and the majority of people in that trade were on the bandwagon... I think most of us would support that effort that ultimately was to put more $$ in our own pocket.

Fair enough.

He may very well understand the difference and just wants to apply the agreed upon spin.

But I bet it's one of those things that's really hard to see when you're the person who's pay is being decreased (just like I've pointed out several times in meetings with people up the chain from me that our real wages have fallen pretty significantly for at least 3 years and there seems to be no plan in place to return to real wages of 2019).