Bill Barnwell (4:57)

I just, I have to warn people because this is like, this can be the worst discussion.

Robert Mays (5:05)

Yes.

Bill Barnwell (5:06)

On the Internet.

Robert Mays (5:07)

Yes.

Bill Barnwell (5:08)

We are going to try hard to make that not be the case. I. There's very few people on the planet I want to have this conversation with you. Miz are one of them. So I just want to say I'm warning you. I'm anti warning you now. We are going to try and make this fun.

Robert Mays (5:26)

Yeah. And that's. I think it's. You never want to be like this is going to be a different version of that discussion. But I kind of want it to be because. And the reason that I am comfortable saying that is is because I don't feel strongly enough about one side or the other to be annoying about this. I think that's my hope in terms of where we land at the end of this discussion. Like, I'm. I'm ready to be swayed, I guess, is what I would say.

Bill Barnwell (5:52)

We don't have to. We could be smart enough here to not have a binary conversation about either running backs are completely useless and you can literally just plug in any jabroni and you're going to be fine, or it's 1973 and the first four MVP picks should all be running backs. There's a middle ground there. There's. There's nuance there. We can get to. We can have a conversation about end. This conversation is different right now than it would have been 10 years ago or 20 years ago or 30 or 40 years ago for lots of reasons that I'm sure we're going to get to today.

Robert Mays (6:28)

And that's partially why I wanted to do this because I think that a lot of my kind of quick responses and the quick talking points that I go to about this are probably a little bit too weight to the conversation that we were having seven to 10 years ago. And if you look at it, that's when a lot of the running backs don't matter stuff started to creep up and it makes sense based on what the league looked like at that time. You know, I think about like the 20. I think about like the 2018 chiefs. Right. And just like that offense and just how monumental and transformative that period in the NFL felt like. And the idea that you could have that offense and just kind of throw Kareem Hunt in there and it didn't really matter. And they could be one of the best offenses we've ever seen. It felt like that was a consistent thing around the NFL in like that era. And I do think the league has changed enough where it's probably worth revisiting a lot of the things we used to say about this topic. And that's why, along with me kind of questioning the validity of the other things that I was saying and a lot of the things that I was saying, thought this might be a good time to actually have this version of the conversation.

Bill Barnwell (7:35)

I think it goes back further and it's not like you realize this in a moment, but just to me, this is a Shanahan offense conversation. Right. This is going back to Terrell Davis.

Robert Mays (7:45)

Yeah. There are different periods of it. Right? Like there are different versions of why it happens and they kind of build on top of each other.

Bill Barnwell (7:51)

But. But that to me is the combo of we saw not just one back. Like what's this? Oh, they just stumbled on Terrell Davis in the late rounds of that draft, but it was Arian Foster, Orlandis Gary, Mike Anderson in Denver and you saw Kyle Shanahan go around the league and his offense is sort of spread around the league and Alfred Morris thrived in Washington. You know, you saw over and over again these late round picks driving at running back. And so because that offense became the meta and because that offense was so successful, I'd even throw C.J. anderson coming off of his couch and replacing Todd Gurley and looking great in there as well. I think that was the biggest long term trend. I think if it had just been a team or maybe just like a guy here or there, I think it would have been like, hey, they just landed a stud in the sixth round. That happens. That's not crazy to imag just landed a really good running back. And not to say those backs I mentioned aren't good because they are good, but there's so many elements to that Shanahan offense and the meta of that Shanahan offense and how not only has the meta of the NFL changed, but also the meta of that offense itself has changed and how it's spread around the NFL and I think that changes the way that the role that those running backs have in those offenses and how valuable the running backs could be within the context of those offenses.

Robert Mays (9:08)

Yeah, I agree with that. And I do think that as we. It's funny that a lot of the arguments that we're going to talk about maybe are a little bit more recent. Like the data points that we go to are a little bit more recent. But when you think about the true baseline examples of why you can find running backs late, you go back like 25 years immediately to think about those Shanahan teams. The fact that that's the first place we go, even though there's a lot more recent stuff that's more relevance to this discussion, I think is pretty telling, of course.

Bill Barnwell (9:38)

But I mean, you can go back to last year's draft though. No, I mean, you know, and this is not to me, I don't put this on Ashton Genty, but the conversation we're having a year ago was can you take him in the top 10 if you're not a great team like the Raiders were not and they were heavily favored to take him and then took him. But in a draft where there were so many backs we felt good about later in the first round, into day two, even into day three of that draft, is taking your running back in the top 10 valuable. And it's different this year because, you know, Jeremiah Love is a phenomenal running back prospect and I think the most likely scenario is that he is a great player in the NFL and I hope he ends up in a place where he can do that. But there is more of a drop off this year. It's not as deep of a running back class. It's not as explosive or exciting of a running back class maybe as it was last year. And so I think that there's changed the calculus in evaluating Love. I know we're going to have a broader conversation, but I think Love is a unique player given that this is a draft where not just at running back but at so many other positions, so many other spots in the top 10 or even into the top 20. We're looking at players who don't have that classic fit for a critical position. We're looking at guys who maybe don't profile as X receivers going in the top 20. We're looking at guys who, you know, are hybrid linebacker edge rushers going in the top 10, safeties potentially being top 15 picks. Like this is a weird draft. And so I think that lends itself to Jeremiah Love being a more interesting player to discuss at the very top of the draft that he would be in a draft where there were more, you know, wide receivers and left tackles and ed rushers available in the top 10.

Robert Mays (11:03)

Totally agree with that. I think we can get into that. Just the idea of there's a Couple different places that we can hit that. The idea of how safe a Jeremiah Love is compared to some of the other prospects. And when that becomes. Okay, let's start. So what I want to do with this is I kind of want to take a lot of the canned arguments and points that come up in this discussion and just interrogate them. Be like, we say this. Is this true? And then just kind of keep going through them as we do it. And so you talking about being able to get running backs later in last year's draft. And then just again, it's a refrain we go back to very often. This idea of there are running backs, you can find running backs later. So that's why you shouldn't take one in the top 10. This is my first. Is this true? Like, is this actually true in the way that we find the players at the position in the modern NFL over the last 5, 10, 15, 20 years? Let's look at them this. So as you think about this, this idea of you shouldn't draft the running back in the top 10 because in most years, let's say that just as a qualifier in most years and over time you're able to find them in more places than the first round of the NFL draft. Do you think right now that is a valid argument against drafting a running back high?

Bill Barnwell (12:16)

Maybe. But for not. Not for the reasons that I think. Not for the reasons I think you're putting out there. I think the answer is probably not

Robert Mays (12:23)

for the Arian Foster reasons that it's no it' those reasons.

Bill Barnwell (12:27)

No, it's not. And I think, number one, the league is adjusted, right? I mean, we've seen fewer running backs go in the first round over the last 15 or 20 years. And so I think the, the value of, you know, you can't put running backs in a vacuum. But like the idea that 20 years ago we would not be having a conversation about Jeremiah being a top five pick, it would be a no doubt obvious that that's where he's going to go. You know, if you have a running back who's number one on a lot of big boards, which I think share my life is close on a lot of big boards, there would be no conversation to have here. So that has changed. We're seeing, I think, guys who would go in the bottom of round one, go in the middle of round two. We're seeing guys who would go in the middle of round two, get to round three. I think we're seeing running backs drop already. And so some of that has already been priced in. I would argue the opportunity cost is the bigger factor. That idea of can you're taking running back in the first round, it's not oh, he's probably going to stink, he's going to be bad. We can get to the success rate for those picks in a minute. But it's that conversation of oh, you're drafting a guy at the position the NFL values at a lower level than just about anything besides kicker, punter, long sniper and fullback, which is where running back is right now after the Tyler Linderbaum contract. Centers have jumped up over running backs when it comes to second contract value and three year contract value for those positions. So there's that. But I think the bigger thing that's changed and this to me is really significant is there's more free agent backs available and good free agent backs available. And that I think is where the league has changed and it's a again, you can't quantify this, but I would just look at the free agent classes over the last 15 years. How many times has a Saquon Barclay caliber prospect at a different position, sorry, a sitcom Barkley caliber player in the prime of his career hit the market at a different position? It's pretty rare. Even a Derrick Henry who signed for, I mean $7 million a year, seven and a half million dollars a year with the Ravens. Like not that Derek Henry didn't have some red flags because he did in terms of his workload, but like a Derrick Henry calendar player hitting the market like it happens, but it's just so rare. And I would even go to this this year, may it with Kenneth Walker, like a guy who certainly not perfect but prime of his career coming off of a Super bowl wasn't going to make a ton of money, got the 13 million a year or so. How often are those guys hitting the market at any other position in football there's that opportunity to get guys that I think makes it less painful maybe to skip on guys in the draft.

Robert Mays (15:07)

There's a bunch of different things happening here and I think you hit on most of them. So this idea that, well you can find running backs deep into day three even and that's why it's hard to justify drafting a running back high. If you look at the numbers even over the last two decades, that doesn't really bear out like most of the impact running backs that are drafted in the NFL, if you just look at the percentages are actually coming in the first two rounds of the draft. It's mostly from rounds one and two and There's a good chunk of them coming from round one specifically. And I think that's even more obvious and even clearer when you look at the last, like 5ish years right now, drafting a running back in the top half of the first round, for the most part, those guys have worked out like, those have been good picks in terms of, like, those are good NFL players. We're happy that they're on our team over the last 10 or so years.

Bill Barnwell (15:58)

They are. But we're going to get to this with the B John or Jameer Gibbs discussion. I think that idea of, like, when you hit, what do you get with a running back versus other positions? That I think is also the complicating factor here.

Robert Mays (16:10)

And we'll talk about the surplus value and all of those things, and that's also part of this discussion. But the wasteland is actually in the back half of the first round. The back half of the first round is where we've had a lot of misses and we just haven't had a lot of impact players come from that range in general. I'm going to read off to you the names of the running backs taken in the back half of the first round since 2006. So the last 20 years. Okay. And we want to include Omarion Hampton, because that just happened. Lawrence Moroney, Felix Jones, Rashard Mendenhall, Naji Harris, Josh Jacobs, Travis H.N. rashad Penny, Donald Brown, D' Angelo Williams, Mark Ingram, Javid Best, Joseph Asai, Beanie Wells, Sony Michelle, Doug Martin, David Wilson, Clyde Edwards, Hilaire. So that's actually the treacherous stretch.

Bill Barnwell (16:58)

I just saw like a decade of my life flashing past my eyes.

Robert Mays (17:01)

The first half of the first round. We're talking about guys like Saquon Barkley, Ezekiel Elliot, Adrian Peterson, Bijan Robinson, Christian McCaffrey, Todd Gurley, Jameer Gibbs. So the first half of the first round has actually been a good place to find these guys. The league typically is good at identifying those sorts of players. The difference, and it's not that you can find these guys deep into day three, but the fact that there's also a pretty much an equal number of impact backs found in round two. That is the slight difference between this and other, like, premium prem, premium positions. Jonathan Taylor, Derrick Henry, James Cook, Kenneth Walker, Maurice Jones, Drew Lashawn McCoy, Matt Forte, Dalvin Cook, Nick Chubb. There are a lot of impact backs over the last 20 years that come from round two. The position where it's almost all round one, there's two of them, offensive tackles, your impact guys are coming from the first round. Like almost invariably they're coming from the first round. Edges is also heavily weighted. If you look Since 2006, the Edge Rushers that have made multiple Pro Bowls, there have been 39 of them. 26 of them were drafted in round one. 26 of the 39 again with offensive tackles. It's almost all of them. The position where there's actually a wide distribution in the draft and that I it was actually interesting looking at this is actually wide receiver. The the impact receivers you find across the entire draft. And so I think that's why you think about the two recent examples. Amaran Saint Brown and Puka are two examples of like all pro caliber players we just found on day three. But you need two to three receivers per team. So that that also weighs it differently. And the other side of this is exactly what you said about free agency wide receivers. Jason Fitzgerald just wrote about this on over the Cap last week where he was looking at the percentage of the top 20 players at the position and what percentage of them come from free agency specifically wide receiver is a nine and a half percent. All the other premium positions are 30% or lower. When you're looking at the top 20 players, running backs is up near like 50%. It's in the same ranges, safeties, linebackers, tight ends. A lot of these other positions where you can find guys in free agency. So the scarcity argument isn't as much about being able to find guys into day three as we might have made it out to be a decade ago. But there still is much less scarcity at running back than there is at some of these other premium positions. Even if most of the best best players often come from the first half of the first round.

Bill Barnwell (19:33)

And then on top of that, what's happened with running backs is that they're getting paid less than they were adjusting for cap a decade ago or especially 20 years ago. And that seems wrong to me. It does seem like now second contracts for running backs are underpaid. Like I just look back at last year James Cook got. He wasn't a free agent. He got an extension with the Bills, but it was the final year of his deal. He got eleven and a half million a year. And I feel bad because I pick on these dudes every time I talk about 2025 contracts. Diami Brown and Tutu Atwell got $10 million a year. James Cook is a better player. He has, he fumbles too much. He has some flaws here. There. James Cook is better for your offense than Diami and 2, 2 Atwell. And he should be not, he should not be making $1.5 million more.

Robert Mays (20:26)

So isn't that actually an argument that paying a running back is a way to find value? Right. If you find a really good running back. And so, so this idea, not even,

Bill Barnwell (20:35)

not even a really good running back, but just a, that idea of it's less painful to pay it back and take a shot on a back versus taking a shot on a player at another position.

Robert Mays (20:44)

So that this plays into the surplus value argument to me, which we can get to that right now if you want to. Right. So this idea of. And I go to this all the time, I'm very guilty of this. I've said this a bunch, even in the lead up to this draft cycle where let's look at the highest paid players at running back and let's look the highest paid players at other positions. Right. If you draft Jeremiah Love in at three overall, he immediately becomes the seventh highest paid running back in the NFL. If you draft a wide receiver at that spot, it's the 40th highest paid player at the position. When you get to second contracts, you're paying a 2x premium for a running back compared to an offensive tackle, a 3x premium for a running back compared to an edge rusher or wide receiver. That surplus value is important when you think about the context of team building and where you can spend your resources in a capped league. But as you think more about it, I think there are layers and nuances to this. The first one is, are we at a place. And I asked a lot of people about this last week, GM's people in analytics departments, because I was like, all right, let's poke and prod a lot of this stuff. And are we at a place where, with the cap inflating the way that it does and teams being so good at manipulating the salary cap, where surplus value actually matters less now when it comes to team building than it ever has in the NFL and shouldn't necessarily be the driving force of how you make these decisions.

Bill Barnwell (22:07)

It matters less. And I think you can fit more things onto your roster if you truly want to. I just, before I get to that, I want to just contextualize for people how running back contracts have changed. So for percentages of the cap this year, Kenneth Walker signed average. His deal is 4.7% of the cap in 2026. Travis HN's 3.9%. Those are like solid starters, right? Like, like they're not, not. They're players where it's like okay, you feel pretty good about them. You have questions about their like are they going to be 1300 yard rushers? I'm not sure. But they could be useful players. That's what Lamar Miller and Chris Ivory were getting a decade ago. That's a little, I think, you know, those guys are not as good as those players who just signed in free agency. Go back two decades ago. Edgar and James signs with the Cardinals. Now you remember Edger and James's tenure with the Cardinals. He got 7 1/2% of the cap. He almost got twice as much as Kenneth Walker or Travis H.N. jamal Lewis re up with the Ravens on a three year deal. He got 8.2% of the cap. The following year Almond Green signed with the Texans as a 30 year old for 5.3% of the cap. That's my point is it's not just that does surplus value mean less because the cap is going up, but it's just the actual price you have to pay to get these guys in the building or keep them around is so much less than it was 20 years ago when we were forming these arguments about running back value. And so we would be having different conversations if those guys 20 years ago were siding for half of what they were making then. And we'd be having different conversations if Kenneth Walker was making $25 million a year, which is what he would be making if he was making about 7 1/2% of this year's salary cap. And so I feel like that conversation is not caught up with where the cap has gone. And that matters a lot. That does change, I think, some of the surplus value conversation.

Robert Mays (24:05)

Yeah, I totally agree with that. And I also just think again, like ultimately if in a salary capped league, you're always going to have to make concessions, you're always going to have to decide this or that. I mean let's go to the Eagles two years like last off season, right? Like the Eagles could not pay Milton Williams. The Eagles cannot, could not pay Jalen Phillips. Even the teams that are the most aggressive and how they're manipulating this stuff still are going to have to lose out on players because it is a cap league and you ultimately have to make choices. I just think that right now those choices are less frequent than they've ever been, especially with teams that are willing to manipulate this thing. And I think we've drifted to a place where I think you can make a really serious argument that the absolute value of the talent on your team is more important than where and how often you're finding surplus value as you're building your team. And I think that the potential chance that Jeremiah Love is going to be a good player compared to some of these other guys at other positions in this draft, especially when you look at the hit rate on these top 10 top 12 ish picks recently, you can make a serious argument that the more absolute value you're going to be getting from these picks is from Jeremiah Love versus a lot of the other guys that you could draft in that spot, even if the surplus value argument is not in your favor.

Bill Barnwell (25:24)

But then there's the thing of you can't get a Saquon Barkley caliber edge rusher in free agency. You can get a Saquon Barkley in free agency. So looking at the broader running back pool, and I did this three years ago when I was writing about Bijan before that draft, so this is not updated between now and then. Obviously Bijan's gonna, I think has had his option picked up. If I'm not mistaken, that's also part of this.

Robert Mays (25:47)

By the way, Bijan's option's $11 million helps. Say flowers, his option is $27 million. Like that should play into this.

Bill Barnwell (25:56)

It does, it does. That's true. So B John and Jamaica games are going to have their options picked up obviously, so these numbers are going to help. But when I looked a few years ago, did the math for like this was for the bottom half around one, I think it was the Cowboys pick that year. They've been a playoff team. So like just the idea of like, given that running back contracts are less than any other position on their second contracts, given that the draft is a flat cap where you're just basically no matter what position you pick, whether you pick a quarterback or a long snapper, you're paying the exact same amount for the first four years of their deal. You can use that to kind of figure out, okay, how right do I have to be about a running back at that spot versus a player at another position with running backs, they have to pan out 63% of the time for that late first round pick on a running back to work for a wide receiver has to be 26% of the time. Edge, rusher, same thing, 26% of the time. So you just have to be significantly more certain. And I think that's the problem to me is we, I don't know if we can be that certain. I would love to say we are really good at picking the running backs. And I think the guys you brought up in the first half of the, the, the draft are evidence that you can be the case. I'd also point out Leonard Fournette was in that discussion and did not do all that well. We're still waiting to see what happens with Ashton Genty. Even Saquon was obviously a great player for the Eagles. The Giants. Saquon, I think that's a hit. I don't really like put it this way. He was a hit. He on the Giants was not a hit unfortunately. But so those running backs had their 50 option picked up 39% of the time. League average was I think right about 51%. So they were actually having their 50 option picked up less often even though it was going to be cheaper than other positions. That's going to change with B Shot and Gibbs getting into the mix. We're not talking about a huge sample of running backs. I think it's like 15 or 16 backs. So it's a pretty small group. But like, I think that's the concerning part to me is that if you could feel really confident you're going to get that guy and maybe you only can in the first half of the first round, then okay, I think it's okay to do that. But I think when you just have this sort of uncertainty about everyone and I think that's probably the most accurate position to take about NFL prospects is just we just don't know and we are too confident with our ability to pick the right guy. You're better off taking those swings on addresses or wide receivers just because when you do hit, you're landing a guy worth $40 million a year in the current market or $30 million a year in the current market. And you can never get that guy in the NFL at running back because that's just that running backs are worth

Robert Mays (28:29)

necessarily I, I go to that all the time and I usually, for the most part I'm inclined to agree with you because I think that's right. I also think the back half of the first round we've seen is a little bit different than the first half of the first round when it comes to players at this position. I making like little caveats here to kind of like fit arguments. But in talking to people about this, I do think that the difference, if you're trying to paint one between Leonard Fournette, even Ashton Jensen and some of the rest of these guys we're talking about is the pass game value. Part of this is, is a necessary part for you to be drafting this guy in the first half of the first round. And I think that is generally become the conventional wisdom among smart people who are thinking about these decisions as well. And so Jeremiah Love does check that Bo. I mean if you look at it and so you look at the receiving value part of this specifically, it's kind of an interesting like set of considerations because there, there used to be a lot of backs that were giving you a lot of receiving value even like seven, eight years ago. But they were specific kind of backs. Like they were the James whites and the JD McKissick and guys like that. When you look at these like do it all backs, Gibbs, Bijan and CMC all had like at least 14 total EPA as receivers last year per next gen. That doesn't happen very often.

Bill Barnwell (29:49)

Okay. To be fair, they also all had negative rushing epa. So I don't think it's a good measure.

Robert Mays (29:55)

That's fair. Well, that's also part of the problem. I want to get into that as well. But like those guys, that doesn't happen that often. It has happened at times. Like the last set of players, I think that was kind of like this. There was a season where Le'Veon Bell and David Johnson did it. Like we have seen it previously. But if you're going to bet on these guys in the first half of the first round, you almost need them to be plus plus receivers for you and for net and Ashton Gentle. It just don't profile as those sorts of players. And I think that's why you can kind of question those picks compared to some of the others.

Bill Barnwell (30:25)

Okay, so you are right in that I think you need to be a good receiver to justify this. I think it needs a little less just because we are leaning more towards like the run game now. And I think that's maybe a reason to. We'll talk about that for maybe we'll talk about that.

Robert Mays (30:40)

Yeah.

Bill Barnwell (30:42)

One of my arguments that I think is total bullshit and is still total bullshit is is the thing we hear about every single running back coming out in the top 10 guys. You have to understand he's not a running back. He's an offensive weapon. You can split him out wide, you can put him in the slot. You can make him a playmaker. Mace, I have a quote for you.

Robert Mays (31:01)

That is the part that's bullshit though. Putting him out, Widen in the slot thing is the part that's bullshit.

Bill Barnwell (31:06)

I have a quote for you. We're gonna get to the numbers in a second. I have a quote for you about Breeze hall from Aaron Glenn before last season. You can do a lot with Breeze Glenn said we're going to open up his game quite a bit. He's the type of guy you can split out wide and let him run the route tree because he can run it like a receiver.

Robert Mays (31:23)

It drives me crazy.

Bill Barnwell (31:25)

You want to know what Breeze hall did?

Robert Mays (31:27)

He can't do it as well as a receiver.

Bill Barnwell (31:29)

No, no, no, no. Not even that. Do you know how many routes Breeze hall ran out of the slot or split out wide last year?

Robert Mays (31:37)

Less than 10.

Bill Barnwell (31:38)

Well, he ran 20. He turned them into five targets and 22 yards. That was three tunnel screens, a hitch against off coverage on second and 14, and an option route for five yards on first and 10. It is the ultimate bullshit dump because no one actually goes back and checks to see whether these guys are actually being used this way. I went and looked. I went from 23 to 25. I looked at running backs on the whole, they averaged 0.36 yards per out run, split out wide or split out wider in the slot, which is basically like if Van Jefferson had a leg chopped off before the game and tried to run routes where you're at. Bijan was at 0.51 yards per route run. Gibbs 0.46. Alvin Kamara, who I think is a phenomenal receiving back, 0.51. Christian McCaffrey was at 0.99. The worst qualifying wide receiver over that stretch, split out wide or in the slot, was Johan Dotson at 1.13 yards per out run. So basically, these superstar running backs who are, and I want to be clear, phenomenal receivers, actually valuable, impactful players as receivers, they're still running backs. They're not doing it in the slot. They're not doing it out wide. When they are, they're doing it on screens and gimmick stuff, which is okay. But, like, let's just be honest about what they are and what they can do.

Robert Mays (32:53)

We'll say this one thing. I agree with you almost entirely. I think that's the one thing where every single time I hear it, I just start rolling my eyes. Those numbers, I think, are weighed down by what happens when you line a running back out wide in the situations you do it in.

Bill Barnwell (33:09)

No question.

Robert Mays (33:10)

So often you're lining that running back up at number one in order to get, like some sort of man zone tell when you're in empty things like this. Like, it's a structural thing that you're doing, and so you're burning them on those plays, even if they're, quote, unquote, running a route. So while I mostly agree with you

Bill Barnwell (33:26)

they're also motioning in a fair amount of the time too, after being, you know, spread out at number one all

Robert Mays (33:31)

the time, though not all the time,

Bill Barnwell (33:33)

a fair amount of the time.

Robert Mays (33:34)

I do think those numbers are a little bit skewed just based on what happens when you're lining those guys up in those situations. But for the most part, yes, I do agree with you.

Bill Barnwell (33:43)

Okay, if, if, if you want to show me like a two minute highlight reel of B John Robinson running the route tree, I'll happily say I'm wrong. You're not going to find it because he's not doing that. And Bishop Robinson, to be clear, rules. He is an awesome receiver. But I think there is that question about those players, right? Like this idea of the receiving back and this, this offensive weapon. Even leaving that argument, which I find to ring very false aside, there's a question of are these guys winning because of their receiving skills or are they winning because of what's being skewed up? And I pick on him a lot. He's a good player. I feel bad. This is like the Kyle Jushuk argument to me where it's like Kyle Juszczyk is not running some killer routes. Like he's, he's getting open because Kyle Shanahan is keeping stuff open for him. That's not a Kyle Juszczyk thing. You plug in another pretty good fullback, you're going to get that. I think when you have backs, you can run option routes, you can run choice stuff who can, you know, stretch teams horizontally. Like, yes, that's a valuable thing and you can find guys to do that. But that's not just a first round thing either. I mean, the Rams, every third down and fourth down, it felt like last year they weren't going to Pukinakua. It was the Kyron Williams option round and Kyron Williams was not a first round pick. So I think we have to sort of delineate here between like how much of this is a running back creating in the structure of the offense versus how much of it is creating a. Creating after the catch, creating my maintenance tackles, creating by actually separating from defensive backs, which I think is possible, but I just don't think is happening as often maybe as those arguments are making it out to be.

Robert Mays (35:13)

So this brings me into the next kind of argument against this that I want to dig into and that's this idea of, okay, are running backs more dependent on the other elements of the offense to be impactful players for you? And is that one of the reasons that you should not be drafting them as high as the players that are actually creating that offensive infrastructure. Do we think that is true? Do we think that is a worthwhile argument against drafting a running back in the top 10 or higher?

Bill Barnwell (35:42)

It's the Astrogen argument, right? Like that's. They say Quan Barkley. That seems that's exactly to make it. And I mean, I guess what I would say is this, right? Like you rarely run into teams that are as hopeless on offense around a running back as Ashton Genti and the Raiders last year. I mean, especially post Colton Miller injury, that offense was completely hopeless without. With. With Ashton Jetty on the field or not. I mean, what does seem fair to say is I think about teams like the Cowboys in recent years, you can create a solid run game with a good offensive line and an underappreciated back. You can't do it with a great upgrade running back and a middling offensive line. But again, I just, I think that's too simplistic and binary of an argument because offensive lines are not either incredible or terrible. There's usually some middle grounds. Maybe it's okay, we have two offensive line we feel really good about and three we don't feel great about. Or we have four guys we feel good about and one we don't feel great about. But I do think something that's missing, and I think this is a question of how teams are funding their offenses and funding their running games is something that's missing from the conversation quite a bit like that conversation about running backs not getting paid enough. Are they underappreciated? It's fair and valid, but that money has mostly gone to interior offensive linemen. Like NFL teams are still spending on their run game. They're just choosing to spend on centers and guards way more than they have in the past. And so when we think about, okay, should running backs get paid more? I would argue yes, I think running backs, really good backs, should get paid more. Is that going to come from offensive linemen? Like, which bucket does that come from in the team budget? And so I think if you're building an offense where you're investing that money in the run game and it happens to be on the offensive line, you can get results. I think if you're investing that in the running back and you're not investing much in the offensive line, you can still get results. But you just have to hit your draft picks on the offensive line, which is tough, or have a really good offensive line coach, which there's like six of Them and a couple of them just retired like that. That to me is the, the tough part of like you can't just draft a running back and not have a good offensive infrastructure and succeed. Everyone knows that. But like can you. Like you're having a choice about where are we investing? And I think you have to invest in both to make it really work.

Robert Mays (38:08)

So we've seen guard salaries really increase at a disproportionate rate compared to running backs. Centers have been more stagnant. That has now changed, right? I mean until, until this year that has, that has changed. So the argument about it, what do you, do you think there is a good argument for what? Because centers and guards specifically. Right. The idea of where you can being able to find those players in free agency. Those guys are available in free agency at about the same rate that running backs are available in free agency. So do you think that there is a reasonable argument as to why guards and centers should be paid more than running backs? If we can find them at pretty much the same rates in the draft and we can find that pretty much the same rate in free agency?

Bill Barnwell (38:54)

I would say they're on the field every stop. That that to me is, I think the tangible difference you can make is

Robert Mays (39:02)

that longevity maybe is the other one I would throw out there just like

Bill Barnwell (39:05)

how long those guys have been too. But I think also the idea of we don't have a lot of three down. Even the guys who we think of as three down backs like a Bishop Robinson can be a three down back even though he was secretly really terrible in pass pro last year. And nobody talks about it but like you know, like a Christian McCaffrey's three down back, a Derek Henry's a three down back. Those guys aren't playing 90% of the staffs most weeks. Like they're, they are coming off the field a fair amount. And so you could take that as like a cynical NFL plot to reduce the value of the NFL running back. Maybe that's the case. I think teams have generally found like our offenses are better, those lead backs are better. When they get more breathers, they get more time off, they're, they're, they last longer. And I think too the idea of like there was a run where a lot of second contracts for NFL backs went poorly. I think one of the reasons this most recent crop of second contracts have gone better is because guys are not getting as many carries adjusted for the 17th game, at least on their rookie deals. As opposed to I think about Todd Gurley and the workload he had, not just in terms of his carries and his receptions, but also just. He was on the field 90% of the time, a fair amount of the time during that rookie deal under McFadden.

Robert Mays (40:17)

Going back to the idea of our running backs more tied to the other elements of the offense and their ability to succeed, I do think that we have a decent amount of evidence that that is the case. Right. Like, I think that Saquon to me is probably the best example. Like when you go back and you look at those early Saquon seasons, Saquon as a Rookie had a 32% rushing success rate. Like those were. Those were slogs. Even if he was productive, those seasons were slogs.

Bill Barnwell (40:42)

He also, I think, led the league in rush yards over expectations that year.

Robert Mays (40:45)

Yes. And like he's doing everything he can and it's still negative. I'll say this though, because I think it's. I still land in a place where I think it is harder for a running back to transcend his circumstances than it is for a lot of other positions. I just do. I think it's just harder to do. And I think that is an argument in favor of going some of these other directions instead of a running back. I also think that the aesthetics of this play into it, right, Like a running back, even in a moderate workload, Ash and Genti is going to touch the ball 250 times. We are going to wash Ashton Denty, run into the back of his lineman 250 times. Even for wide receivers in bad situations, it's just not as ugly to watch. And so I think the. It lasts a little bit less like it's it. We don't quite have it burned into our brains quite as much. When a receiver is just in kind of like circumstances like Tyrone McMillan last year, if you look at his numbers, like on a per route basis, they're actually kind of similar in terms of like where they rank among all the players at that position to what like a Saquon would have done early in his career with the Giants. But we don't think about that Tel McMillan season last year and think, man, that was a really frustrating experience watching Tel McMillan play in that offense.

Bill Barnwell (42:03)

You're right. Like you flip it. I think one of the reasons running backs and the run game was so valued in the NFL for so long was this idea of like, like a five yard run just looks and feels so much more satisfying than like a five yard check down or like a five yard hitch or you know, a five yard basic Just like, okay, whatever, we got five yards doesn't feel that great. A five yard run feels like you've accomplished something. Like it feels. It feels like it's a positive play even though it's the exact same amount of yardage as a five yard pass.

Robert Mays (42:30)

I think the going back to Giants and I I didn't do this to you on purpose, but I was looking at the Saquon rookie numbers compared to like Malik Neighbors, right? Malik Neighbors was on an objectively bad offense as a rookie, but he was still fin like his numbers and what he did independently, he was able to transcend a terrible offense when it came to his individual production in a way that a player like Saquon Barkley never would be. And I think that is important to think about when you're considering taking a running back when you have a bad team compared to taking a receiver when you have a bad team.

Bill Barnwell (43:03)

You're completely correct. And yet that I again, this is anecdotal and unfair but like I do think this is the first example that comes to mind. I go back to the Chiefs that year. They took Clyde Edwards Allaire at 32 and it was like, well this is different because we can afford to take Clyde Edwards Allaire. We're set at receiver. T. Higgins, by the way, I believe was the very next pick in that draft. We're set at receiver. We can afford a luxury pick. This guy's a perfect for offense because he's a great receiver. It did not work out with Clyde Edwards. Hilary in Kansas City, I sort of like, yes, we would love to drop every running back into a perfect situation. But this also goes back to the carry thing you brought up, which is like if you're a wide receiver, you're going to get a couple ISO targets here and there, especially if you're a top five pick. But like you're only going to get the ball if you get open. So you're going to look efficient because you're getting the ball by your by your ability. Ashton Genty was going to get the ball 15 times a game last year regardless whether he was any good or not and regardless of whether he was working or not. Because the Raiders did not have alternatives. It wasn't like they were only giving in the ball in positive run scripts or you know, positive looks like they just like we don't want Geno to die and so we're going to give fast Jessica the ball just to make it make Geno's life easier. We don't want to. We don't trust any of our offensive linemen in pass pro. So we're going to run the ball outside of that, outside of the one game where Pete Carroll decided to throw the ball like 50 times and no one really seemed to understand it, including Pete Carroll. It is just like a you're sort of setting up these guys in bad situations to fail and it's through no fault of their own. And I think that makes it tough because I think we're more likely to hang on to the guys who are in incredible situations. Going back to all those Shanahan era backs and being like, well, they don't count because they were with a genius offensive coordinator and a run game that succeeds. And you know, teams are terrified of the play action game. Like that's just as valid of a beneficial situation as the Genti or Barkley situations are. As awful situations. Like, I think you can't really evaluate either of those sets of guys based on those scenarios.

Robert Mays (45:15)

All right, before we move on, let's take our first quick break.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (45:18)

This time of year always makes me rethink what's in my closet. I'm trying to keep fewer things, but better ones. Pieces that are well made and easy to wear all the time. That's why I keep coming back to Quince. The fabrics feel elevated, the fits are thoughtful, and the pricing actually makes sense. Quince makes high quality everyday essentials using premium materials like 100% European linen and their insanely soft flow knit activewear fabric. Their men's linen pants and shirts are lightweight, breathable and comfortable, basically the perfect layer for spring. The pants strike the right balance between laid back and refined, so you look put together without trying too hard. And the flowknit activewear moisture wicking, anti odor and soft enough that you'll actually want to wear it all day. The best part is that their prices are 50 to 60% less than similar brands. How Quint's works directly with ethical factories and cuts out the middlemen so you're paying for quality, not brand markup. Everything is designed to last and make getting dressed easy. My wife and I were fortunate enough to have some grandparent babysitting over the last two weekends and that meant that we were able to go out with some friends events both of those weekends and both of those nights. Didn't Even Think Twice Broke out my Quint shacket. Felt good, looked good, felt cool. It was just the absolute perfect thing for me to be wearing in that moment and like I said, didn't even think twice about it both those nights. Knew exactly what I was going to that's what you're getting with quints. Refresh your wardrobe with quince. Go to quince.com athleticfootball for free shipping and 365 day returns. Now available in Canada too. Go to Q U I n c e.com AthleticFootball for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com AthleticFootball.

Robert Mays (46:57)

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever think about switching insurance companies to see if you could save some cash? Progressive makes it easy to see if you could save when you bundle your home and auto policies. Try it@progressive.com Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states.

Bill Barnwell (47:16)

Think Verizon is expensive?

Robert Mays (47:18)

Think again.

Bill Barnwell (47:19)

Anyone can bring their AT and T

Robert Mays (47:20)

or T mobile bill to a Verizon store today and we'll give you a better deal. So bring us your bill. Walk in, run in, Hogo sticking, teleport if you can, ride on the back

Bill Barnwell (47:29)

of a rollerblading yak or fly in on the wings of a majestic falcon. Any way you can bring your AT&T

Robert Mays (47:34)

or T mobile bill to a variety Verizon store today and we'll give you

Bill Barnwell (47:37)

a better deal on the best network based on root metrics Best Overall Mobile Network Performance US Second Half 2025 all right, preserved must provide a very recent postpaid consumer mobile bill in the name of the person redeeming the deal. Additional terms, conditions and restrictions apply.

Robert Mays (47:53)

Let's get to the opportunity cost argument because I do think it's a really important one. And I also think the opportunity cost thing to me kind of plays into this idea of sequencing. Like when should you draft a running back and if you're in the top five and your offensive line isn't where it needs to be or you need a pass rusher. Is that another argument against drafting one? Like is there actually a sequence in terms of how this should happen? So what, how do you feel about how when it should come as part of the overall team building process? And where are you at with the idea of the opportunity cost of drafting running back in the top five versus another position and why it's important or whether it's overstated how important it is?

Bill Barnwell (48:33)

No, we talked about it a little bit earlier about like the financial reasons why there's an opportunity cost. I think the tough part is it isn't really about running back. To me, it's about the other positions. When it comes to the opportunity cost, it's not a we can't Take this running back because he's good. It's that you only have so many shots and so many chances to actually fill the positions you cannot get in free agency. And I think what reinforces this is two really good running backs. I go to the Bijan Robinson situation and the Jameer Gibbs situation. So the Falcons draft Kyle Pitts and Bijan Robinson in a three year span. Two players who are good players. Kyle Pitts is good. Now remember, at positions we don't value as premium spots and their pass rush was a mess. For years they tried to sign Dante Falco, that didn't work. They draft a couple guys, that doesn't work. They make the big trade up last year. Obviously we don't know what's going to happen with James Pierce. It's unrealistic to judge it based on that. But like, you know, that was a. We kept not addressing edge rusher. It held our team back even when we got the running back right, we were still in trouble until we completely had to sell out and use a ton of capital to get a guy we feel good about at the end of the first round. For the Lions, Shapir gives rules. He is awesome, he is fun to watch, he's a great player. They draft Jack Campbell in that draft. They draft Brian Branch and the Porter, all good football players. Guys who they're going to sign I think to second contracts. They're all really useful players at positions we don't typically see as valuable. And the Lions are sitting here now a couple years later. They don't have a right tackle because they do potential with a left tackle. They don't have a second edge. They haven't had a second edge for the entirety of the Aiden Hutchinson scenario. I don't know if it makes a difference for them the year they lose to the Commanders because that team was just so banged up. But do they beat the Niners if they have a second edge rusher and the Niners are spending that entire second half playing from behind, they have a great defensive tackle who can pass rush like I think that's the tough part is you can get those picks right and then running backs who are superstars you feel great about and because you only have so many shots at landing tackles, edge rushers, wide receivers and the Lions did add in the middle rounds of the draft but if you don't land that stuff then it's going to be so hard to fill that in. And we've seen the Falcons and Lions both try to fill it in elsewhere in spots where your Chances of succeeding are very low and they haven't been able to do so.

Robert Mays (51:00)

If you look back at the two drafts you're talking about and we can make an argument about the second one and even the first one. But The Falcons in 2021 drafted Kyle Pitts. Michael Parsons was the top 12 pick in that draft. Like it's, and that's, it's exactly right. Like even if Kyle Pitts is a good player, they had to scramble and trade back into the first round for James Pierce because they never figured out the edge rushing thing because they spent two first round picks on non premium positions. In the Bijan draft, the next pick was, I believe or two picks later was Jalen Carter.

Bill Barnwell (51:31)

Okay.

Robert Mays (51:32)

And you can make it. I think, I think B. John Robinson is a better player than Jalen Carter is in terms of like on field impact. I, I think I, I do believe that. But at the same time it's harder to find a player like Jalen Carter. The Bengals just had to trade the 10th overall pick in the draft for Dexter Lawrence because you can't find interior defensive linemen of impact and free agency anymore.

Bill Barnwell (51:56)

Yeah, or you can, but they cost $26 million a year. If you're the Eagles like swing defensive tackle.

Robert Mays (52:02)

Yeah, that's exactly right. For a part time player, you have to be the second highest paid player at the position in free agenc. That's happened like once in the last five years.

Bill Barnwell (52:10)

And, and, and to your point, like I think Jalen Carter is the better player of the two of them. I don't think it's like obvious like Jalen Carter is not, you know, a significantly better player than B. Robinson.

Robert Mays (52:22)

When you wait last year, I don't think you can say that. I, I think if you look at their careers in totality, I think, I think Bijan was a significantly better player last year specifically. And then when you combine that into the aggregate of his career, I think Bijan's a better player.

Bill Barnwell (52:36)

I think Bichon rules. He fumbled a lot. He was terrible in pass pro. I think Bishop was better last year. I also saw Jalen Carter like take over a playoff game and pretty much get the Eagles to the next round. That's going to weigh a lot for me. If I'm put it this way. Neither team does this. But if the Eagles, if the Falcons call the Eagles and say we want to trade you Bishon Robinson for Jalen Carter, Howie Roseman hangs up the phone and the opposite does not happen.

Robert Mays (53:06)

That's about the availability of those players. It's not about the on field impact of those players. I think that plays into the price.

Bill Barnwell (53:12)

But the NFL is pricing in. You would assume the on field impact of those players. And I think.

Robert Mays (53:16)

But that's not the conversation we're having. It's not. Is it harder to find Jalen Carter than it is B. John Robinson? It's who's a better player when they're on the field.

Bill Barnwell (53:21)

But that is the conversation that does matter. That's why you take a guy is because the ability to get that guy out there.

Robert Mays (53:27)

Those are two different conversations. That's a value conversation, not an impact conversation.

Bill Barnwell (53:32)

I think what the NFL is saying is that the defensive tackles impact the game more than running backs do and a good running back does. You could say that's wrong.

Robert Mays (53:39)

I don't think that's necessarily true. Do you think that's true, though, in, in. In a vacuum? Like, do you think an impact defensive tackle impacts the game more than a running back? Because that plays into the discussion that we're having.

Bill Barnwell (53:49)

I do. I do think that it is not, you know, like there are moments where a running back could take over a game. And we're going to talk about, I think how running backs to me mean more maybe than they do in terms of taking over games and having special plays than do before. But yes, I do think I have seen defensive tackles take over big games more in big moments than running backs have over the last few years. Think about Chris Tiltz and Jalen Carter specifically.

Robert Mays (54:17)

You think Jalen Carter took over games more than Saquon did for the 2024 Eagles

Bill Barnwell (54:23)

during the regular season? Probably not in the postseason.

Robert Mays (54:28)

In the Rams game?

Bill Barnwell (54:29)

In the Rams game? Yes, I do. Did you go watch the final few plays of that Rams game?

Robert Mays (54:38)

I think it's closer than you're making it out to be. I think, I think the trade value plays again, more into the idea of value that does impact. And I think again, that's something I have softened on. If you had asked me this question a year ago, the on field impact of these positions, which is higher. I go to the defensive lineman every single time. I think I'm starting to believe the fact that running backs can. That a running back in the modern game can do. It can get to that level like being.

Bill Barnwell (55:05)

Let me ask you a similar sort of range. Do you think the NFL is wrong then in saying, because like the pricing of those two positions suggests that running backs are not as impactful as defensive tackles on the whole, like the top, the top six running backs are not as Impactful as the top six defensive tackles. And so those defensive tackles are getting paid an average of about $28 million a year and the top six running backs are getting paid an average of if even that much. We just saw Dexter Lawrence coming off of a mediocre season, a really good player, get traded for the 10th overall pick. The third time in the last 25 years a team has traded the top 10 pick for a veteran player behind Russell Wilson and Randy Moss. There's no universe you would be stunned tomorrow if you woke up and the Falcons had traded Bjorn Robinson for a top 10 pick. It would be completely mind blowing to you. And I would go to me, at the very least. Do you think that's wrong? Do you think that NFL teams are incorrect in feeling that way about the impact ability of running backs, good running backs, on the.

Robert Mays (56:13)

Not when we fold in the opportunity cost and the scarcity. No, but I think those are the elements that really start pumping it up for me is that in order to find those players at other positions, you have to draft them in the first round. You still just don't have to do that with running backs.

Bill Barnwell (56:27)

But, but with the second round. But I'm not, I'm not arguing the value of running back A versus running back B. I'm arguing the whole group of running backs, like I'm saying, are running backs on the whole, the top 10 running backs, all of them undervalued versus the ability to no players.

Robert Mays (56:47)

No, I think. I think it's about the running backs at the top. Top, top, top, top. If you asked me would I rather have the 10th most impactful defensive tackle or the 10th most impactful running back, I would have to look at the list next to each other. I would strongly assume it's going to be the 10th best defensive tackle. Strongly. I think this is more. This, this argument is more limited to a very small segment of running backs at the very top. And I think the argument to bring it around to this is that people think Jeremiah Love can be that sort of player and that's playing into where he's being considered. The last thing about the opportunity cost part of this, to me, I was just playing it out practically and just thinking about two different scenarios, right? So if you're the Titans or the Cardinals and you draft Jeremiah Love at number four, you've given yourself just one fewer opportunity to find a player at a position that you typically find fourth overall. Like it's a pass rusher. If you're the Titans, it's an offensive tackle. If you're the Cardinals. So now you go into the 2027 draft. And in the 2027 draft it is much, much, much more likely that you will be able to find an impact running back in the second round. And versus being able to find your offensive tackle in the second round of this year's draft. Like it just. That's just how it often goes. And so thinking about it that way and just where you have to find these guys like that is almost the most important single argument in this for me is that you just cannot find so many of these other positions in any other place than the first round and would truly elite guys some like in the first half of the first round. And that's why it's really hard to make the argument for the running back even in a draft like this.

Bill Barnwell (58:24)

That's what makes the Chiefs conversation when they were thinking, when there was conversation about them taking Jeremiah Love so difficult for me is just this is going to be their last top 10 pick for a while. You would, I would be shocked if they don't top 10 pick over the next five years. And so it's like this is your window to get a tackle or an edge rusher. Yes, you can find a Judge Carloftis at the end of the first round. Yes, you can draft Shaw Simmons coming off a serious injury and hope he turns out to be your starting left tackle. And I think he's going to be in the long run. But like to have a guy you feel really good about who has a really good chance of succeeding, that's a top 10 pick. And I think that's the risk of if we take Jeremiah Love here again, even if he is a great player and I hope he is, and I think he will be the risk of missing out and not having a path to getting those other positions. Like you're saying, can I the last

Robert Mays (59:13)

thing I want to say about this is just the last thing I want to say is I it's this idea of, well, you have a whole rookie contract to build up the rest of the infrastructure around the running back, but by taking the running back you've robbed yourself of the ability to properly build up the rest of that infrastructure. And that's why to me it becomes a problem. It's not that you can, you can. You don't have to sequence it in that exact order. You just have so few opportunities to add a top 10 player at that sort of position to your roster that it's harder to find those guys later on if you've used one of those opportunities on a running back. So that, to me, is where the sequencing thing comes into play.

Bill Barnwell (59:51)

Are you okay saying we can build by going offensive line and running backs, wide receivers, and then taking the quarterback when we feel good about it? Or, like, is that a viable strategy for you? Or do you think you have to go, like, offensive line, quarterback and then get the other stuff?

Robert Mays (60:11)

I think this, I think there's a, that's a valid way of doing it the first way that you talked about it. I do.

Bill Barnwell (60:17)

Because if you feel that way, like,

Robert Mays (60:19)

there are fewer quarterbacks available, right? Like, it's. I don't, I don't think you should draft a quarterback in the first draft. Like, there are years where you should do it right. Like, the Giants should have drafted Josh Allen when they drafted Saquon Barkley. But there aren't that many drafts where there are five quarterbacks available in the top 10.

Bill Barnwell (60:37)

Just thought about how my life would be different if the Giants had drafted Josh Allen in the first round. I think the emotional swing of how much I would have hated the pick versus how, how, how I, how happy I would have been to be wrong about Josh Allen. I don't know that emotionally I could have handled that swing. So maybe it was for the best. The Giants did not take Josh Allen.

Robert Mays (60:59)

All right, before we get to the rest of this conversation, let's take one more quick break. Running a business means juggling a lot of moving parts. And when your communication tools can't keep up, things start to slip. Missed calls, slow replies, scattered conversations. They're not just frustrating, they're lost opportunities and revenue left on the table. That's where quo comes in. Spelled q, U O. Quo is the number one rated business phone system on G2, trusted by over 90,000 businesses. One shared business number for calls and texts so every conversation stays visible, organized and accountable. It works from an app or computer. You can keep your existing number, add teammates, and sync your CRM, letting you scale without adding complexity. And with built in AI, Quo logs, calls, summarizes conversations and flags next steps. Even after hours. Stop missing customers. Stop leaving revenue on the table. Try quo free and get 20% off your first six months at quo.comtech. that's quo.comtech quo no missed calls, no missed customers. Most all in one HR systems are a patchwork of disconnected and manual tools. Rippling is totally automated. If you promote an employee, Rippling can automatically handle necessary updates from payroll taxes and provisioning new app permissions to assigning required manager training. That's why Rippling is the 1 rated human capital management suite on G2 TrustRadius and Gartner. If you're ready to run the backbone of your business on one unified platform, head to rippling.com acastbiz and sign up today. That's R I P L-I-N-G.com acastbiz to sign up.

Bill Barnwell (62:53)

Open the door to Spring with Pura. Refresh every room with transportive fragrances like soft florals and clean, energetic citrus. Get started with a free Pura Florida 4 diffuser when you subscribe to 2 cents monthly for six months. Shop now at pura.com.

Robert Mays (63:17)

Let's talk about the structural changes to the league and how that has impacted this discussion. Or how that should be impacting this discussion. Because again, when we were in this place where running backs didn't matter 7, 8, 10 years ago, the running game was just not as central to the way the NFL game was being played as is right now. I was looking up some of the numbers this morning. In 2018, four of the top 10 teams in EPA per play ran the ball less than 40% of the time. In 2018, 40% of the top 10 teams in EPA per play. In 2025, that number was zero. No teams in the top 10 in EPA per player ran the ball less than 40% of the time. Only three teams teams were below 43% in the top 10, and there were six of those teams in 2018. So it's just much, much harder to be a very good NFL offense in 2025 if you don't have a strong running game than it was a decade ago. Should that affect how we view the value of running backs overall?

Bill Barnwell (64:21)

Yes, of course. I think it is. And I will say, and we're going to get to this as well. Like NFL defenses are aware of what was happening seven, eight years ago, and they're playing defense differently. Like, I don't. I don't have the light box rates. I don't have the nickel race.

Robert Mays (64:40)

They don't go back 10 years ago.

Bill Barnwell (64:41)

Yeah, but you get the idea. Like, I would bet no team in NFL history has played their sub packages 93, 94% of the time the way the Seahawks did last year. I'm guessing that is an NFL record, even though we don't have the data on it. And that's a product of playing from ahead, which they were for a good chunk of the year. That's a product of having great players and unique players. Like a Nicki Minwari we talked about before the super bowl and the difference that made. But it's also a product of teams have changed the way they play defense. I mean I go back to really almost a decade now, but six, seven years ago now how teams change the boot game, right? Like where you had that backside edge rusher who when teams were running outside zone, the Shanahan offense they were chasing down, they're trying to chase down that play from behind and take away the cutback lane. And that opened up the play action game. And I would say probably right around 2018, we saw teams shift that edge rusher's responsibilities. Instead of chasing down outside zone from behind, they just said it, you have to go get the quarterback. We don't care if we give up 5 yards of carry to outside zone. We don't want to give up 15 on the boot game. And so we saw NFL offenses have their play action, ability, impact and now good coaches that come up with solutions. I've been watching Rams tape all week and there's like 18 different ways Sean McVeigh got guys to the flat open for completions on their play action game last year. But that we've seen NFL defenses basically say we want you to run. We've seen Fangio defenses proliferate around the NFL. We've seen defenses who want to play like Carolina, which is another franchise defense with two deep safeties all the time. We want to see teams are basically saying we want you to run the football. And so I don't know if that makes it easier for running backs. I just think it changes the kind of running back you want. Like to me, I think there has to be a much higher importance placed on can you create explosives? Can you have, do you have the vision on duo to find an open lane even if it's at the backside of the play and create a big play? Whereas I think with the Shanahan style offense as it was, can you consistently be a one cut back? Can you consistently find the timing and the vision to make that cut? Teams still run plenty of zones. That's still valuable. Jeremiah Love, I think his best is his own back and I think he's going to be running plenty of that at the NFL level. But the way the things we ask of NFL running backs in the run game are different now than they were 10 years ago. And so I think that changes the kind of back you want and I think it makes certain kinds of backs more valuable than they would have been a decade ago.

Robert Mays (67:25)

The explosiveness thing is to me is exactly what it's rooted in for Two reasons, actually. For more than that. This idea of, because of the way that defenses are playing, the running game is more important. The running game is about more than the running back. And so you could make a very solid argument that yes, you should be building up your run game infrastructure and valuing that more than you have in years past, but that can manifest with how much you're spending on a guard or where you're drafting those sorts of players. Again, I think the Cowboys are a very good example of this. The Cowboys had free running backs last year, but what they've invested in their offensive line, they're still one of the most efficient running games in the league. Like that is a viable path here. The explosion, the explosion thing changes that because we have years and years and years of data that the running backs are responsible for what happens with explosive plays. The line is responsible, more responsible for what happens in the first five yards of a play. And so if explosives are what's going to be at a premium here, the running backs are what create those explosives and the guys who can become really valuable. And I was looking at it. You look at just explosive plays overall and how, how many running backs are really contributing to a bunch of those explosive plays. Last year, Derrick Henry and Bijan were tied for eighth in the amount of 20 plus yard plays that they created last year, tied for eighth. Gibson HN were 11th. In 2018, you had one running back in the top 20 was just, just Christian McAffrey. He was the only one. And so I think you can make a really solid argument that running backs, because of what they're paid, are actually the most efficient way to pay for explosive plays in 2025. Like if you look at Saquon and Derrick Henry two years ago, and if you look at the dollar amount being paid to those players, the amount of explosive plays coming from those guys, it was probably the best bang for your buck you could possibly have at any spot in the entire league. And so I do think that's a real argument for why running backs are significantly more valuable than they used to be. Because explosive passes are so much harder to come by.

Bill Barnwell (69:35)

And I think again, like, I think it's more. You're evolving what matters as much. Like, I think so. Success rate for design runs on running backs has gone up from 38% to 42% over the last decade.

Robert Mays (69:48)

It's crazy.

Bill Barnwell (69:49)

2015, 38%, 2025, 42%. That's a big difference. It doesn't sound like that big of a difference. It really is.

Robert Mays (69:57)

And you feel that when you watch a game that that is a. That is a big difference.

Bill Barnwell (70:01)

It's a big difference. And I don't think a lot of that is running backs. And I don't mean. I'm not saying that to disparage running backs. I think a lot of these were the defense's choices and the offensive choices in that they are more comfortable letting you get a successful play as long as it's not an explosive play. And I do think that that changes what you look for. I think having a running back who can be consistently successful is not as valuable as it would have been a decade ago. I think about someone like, who do I want to pick on? Like a Justin Forset, maybe? Justin Forsight was a good player, an efficient back, had a good success rate his year as a starter, I think in Baltimore, right?

Robert Mays (70:42)

Yeah, it was Baltimore.

Bill Barnwell (70:46)

I don't recall him creating a ton of explosives. I don't think that was his game. You flip it for someone like a Kenneth Walker where the success rate has consistently been below average, but we saw him flip the super bowl with his explosives. And that was a game where nobody was doing anything on offense for most of that game, except until Kenneth Walker hit a few 20, 30 yard plays and that led to field goals. You know, that ability, that ability to create at the second level, create at the third level, that is, I think, the thing that is undervalued. And I go back to James Cook, like, James Cook destroys a lot of value with his fumbles, but his ability to run away from guys, the second and third level, his ability to break tackles, his ability to find open spaces is incredibly valuable. And it's something that Bill's offense does not have anywhere else with any of their other players. Maybe Khalil Shakir here and there. But like that's the explosive play from that offense is Josh Allen running and James Cook running. And I do think that is undervalued versus how we viewed it a decade ago. And I do think teams should be paying a premium for it, which is why I was not really upset with the Chiefs paying so much for Kenneth Walker because of that ability to create explosives, which, by the way, Chiefs I think over the last couple of years are last in the NFL in explosive run rate from their running backs. So that is, I think, a big thing that was missing from that offense. So we sort of have been spending the last two years wondering why is the Chiefs offense consistently struggling?

Robert Mays (72:08)

I think that to me is the other part of this. I think if you're Going to spend high on a running back, whether that's in free agency, whether that's in the draft, it's maybe two different things. If you're going to spend a premium on a running back, which kind of Walker was a premium, he needs to be explosive. If you're going to draft one in the first half of the first round, he needs to be explosive and a positive add to your passing game. Like both of those things need to be true. If both of those things are true, and especially in a draft like this, I think we get closer to a place where you have to jump through fewer hoops in order to justify drafting a player like Jeremiah Love in the top 10 or the top five.

Bill Barnwell (72:52)

I think, yes, but I think it really depends on the availability. And I keep coming back to this idea of we're missing what actually matters here. I think when it comes to availability of alternative options, it's not day three of the draft. It's not undrafted free agents. It's free agents, it's veterans.

Robert Mays (73:20)

It's guys, second round picks and free agents. It's those two pools of guys. Those two pools give you a lot of viable players in the position.

Bill Barnwell (73:26)

That's really that, I think is the difference that people are missing here. And it's not the paying thing because the money has gone down to the point where I think it's probably a pretty good value. I think I should get paid more. I think running backs on the whole are underpaid, but it's the opportunity cost of we can't get that other guy at that premium position that we are not going to be able to fill. Otherwise. I don't think Jeremiah Love is not one of the top five players in this draft. I don't think he has the ability, I think he has the ability to be one of the five most explosive players in this draft. But I just feel like you are. It's so much harder to find players in other positions that I still feel like I come back to those same concerns about guys in the top five of the draft.

Robert Mays (74:09)

I typically do too. And the opportunity cost part of this again, to me is very real. And I just think that where you're finding impact players at these positions, it's almost, almost every single spot. It is just much more consistently happening in the top half, the first round of the first round overall than it is at running back. So I'm with you on that. I just think that we've gone a little bit too far the other way. And I think that there are plenty of Arguments as to why drafting a running back in the first half of the first round is a better proposition now than we made it out to be seven or eight years ago. The last thing I'll say about this, and I had a really good conversation with an executive last week just about this idea and just kicking around all of these theoretical things that we're talking about. Well, like the surplus value of this and the opportunity costs and all this other stuff.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (74:53)

Stuff.

Robert Mays (74:55)

This is about getting enough bets right to stay at the table. That's what this is about. Right. It's a. It's about making a. But it. But it. But it's. It is. But it mostly is even. Even beyond job security, building the right team. It's just about assembling and. And acquiring as many good players as you possibly can. And I do think that there is an argument to be made, and I've talked to analytics people about this recently, that Jeremiah Love is probably the safest player in the draft. It's not as safe as you want it to be. It's probably closer to like, 60% like you're talking about, rather than 90%, but it still is a little bit safer. And so the idea that you feel safer about Jeremiah Love becoming a good player for you compared to the premium position players that you could draft at that spot, I do think that is a solid argument as to why you should take Jeremiah Love over those other premium position players, because I think we can remove ourselves a little bit from all the theoretical shit about surplus value and opportunity costs and everything else. We shouldn't do that all the time, but we can a little bit more often than we do.

Bill Barnwell (76:06)

This is the nihilist in me. I don't trust their opinions. I don't. If you can show me the guy who knows for sure. This is like a classic. I love when I read people talk about the draft and they're like, don't overthink it. Take. Take the guy. Don't overthink it. And it's like, who's arguing to overthink it? Who's like. Who's like, oh, no, you should take a kicker in round one? I think that's the appropriate level of thought of this topic. If it's that simple, teams would be doing it, and it's not that simple. Like. Like, I see your point, and I think you're. You're making a nuanced point that I generally agree with. But I do think that at our confidence level in talking about these guys as like, well, this guy is safer than that guy. I don't think we've earned the right.

Robert Mays (76:56)

And I tend to agree with you most of the time.

Bill Barnwell (76:58)

Maybe, maybe. I think the way you're putting it as, like it's closer to 60 than 90 is probably accurate and I think you're probably correct here. But again, it's the thing of what do you get when you win, when you get Jeremiah Love, right? You're getting a $20 million a year player on the current cap who is at a position you can find elsewhere. And when you get it right with David Bailey, you're getting a $40 million a year player at a position it's really hard to find elsewhere. And that doesn't mean you should feel this equal level of confidence. But I think it's probably closer to equal than GMs and people who have their jobs on the line in a way that I do not make it out to be. It's very easy to be mean and just throw up your hands and be like, oh, I don't know, whatever. Like, I recognize there's a real privilege in doing that. Just, it's not my problem. If, you know, Jerry Ryan left, turns out to be a superstar, I'll be okay. It's easy to throw those bombs from the outside. But I just, the evidence says we stink at this. And I think that's the part where if you have no faith in your ability to actually find the guy, take the biggest swing possible, get the position that you can't fill elsewhere. Because I really do think you can evaluate running backs really well at this point once they're in the league. I think once you get to free agency, you can evaluate guys at a much higher level.

Robert Mays (78:23)

Do you think that's dismissing the process a little bit too much though? Because probably I go to that, I go to that same argument. I said exactly what you just said like three weeks ago on this show. And again, I'm trying to like, push back against it. And that's why we're having this discussion.

Bill Barnwell (78:37)

No, no, no. For sure.

Robert Mays (78:38)

The idea that none of this matters, so just draft the premium positions every single time. Like, I think that's, I, I've gone to that too often too. I think that's a little bit too dismissive of the fact that there is a real process that goes into this.

Bill Barnwell (78:53)

I, I, to be clear, this is not just, oh, fire all your scouts and your executives, that's what you're saying. Hire a 12 year old, give them field gates or Dane Burglar's big board and just draft off that there is a process to this. And I do think that all that process matters and is meaningful. What I am saying is that the variance in a single year or a single three year period of that process swamps any confidence I have in the ability to pick guys. When you're talking about teams where the OCS are changing every couple of years, where the coaching staff is changing, where the GMs who drafted the guys are disappearing like the, the noise swamps the signal so significantly, where, if I can actually get a look at Ashton John T. On 32 teams, I feel really confident saying, like, yeah, on the Broncos, for example, I think Ashton Johnson would have been like an offensive rookie of the year candidate with the Broncos last year. I think he's that good of a player. The Broncos were that good of an offense. They had the infrastructure for him to succeed. They would have been playing from ahead. They would have had a great coach who can get the most out of him. But he wasn't on the Broncos. Like, we don't get to see these guys on 32 teams. And so it's so hard to evaluate with other positions.

Robert Mays (80:10)

You might not need to. And that plays into this.

Bill Barnwell (80:12)

Maybe not. That's true. That's a very good point. But like, how do we know that? How can we feel confident that even if we do get to see a guy play well and we're like, oh, that guy's a hit or that guy's a bust, I don't feel confident that we can even get the data to have the answer to that question, let alone have meaningful differences. That's what makes this such a tough thing to judge. That's why I feel like it is harder to gauge. Not because the process is useless, just because the outcomes are so difficult to parse and the distinction between what the process delivers and what the outcome delivers, it's so hard to draw a clear line between those two things. Things.

Robert Mays (80:52)

The idea that we're better at identifying running back prospects in the first half of the first round, that is anecdotally true. Over the last 10 years, that's a sample size of like seven dudes. Like, it just hasn't happened often enough to feel great about it. But I, I know people who are extremely analytically inclined in the NFL who have come to adopt that mindset where it's like, I'm fine taking a running back in the top 10, because for the, if you look at the impact guys, they're coming from the top 10, we actually have gotten much better at identifying those players. But that sentiment is based on little when you think about like the history of the league, very little.

Bill Barnwell (81:26)

But you know what? You know what? If you're an NFL GM, you might get seven top 100 picks before you get fired. Like that might be it for you. Like, like this is not a league where you get eight, nine years to draft. That makes it also tougher to evaluate these GMs, right? I mean, I go back to John Schneider, who has been around for a long time, and you know, going back to the Jamal Adams trade, Seahawks fans being like, we don't, we don't need those first round picks. He's going to them up anyway.

Robert Mays (81:53)

Didn't you hear though that all the bad things that the Seahawks did were because of Pete Carroll?

Bill Barnwell (81:57)

Well, you go back further, all the good things the Seahawks did were kind of Scott McLuhan. So you have to get that cycle of life changes where it's never John Schneider good or bad apparently. I think he probably was the guy doing most of those things. It was pretty darn good at it the entire time. I go back to Howie, I mean, Howie be a great example of like, like, give me a three year window of how you might get incredible draft picks. You might get him Jalen Rager, you might get Jalen Rager, you might get Andre Dillard and like, it's the same dude. That's what makes us so tough, is that the process of evaluating. Would this guy have been a great pick everywhere? You know, like, you might find guys where they wouldn't bust everywhere. They would have been great picks everywhere. It is so hard to gauge this stuff. And so I think that makes it so hard to actually judge the process because the outcomes are so muddled.

Robert Mays (82:46)

So the Titans take Jeremiah Love in the top five. What's your reaction going to be?

Bill Barnwell (82:53)

I. I do think of these teams who could take a running back in the top five in a typical year. Tennessee is better suited for a running back than most of them. They've invested a ton on their offensive line. I don't know if a lot of those guys are good, but Peter Skarsky's good. That's one. They have a quarterback who I believe in, in Cam Ward. I think he needs help. Well, it's not their most pressing need. I would say in the long term, it's probably not the right thing for them. I think they need edge more than they need running back, but I would rather they take a running back than Arizona.

Robert Mays (83:28)

Yeah, Arizona to me is crazy. It's crazy to me.

Bill Barnwell (83:32)

To me, the actual Place I want Jeremiah left to go is Washington. I just, yeah, offensive lines already there. You have offensive infrastructure. You have a quarterback who needs help. He's going to help you. In terms of changing the numbers in the box, in the quarterback run game, you want to work from under center. I do think that's the spot that feels best to me for Jeremiah Love.

Robert Mays (83:59)

I think overall my stance on this is that I've softened on it. When you consider all of the variables in every single category, I, I do think that, and really sitting with them, my stance has been a little bit too hardline when it comes to when you can do this and when it's available, when it's okay and why it's okay. Because I do think enough stuff has changed and I do think we over index too many of these variables when we're talking about taking a running back and what, what it really means and what it prevents you from doing.

Bill Barnwell (84:29)

I, I feel, I feel better. I feel like top running backs are underpaid. I feel like yes, paying running backs, I'm much more inclined to do than I would have been a decade ago. Drafting running backs in the top 10, I'm a little nervous about. Although I do think, like you said, there is a sample of some positives here and there. I'm not as on board with that as you are. But I do think the idea that like again, James Cook should be making 16, 17 million dollars a year and he's making 11 and a half, that doesn't seem fair.

Robert Mays (85:04)

I think that's the right place to land. I, I, I will say I still have a lot of, I would have a lot of hesitance about it because, because of the opportunity cost stuff that, that's what it gets to, to for me, it's not even the money anymore. Like the money is not the most important factor. And when we were talking about this recently, I think I went to the money first. I think I went to the 40 million versus versus 15 million. I think that was the first thing I said and I think this is more to me about where you can find these players. It's a, more, it's a scarcity argument over a surplus value argument to me is the most compelling point among all of these. And I don't think I've gone to that place often enough in having this discussion.

Bill Barnwell (85:43)

I agree. So just take, just get Kenny Gainwell and you're fine

Robert Mays (85:51)

as long as you have a really good offensive line.

Bill Barnwell (85:56)

As long as you have a quarterback who wants to throw swing screens like 30% of the time you're going to have a really good receiving back.

Robert Mays (86:04)

I'm glad we brought this about around to Aaron Rodgers. That's exactly where I wanted to end this discussion. Bill Barnwell, thank you very much for the time, sir. I know it's a busy week. We all got a lot going on. Tell people where they can read all of your wonderful musings about the National Football League.

Bill Barnwell (86:18)

ESPN.com Last thing I wrote when you guys listen to this would probably be about the Dexter Lawrence trade which yeah, I don't know, I'm intrigued. I mean like I said, third time in the last 25 years a team has traded a top 10 pick for a player. I like Dexter Lawrence. I don't know if he was worth the top 10 picks.

Robert Mays (86:43)

I'm generally okay with it.

Bill Barnwell (86:45)

Yeah, that's fair.

Robert Mays (86:46)

I'm generally okay with it. Like they their window and like where you have to find these guys. And again this gets back to me with like I, I said this immediately. I broke down for like two minutes on our show because we happened over the weekend. But I, I get back to a place where you just can't find players like this in free agency. They just don't exist. And the idea of trading a top 10 pick for one that seems like a ton. But Quinn Williams went for way more than a top 10 pick. First of all, when you combine the value of those two picks and the Bengals have tons of money to spend, you're never going to be able to spend all of your free agent money on worthwhile players anymore. It's just not going to happen based on where the cap is. So you're going to have to trade draft capital for it. This is a weak draft and if you look at the way the draft could play out for a team like the Giants who could justify drafting an offensive lineman who probably need an offensive lineman who need a receiver, there's so many different directions you could go with the 10th overall pick for the Bengals. They need a defensive player. It is not hard to picture a scenario where styles love all the pass rushers are gone by the time they pick a 10 and they're sitting there being like we'd rather have Dexter Lawrence. I, I understand landing in that place. Even if it's a real premium.

Bill Barnwell (87:53)

I, I, I would have waited until draft day maybe to make that trade.

Robert Mays (87:56)

Then that's, that's fair, that's fair.

Bill Barnwell (88:00)

Or I would have traded up or maybe I would have signed Trey Hendrickson and held on for all pick and just not, not not, you know, give it a tenth over a pick to get the good defensive player. But I mean your arguments are not, they're not invalid. I just, I just like draft picks, as it turns out, maybe too much.

Robert Mays (88:20)

I think. I think some of us like draft picks too much and that, that brings it all back around. All right, Barnwell, thank you very much for the time, my friend. We'll talk to you very soon.

Bill Barnwell (88:28)

Thanks buddy.

Robert Mays (88:30)

All right guys, that's all we got for today. We will be here tomorrow night, 7:30pm Eastern. Me, Dane Brugler, Dave Hellman, Derek Class and Bruce Feldman live on the Athletic Football Show YouTube page, breaking down every pick of the first round and then we will be back except for Bruce. The other four of us, we'll be back on Friday doing the exact same thing, 6:30pm Eastern with rounds two and three, two of my favorite nights of the year. Very much looking forward to it. Please come and join us. We would really appreciate it for now that that's all we got. Appreciate you listening. We'll talk to you very soon. Thanks for tuning in. Make sure to hit that subscribe or follow button so you never miss an episode. If you enjoyed what you heard, please like comment and leave a rating. We'll see you next time. This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever think about switching insurance companies to see if you could save some cash? Progressive makes it easy to see if you could save when you bundle your home and auto policies. Try it@progressive.com Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states. AI pilots are easy, but scaling AI across enterprise customer experience is where most organizations fail.

Bill Barnwell (89:43)

Parloa's Agentix CX platform helps enterprises move

Robert Mays (89:46)

from experimentation to production.

Bill Barnwell (89:49)

With the AI Agent Management platform for

Robert Mays (89:51)

Enterprise CX companies can design, test and orchestrate production grade AI agents across customer service operations.

Bill Barnwell (89:59)

The result?

Robert Mays (89:59)

AI agents that turn customer conversations into lasting loyalty. Learn more@parloa.com shipping, billing, admin, payroll, marketing. You're managing all the things, so why waste time sending important documents the old fashioned way.

Bill Barnwell (90:14)

Mail and ship when you want how

Robert Mays (90:16)

you want with stamps.com print postage on demand 247 and schedule pickups from your office or home. Save up to 90 90% with automated rate shopping.

Bill Barnwell (90:26)

That's why over 1 million small businesses

Robert Mays (90:28)

trust stamps.com go to stamps.com and use code podcast to try stamps.com risk free for 60 days.