Jonathan Taylor is your 1.01 now.

[BabyChark23]

Some of you are dreaming.

Dobbs......Hurt
Barkley.....Hurt
Ekeler.......Hurt
Chubb......Hurt

Teams are not giving up a huge asset to sign a RB who by the way was hurt last year and who knows how he really is this season.

He can wine, cry, or man up but he is playing for the Colts this year unless some team is really stupid.

*the Browns have entered the chat*

They already traded the farm for Watson. Not sure they even have anything of much value left to trade that the Colts would find sufficient.

I don’t think they are a realistic outcome. Just responding to the bolded above.

[mild]

Teams that make the most sense for JT right now are:

1. Colts (surprisingly). They’re 2-1 and have a very winnable schedule ahead. With the way the D is playing, and competent offense, this is a potential playoff team.

2. Ravens

3. Browns, if Ford falls on his face in the coming weeks

4. Rams, if they feel like they have a legit shot at contending this year and want to upgrade on Kyren

5. Will never happen, but I’ll put KC down just for the obvious fantasy implications

Or, maybe he can go to the Jets or Eagles just to REALLY eff up those committees

Ravens - have only spent a 2nd on a RB twice going all the way back to 2001 (Ray Rice, JK Dobbins) - I don't see them giving up huge capital for an RB with no rookie years left on his deal

Browns - already trying to roll cash into 2024 to dampen the forthcoming Watson insanity (64 million against the cap for 24/25/26) and still pretty depleted pick-wise from the Watson trade. For them, getting production out of rookie contracts will be key to continuing the party as the DW contract kicks into high gear; Taylor doesn't fit this plan.

Rams - maybe. They did sniff around McCaffrey. Still feels doubtful that this is a true contender when compared to the DAL / PHI / 49ers tier. They do love the Stars and Scrubs model.

KC - doubtful, because again - big contracts to pay already.

The best fit is probably still Miami. Think of it in these terms:

- Team that is all-in on a playoff run
- QB hasn't been paid their mega-extension yet

Packers are a low key sneaky fit. They're better than expected, and may try to move the timeline forward. Similar problem to the Ravens, in that they don't really draft RB's high - but they've occasionally shown they value the RB position with 2nd contracts to the right kind of guys. (Aaron Jones re-signed, but let Jamaal Williams walk, etc)

[Shoreline Steamers]

Packers are a low key sneaky fit. They're better than expected, and may try to move the timeline forward. Similar problem to the Ravens, in that they don't really draft RB's high - but they've occasionally shown they value the RB position with 2nd contracts to the right kind of guys. (Aaron Jones re-signed, but let Jamaal Williams walk, etc)

And it's looking increasingly likely that AJ Dillon will not qualify as "the right kind of guy".

[Sriracha]

Packers are a low key sneaky fit. They're better than expected, and may try to move the timeline forward. Similar problem to the Ravens, in that they don't really draft RB's high - but they've occasionally shown they value the RB position with 2nd contracts to the right kind of guys. (Aaron Jones re-signed, but let Jamaal Williams walk, etc)

And it's looking increasingly likely that AJ Dillon will not qualify as "the right kind of guy".

I think we're going to have shift the focus to teams with bad FO's -- since trading for what the Colts are asking for AND paying him a huge contract would be a resource allocation blunder.

I could see the Bears doing it in a last ditch effort to save their jobs (RIP Roschon in that scenario)

[mild]

I think we're going to have shift the focus to teams with bad FO's -- since trading for what the Colts are asking for AND paying him a huge contract would be a resource allocation blunder.

I could see the Bears doing it in a last ditch effort to save their jobs (RIP Roschon in that scenario)

Lord have mercy that'd be bad.

I do agree that there's always the chance of a FO doing something drastic, and dumb - and that likely, that is what it's going to take, to make a JT trade happen.

But the RB discourse has now gone SO mainstream, I do wonder if those halycon days of paying a future 1st for Trent Richardson are truly in the rear view mirror... not paying RB's is a league-wide feature now. It's fair to speculate that even the dumbest of teams/GM's have probably cottoned on.

(Bears fans should lock up Ryan Pace's cellphone just in case though given that the last offensive player he traded for was the 32nd overall pick for Chase Claypool... )

[Sriracha]

I think we're going to have shift the focus to teams with bad FO's -- since trading for what the Colts are asking for AND paying him a huge contract would be a resource allocation blunder.

I could see the Bears doing it in a last ditch effort to save their jobs (RIP Roschon in that scenario)

Lord have mercy that'd be bad.

I do agree that there's always the chance of a FO doing something drastic, and dumb - and that likely, that is what it's going to take, to make a JT trade happen.

But the RB discourse has now gone SO mainstream, I do wonder if those halycon days of paying a future 1st for Trent Richardson are truly in the rear view mirror... not paying RB's is a league-wide feature now. It's fair to speculate that even the dumbest of teams/GM's have probably cottoned on.

(Bears fans should lock up Ryan Pace's cellphone just in case though given that the last offensive player he traded for was the 32nd overall pick for Chase Claypool... )

We just saw Bijan Robinson and Jahmyr Gibbs both get selected in the top 12 of the NFL draft... I don't think the NFL is quite ready to embrace "zero RB"

[mild]

We just saw Bijan Robinson and Jahmyr Gibbs both get selected in the top 12 of the NFL draft... I don't think the NFL is quite ready to embrace "zero RB"

No, obviously not. But there's a big difference between paying a 1st to have a cost-controlled 5 year rookie contract for a 21 year old with juice, and paying a 1st for a 24 year old with an injury history, and with absolute work-horse usage touch counts with 860 NFL touches and 968 college touches across the last 6 years - and then him expecting to be given his next long-term contract OR you just rental him for a year.

Quite a different value proposition, and also the entire reason we are in this mess in the first place.

Classic "the car loses half it's value when you drive it off the lot" allegory going on here... with the added bit that the current car owners (the Colts) have been absolutely driving it like they stole it for the last 3 years.

[FantasyFreak]

I think we're going to have shift the focus to teams with bad FO's -- since trading for what the Colts are asking for AND paying him a huge contract would be a resource allocation blunder.

I could see the Bears doing it in a last ditch effort to save their jobs (RIP Roschon in that scenario)

Lord have mercy that'd be bad.

I do agree that there's always the chance of a FO doing something drastic, and dumb - and that likely, that is what it's going to take, to make a JT trade happen.

But the RB discourse has now gone SO mainstream, I do wonder if those halycon days of paying a future 1st for Trent Richardson are truly in the rear view mirror... not paying RB's is a league-wide feature now. It's fair to speculate that even the dumbest of teams/GM's have probably cottoned on.

(Bears fans should lock up Ryan Pace's cellphone just in case though given that the last offensive player he traded for was the 32nd overall pick for Chase Claypool... )

Why would the Bears do that? They don't even use their "#1" running back right now.

I was amazed that he was allowed to draft Fields, by trading away a future 1st. When a GM is on a "prove it" year, you don't let them trade major future capital. Just shows you how poor the ownership is. Takes one to know one, I'm a Raiders fan, don't forget.

[JoshGordonsDealer]

Alright folks, place your bets. When (and for whom) does JT next play?

[Jigga94]

Alright folks, place your bets. When (and for whom) does JT next play?

Indy week 6 or 7

[hoos89]

Alright folks, place your bets. When (and for whom) does JT next play?

Indy week 6 or 7

Indy week 5

[Jigga94]

Alright folks, place your bets. When (and for whom) does JT next play?

Indy week 6 or 7

Indy week 5

Very possible as well. I was thinking it may take a week or so to get back into the swing of things.

I think we can both agree he will not be traded. Play as many games as he needs to get to FA (or the franchise tag) next year

[hoos89]

I'm not sure he just sits out after that...the Le'Veon Bell strategy is not going to work again after what happened with Bell, and JT should know that. I think that it's pretty shitty how the NFL can treat RBs given the inherent risks of that position but the reality is that he doesn't have leverage and not playing makes him even less likely to get a long term contract.

[FantasyFreak]

I'm not sure he just sits out after that...the Le'Veon Bell strategy is not going to work again after what happened with Bell, and JT should know that. I think that it's pretty shitty how the NFL can treat RBs given the inherent risks of that position but the reality is that he doesn't have leverage and not playing makes him even less likely to get a long term contract.

He won't sit, they will file a grievance. The team doctors will likely assess him and say he's healthy. They can also tag him next year, but not much chance he can get away with faking an injury the rest of the year, and accrue the year, with a grievance from the league already filed vs the union.

[Jigga94]

Hopefully you guys are right. Maybe I've just been prepared for the worst (Bell)