Football Melvin Gordon Wants a New Contract or Out of the Chargers - Page 8

thabear04 · 07-11-2019, 08:18 AM

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thebigl...act-trade/amp/

Melvin Gordon, entering his fifth season in the NFL and thus still on his rookie deal, is dissatisfied with his contract with the Los Angeles Chargers and is taking those frustrations public:

Los Angeles running back Melvin Gordon has informed the Chargers that unless he receives a new contract, he will not report to training camp and he will demand a trade, his agent Fletcher Smith told ESPN.

Elite backs in the NFL persistently face this issue. The five-year deals for first round picks lock them in at below market wages, and then when they hit their mid to late twenties the teams say they are nearing the end of their useful lives. Last year, Gordon missed four games with an injured knee, but when he was playing he averaged over five yards per carry. Gordon is slated to make $5.6 million this season.

Off the top of my head, if they could make the compensation work the Packers would be a great fit for Gordon. He is from and played college football at Wisconsin, and is the threat to catch passes out of the backfield that Aaron Rodgers has been sorely lacking.

PAChiefsGuy · 07-13-2019, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC

I’d rather take Fisher over Barkley, even at 1.

RB’s are easy as hell to find. I mean goddamn Damien Williams and Phillip Lindsay were some of the most productive RB’s in the league last year and they weren’t even drafted.

Yeah Fisher is average, but it’s really damn difficult to find even an average LT in the league anymore.

Williams is a product of Reid and Mahomes. Put him on another team he is average at best. Barkley would be elite anywhere. Put Barkley on the Chiefs our O would be unstoppable.

O.city · 07-13-2019, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

Move those goalposts

I’m not moving anything

Elite running backs are great. The difference in an elite back and a good one isn’t worth spending first rounders on them when you can find good ones later

PAChiefsGuy · 07-13-2019, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

I’m not moving anything

Elite running backs are great. The difference in an elite back and a good one isn’t worth spending first rounders on them when you can find good ones later

You are an idiot if you dont think an RB like Saquon Barkley or Adrian Peterson are not worth a 1st round pick.

RunKC · 07-13-2019, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PAChiefsGuy

Williams is a product of Reid and Mahomes. Put him on another team he is average at best. Barkley would be elite anywhere. Put Barkley on the Chiefs our O would be unstoppable.

Uh you just proved my point

saphojunkie · 07-13-2019, 10:07 AM

Reid will get production out of any running back. He's also likely one of maybe 3 or 4 coaches who could do that. He might be the ONLY one.

If you're another team, you do not have that luxury. If you don't have Andy Reid, you need better players. No, Reid doesn't need Saquon Barkley. He doesn't "need" Tyreek Hill. But look what happens when you have Hill and Hunt? Why the hell wouldn't you want that?

Saying that you just would never take a RB at 2nd overall is just limited thinking. Taking Fisher over Barkley is ****ing ridiculous.

BryanBusby · 07-13-2019, 10:07 AM

When you get wrapped up too much into positional value, sometimes you end up making butt****ing stupid decisions like drafting a Kolton Miller or a Vita Vea over Derwin James.

RunKC · 07-13-2019, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

I’m not moving anything

Elite running backs are great. The difference in an elite back and a good one isn’t worth spending first rounders on them when you can find good ones later

Yup

Saquon Barkley
1,307 yards, 5.8 YPC, 11 rush TD’s; 4 receiving TD’s

Phillip Lindsay
1,037 yards, 5.4 YPC, 9 rush TD’s; 1 receiving TD

Damien Williams
256 yards, 5.1 YPC, 4 rush TD’s; 2 receiving TD’s

Two undrafted RB’s had roughly the same efficiency as a 2nd overall RB. And Lindsay/Williams got nowhere near as many carries or catch attempts as Saquon.

Drafting any RB at 2 is reeruned.

O.city · 07-13-2019, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

When you get wrapped up too much into positional value, sometimes you end up making butt****ing stupid decisions like drafting a Kolton Miller or a Vita Vea over Derwin James.

Running back is for sure the only spot I’d argue about

Those other ones are dumb, especially Vea. Never really understood what he was supposed to be projection wise? A nt?

Atleast with Miller you hope he could be a good tackle but it’s Jon Gruden thinking so who knows

PAChiefsGuy · 07-13-2019, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC

Uh you just proved my point

Yeah because every HC and QB in the NFL are as good as Mahomes and Reid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC

Yup

Saquon Barkley
1,307 yards, 5.8 YPC, 11 rush TD’s; 4 receiving TD’s

Phillip Lindsay
1,037 yards, 5.4 YPC, 9 rush TD’s; 1 receiving TD

Damien Williams
256 yards, 5.1 YPC, 4 rush TD’s; 2 receiving TD’s

Two undrafted RB’s had roughly the same efficiency as a 2nd overall RB. And Lindsay/Williams got nowhere near as many carries or catch attempts as Saquon.

Drafting any RB at 2 is reeruned.

What round was Tom Brady drafted in? Joe Montana? Was Mahomes drafted at #2 overall?

You can find elite players in every round for any position. The stats you just posted dont prove anything.

BryanBusby · 07-13-2019, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

Running back is for sure the only spot I’d argue about

Those other ones are dumb, especially Vea. Never really understood what he was supposed to be projection wise? A nt?

Atleast with Miller you hope he could be a good tackle but it’s Jon Gruden thinking so who knows

Idiotic. One coach used a first rounder on a RB a year ago and won the Super Bowl largely because of that RB.

staylor26 · 07-13-2019, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

Idiotic. One coach used a first rounder on a RB a year ago and won the Super Bowl largely because of that RB.

That’s where I really disagree with some of these guys.

No RB in the top 5 as a general rule? Fine. I won’t say I’d never do it, but I probably wouldn’t. Even if the Giants didn’t take Darnold, Chubb would’ve been a better option.

But I see absolutely nothing wrong with taking a RB late in the 1st.

O.city · 07-13-2019, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PAChiefsGuy

Yeah because every HC and QB in the NFL are as good as Mahomes and Reid.

What round was Tom Brady drafted in? Joe Montana? Was Mahomes drafted at #2 overall?

You can find elite players in every round for any position. The stats you just posted dont prove anything.

The vast majority of QBs are drafted in the first if not early first round

The chances of finding an elite qb in the mid to late rounds are much less than finding a running back

O.city · 07-13-2019, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

Idiotic. One coach used a first rounder on a RB a year ago and won the Super Bowl largely because of that RB.

And the team before picked one up mid season for a late round pick

BryanBusby · 07-13-2019, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26

That’s where I really disagree with some of these guys.

No RB in the top 5 as a general rule? Fine. I won’t say I’d never do it, but I probably wouldn’t. Even if the Giants didn’t take Darnold, Chubb would’ve been a better option.

But I see absolutely nothing wrong with taking a RB late in the 1st.

Taking anyone but Sam Darnold was the wrong move for the Giants. Hands down.

They were stupid enough to think they could build around Eli Manning and win.

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

And the team before picked one up mid season for a late round pick

I guess you feel that you've got a point here when you really don't.

O.city · 07-13-2019, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26

That’s where I really disagree with some of these guys.

No RB in the top 5 as a general rule? Fine. I won’t say I’d never do it, but I probably wouldn’t. Even if the Giants didn’t take Darnold, Chubb would’ve been a better option.

But I see absolutely nothing wrong with taking a RB late in the 1st.

Atleast in the late first you aren’t having to pay them that much so that’s one benefit

I still wouldnt just because of the five years of cheap labor I could get from another position

Like the Chris Jones situation we’d have been better off taking him instead of trading back

07-11-2019, 08:18 AM
thabear04 MTFU Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The Valley Heat Casino cash: $5700450	Melvin Gordon Wants a New Contract or Out of the Chargers https://www.google.com/amp/s/thebigl...act-trade/amp/ Melvin Gordon, entering his fifth season in the NFL and thus still on his rookie deal, is dissatisfied with his contract with the Los Angeles Chargers and is taking those frustrations public: Los Angeles running back Melvin Gordon has informed the Chargers that unless he receives a new contract, he will not report to training camp and he will demand a trade, his agent Fletcher Smith told ESPN. Elite backs in the NFL persistently face this issue. The five-year deals for first round picks lock them in at below market wages, and then when they hit their mid to late twenties the teams say they are nearing the end of their useful lives. Last year, Gordon missed four games with an injured knee, but when he was playing he averaged over five yards per carry. Gordon is slated to make $5.6 million this season. Off the top of my head, if they could make the compensation work the Packers would be a great fit for Gordon. He is from and played college football at Wisconsin, and is the threat to catch passes out of the backfield that Aaron Rodgers has been sorely lacking.
Posts: 7,229

07-13-2019, 10:07 AM	#110
saphojunkie MVP Join Date: Aug 2011 Casino cash: $4786250	Reid will get production out of any running back. He's also likely one of maybe 3 or 4 coaches who could do that. He might be the ONLY one. If you're another team, you do not have that luxury. If you don't have Andy Reid, you need better players. No, Reid doesn't need Saquon Barkley. He doesn't "need" Tyreek Hill. But look what happens when you have Hill and Hunt? Why the hell wouldn't you want that? Saying that you just would never take a RB at 2nd overall is just limited thinking. Taking Fisher over Barkley is ****ing ridiculous.
Posts: 12,517

07-13-2019, 10:07 AM	#111
BryanBusby In Search of a Life Join Date: Mar 2006 Casino cash: $3809900 VARSITY	When you get wrapped up too much into positional value, sometimes you end up making butt****ing stupid decisions like drafting a Kolton Miller or a Vita Vea over Derwin James.
Posts: 22,127