Why Aren't Running Backs Getting Paid? (Hour 1)

Bird Dogs khaki shorts are just like your mother. They'll wrap you up and keep you comfortable no matter where you are.

Their zipper pockets will securely hold all your things. They'll fondle you with a love you thought only your mother was capable of. Oh, and don't worry, these shorts won't call you a disappointment. You might even start to love Bird Dogs just as much. If you want to experience motherly love again, hurry to birddogs.com slash MLB and buy a pair. They're selling out quickly, but they'll throw in a free Bird Dogs tumbler if you get there on time.

That's birddogs.com slash MLB. Live from the play show yet not overly ostentatious, studios of CBS Sports Radio here in beautiful New York City, sitting on top of the 10 floor 345 Hudson Street. Welcome on in to a Tuesday edition of the Zach Gelb show across all the great local CBS Sports Radio affiliates, Sirius XM, Channel 158, and that free Odyssey app. 855-212-4CBS, number to jump on in. 855-212-4227, you can always get at me on Instagram, where I'm straight flexing, or via the good old cesspool of Twitter, at Zach Gelb.

That's Z-A-C-H-G-E-L-B. And we've got a nice guest list for you today. Coming up at the top of the hour, we'll preview the upcoming football season with longtime NFL scribe and Gary Myers. We'll do a little college football fix at 8 p.m. Eastern, 5 p.m. Pacific with Hudson Mason. And then we will do some first and goal previewing the Atlanta Falcons at 9.20 p.m. Eastern, 6.20 p.m. Pacific with Carl Dukes of the game, 92-9 the game in Atlanta.

But first up, producing the extravaganza for the next four hours is no other than Hot Take Hickey. It's a long-term contract. Saquon Barkley, we all know yesterday, has the franchise tag along with Tony Pollard and Josh Jacobs.

Tony Pollard already signed it, but yesterday was the deadline for a long-term deal to be met. And if they did not reach a long-term deal, they would have to play this year on the franchise tag. Saquon Barkley, Josh Jacobs have not signed the franchise tag yet. And then you have Joe Mixon who, to stay on the Bengals, had to basically cut his salary and slash his salary in half. So that's the current state of the running back market, and you've not had a running back get a long-term extension since 2021.

It was like 700-something days ago, according to Adam Schefter, when Nick Chubb inked his long-term deal. So you have a lot of running backs who, at least verbally, are coming together and they're blasting the NFL. And we've seen this yesterday, ranging from guys like Austin Eckler on this show, which will play you that audio in just a second, Derek Henry, Christian McCaffrey, Josh Jacobs, Saquon Barkley. Every big time running back yesterday had an opinion because this does not benefit them, even the guys that have got paid before, because eventually their contracts are going to be up. So there's this big question on what can be done, and are these teams in the wrong? I don't think the teams are in the wrong, and I'll explain that in just a second, but we did have Austin Eckler on the show yesterday, and let's play you about 30 seconds of that, just in case if you missed that conversation.

But Austin Eckler called out NFL owners yesterday as to why running backs aren't getting paid. From a player's aspect, we have no control of that. I have no control. So really, who we want answers from is the ownership. Like, why are you doing this? What's the reasoning? You aren't interviewing them about it. How many owners have you talked to about this? Zero.

I would love to. I know. They ain't going to say anything either, because for whatever reason, they got this thing going on where it's like a new trend. They go, let's not pay these guys. I don't know. Maybe they're just testing us, like, hey, let's see what happens. But you poke the bear, and you're going to make us have to do something.

So I love Austin Eckler, one of my favorite guests that we have on. He's one of the more genuine athletes out there, and clearly he was agitated yesterday. It's almost as if both sides could be right on this one, where if you're a player, you're going to call out the owners, you're going to call out the league, because you work your ass off, you put up prodigious stats, and you expect to be rewarded financially. So I understand why players, especially running backs, think this is unfair when every other position in the NFL, the price is just going up and up and up.

When you look at quarterbacks, when you look at wide receivers, when you look at edge rushers, when you look at offensive linemen, when you look at cornerbacks, all those prices have been increasing exponentially. But the reverse has happened with running backs. So I get why running backs are annoyed, but it doesn't mean, and I know each situation is different, but as a whole, it doesn't mean that the NFL owners are wrong, or NFL general managers are wrong.

Because just as we ask of our players and our coaches to adapt each and every week, we also need to ask our owners and also our general managers to adjust with the times. And I'm not diminishing the importance of the running back position, because I understand you need a run game to win in this league, but banking on an individual running back is a tricky game. And that's why for the last few years, I've been vehemently against, unless, and this is also on a rookie deal, unless it's the last thing you need, and it's an added luxury, one or the other in drafting a running back in the first round. But when it comes to paying running backs, the shelf life is not long.

We know how much exposure there is. I know there's exposure to injuries for every player, but at the running back position, when you're running into the fire, and you're getting asked to do more, where you're not only running the football, catching the ball, and getting all the yak out of the backfield as well, and you look at the lay of the land in the NFL, quarterbacks and wide receivers in a passing league now are more valued. And also, we've seen the last 10 Super Bowl champions, if anyone just off the top of their head can name the last 10 leading rushers on a Super Bowl champion from what they did in the regular season, I would be stunned.

Like there's some names out there, but there's only one enormous name out there. Kansas City Chiefs last year, the leading rusher in the regular season, all these are regular season leading rushers, Isaiah Pacheco, the Rams when they won the Super Bowl 56, Sony Michel, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers when they won Super Bowl 55, Ronald Jones, the Kansas City Chiefs when they won the Super Bowl 54, Damian Williams, the Patriots, look who popped up on this list again, when they won Super Bowl 53, Sony Michel, LeGarrette Blount, back to back years but different teams, Super Bowl 52, Super Bowl 51 respectively, Eagles and Patriots, Super Bowl 50, Ronnie Hillman with the Broncos, Super Bowl 49, how about this one? And the guy didn't even play in a ton of games, Jonas Gray, and then the leading rusher in the regular season from the Super Bowl 48 champion, Seattle Seahawks, there's your big name, Marshawn Lynch. So in the last 10 Super Bowls, you've had guys, you know, outside of Marshawn Lynch, and then I'm not going to call LeGarrette Blount a bell cow back, but he's a more well known name. You've had a lot of lesser names and guys that didn't even put up these big time numbers, but the backfield was crowded. Where if you look at a team like Tampa Bay, it was Ronald Jones and Leonard Fournette, you look at the Patriots depending on the year, you had Sony Michel, James White, Shane Vereen, it just rotates, the Eagles.

And that Super Bowl, I don't even really remember much of LeGarrette Blount, I think he had a touchdown early, but Shane Vereen, who was the running back, excuse me, Corey Clement was the running back, had four catches for 100 yards. So this idea that you need to go pay a running back that's getting to 27, that's getting to 28, it's not a necessity, and you only have so much money to spend. I know we look at the salary cap number and we go, oh, you could maneuver around the salary cap a lot, but the rest of the possessions are extremely expensive. And if you look at history repeating itself and it being a copycat league, in the last 10 years, and that's just giving you an even number, that's just giving you a decade, there's only one running back that you can make the case is a great running back in the NFL that won a Super Bowl. So I understand the frustration from NFL running backs because you want to get yours, and you see guys like Dalvin Cook and Austin Eckler and Saquon Barkley and Josh Jacobs put up big time numbers, and you would anticipate with how lethal of a game this is, when you give something to an organization and you dominate for an organization, that you'll get rewarded consistently financially. But the league is kind of sending a message where if you want it your way, we're not going to budge here because we could use the franchise tag up to two times.

We can find a way to front load the contract and then make it easy to get out of the contract. And also, you look at like, for example, the Minnesota Vikings or even the Dallas Cowboys, right? They give Zeke that big contract. Zeke's not even on the roster anymore. I know they have their own contract situation right now with Tony Pollard, but for the last few years, people saw Zeke declining and they saw Tony Pollard emerging. Or look at the Minnesota Vikings. The last two years, Alexander Madison out of Boise State, he's not Dalvin Cook, but he showed he could be competent. And when you have a more passing heavy league where you're going to rely more on Kirk Cousins and Justin Jefferson and KJ Osbourne and Addison, the wide receiver that they drafted out of USC, you could slash that salary and get rid of Dalvin Cook, even though that's a valuable player and you either have him on your roster and you limit the carries, but then you have fresher legs in an Alexander Madison and you're not asking him to pick up 100% of what Dalvin Cook left behind. But if he's 75% of what Dalvin Cook is, that's probably good enough in the NFL now. And you once again look at the last 10 regular season leading rosters, the team that ends up winning the Super Bowl.

It's only one household name. So if you're an NFL running back, it stinks. I would be equally as frustrated, but there's really nothing you could do. Like when you heard the end of that Austin Eckler clip and you hear maybe Saquon Barkley and Josh Jacobs talking as well, what are you going to do? Because you get 10 plus million dollars this year if you're Saquon Barkley or Josh Jacobs, you play in the franchise tag. Every game you miss, that number is going to get shaved off because you're missing regular season games. So if I'm Saquon Barkley and you're Josh Jacobs, since you don't technically have a contract signed yet. Yeah, you don't need to go to training camp, but I don't get what would really happen. And I don't get I would behoove you to just prove a point if you miss one regular season game because what's going to get accomplished?

You've already passed the deadline to get a long term deal done and look at it like two guys in recent memory that I remember holding out. Le'Veon Bell, who Saturday year eventually got a contract with the Jets, but you really never really never did anything in the NFL again. And he even says he regrets it to this day. And I remember Melvin Gordon, Melvin Gordon right before Covid happened. And that was during that season when I think he missed like five or six games he was holding. I forget how many games it actually was. And Melvin Gordon was crying to me on Radio Row when I asked him a simple question on the air.

Like seriously crying, tears rolling down his face when I asked him, do you regret how this season played out? So you could make a point and people will talk about it, but what's going to change? And with the way that the league is moving and with how the last 10 Super Bowl champions have won and only really having one dominant running back. I don't think owners are going to change their position and I don't think general managers are going to change their stance either.

So I get why you're frustrated and I would be as well, but I don't know what you could really do. And like a guy like Jonathan Taylor, assuming he stays healthy this year, you know, he'll probably eventually get a big lucrative contract, you would think. But that doesn't mean that every running back is going to get that. And there's going to be some periods like we've seen the last two years where there's not a lot of movement.

Hickey, how do you react to all this stuff that's been happening in the last 24, 48 hours? I think at this point, running back has to be looked at on an individual basis. Like, for example, Jonathan Taylor, I want the Colts to pay him.

I hope they pay him. I thought the Giants should have paid take on Barkley. Look at the Raiders, for example, I don't think they should have paid Josh Jacobs.

Not because he doesn't deserve it, but because they don't really know the direction they're going in. And I don't think it makes sense for a team kind of stuck in the middle to give a big contract to a running back. Overall, again, we talked about this yesterday, I just don't really see the downside, or maybe I should say I think the downside of paying a running back is too exaggerated at this point. Where people freak out and they think it's impossible once you pay a running back to get out of it and it's a big financial mistake.

A lot of these contracts have easy outs. Salary cap is screwed and hamstrung. Running back, I don't know for totality, but I think it's the least paid position on average of any position in the NFL. See on Twitter, do you know kickers on average are paid more than running backs?

Yeah, well the tricky part there is there's only like 32 kickers in the league. Right, and there's way more running back, but the overall point is the salaries are so suppressed that even if you give a quote unquote big contract out, what are we talking? 70 million dollars, like Zeke got 90 million dollars. Is anyone going to get over 100 million dollars again? No.

Probably not. So you're talking about not a lot of- You don't even see the entirety of that deal. You're talking about the average annual value.

You're not talking about a big number in general. And like you said, most of the time running backs are cut before they see the end of the contract just like Zeke and just like Dalvin Cook to name two quick examples. So it's like if you're paying a running back, I don't know, 13 million dollars a year roughly for two or three good years before you got to move on?

I think that's still a win. Again, individual basis based on which running back we're talking about. But I think there's still more of an upside and still more of a positive to paying running backs than the dreaded downside that a lot of owners now in GMs are making you believe is the worst thing in this world.

Put it this way, the last few years you would agree Derek Henry is the most feared back in the NFL. In 2020 he got a four year 50 million dollar contract. And I think like 25 or so of it was guaranteed. I don't care what the years are. I don't care what the total salary is if I'm a running back at this point.

I just care how much guaranteed money I'm getting. Because like you're saying, a lot of these deals are front loaded or a lot of these deals have easy outs because most of these teams when they give contracts to running back, they don't intend for the running back to actually see through that entire contract. Who would you say at the top of your head was the last team to truly regret paying a running back?

I can't even give you one. I would maybe argue the Jets or Le'Veon Bell just because that was so outrageous and that was kind of a one off. Yeah but they were a disaster. Right. It was more Adam Gase incompetence.

Agreed. And not having a quarterback. But I don't, if I was the Cowboys, I don't think that they should regret the Zeke deal.

Maybe you want 2022 to be better and you want a little bit more production. And he was declining the last two years. On the whole, I don't think it was that big of a disaster where now you're looking back and you regret it. Christian McCaffrey, I know the Panthers traded him but also that was more where they were. But they got good capital back. Furman and the 49ers are going for it right now with them. Right. So it's like Kareem, excuse me, Nick Chubb has done so far a really good job in Cleveland. Obviously the Titans do not regret paying Derrick Henry. Probably Zeke is probably the one but it's not as if the Cowboys can't recover from that. Right.

It wasn't egregious. He didn't hold them back and that him getting cut is not holding them back financially where they can't go for it this year. So it's even if you want to say you wanted more production than maybe the two good years they got after extending him in 2019.

It's still a situation where you paid him a lot of money and you're not hamstrung now financially either going forward or even in 2022 when you're going for it. And also if you look at these individuals that we've been talking about this offseason, Dalvin Cook's 27. It's clear the team thinks that Alexander Madison can replace some of his production. Austin Eckler's 28. They're waiting on Herbert and they have to pay a bunch of other guys. I think Austin Eckler outside of Herbert is the Chargers MVP. That's how good he is. But they got to a point where he signed a previous deal.

It benefits them. And Austin Eckler even said it the other day, like he really has no choice but to ball out because, yeah, he got some more incentives, but there's no guarantees on that contract. Saquon's 26. I think he didn't get paid because of health concerns. And you also have a new GM who has paid Dexter Lawrence deserved, paid Daniel Jones. Saquon Barkley wanted a certain price.

They gave more guaranteed money than cut down the AAV. And I think that's a new general manager I have a lot of respect for and Joe Shane that didn't want the player to get him because then that could set a different precedent. Tony Pollard, 26, has played well the last two years coming off an injury.

I think he's got to show you more. Josh Jacobs, it's clear Josh McDaniels doesn't value the individual at the running back position. Look where he came from, New England, where it was running back by committee year after year after year. And for Joe Mixon, I think Joe had to beg to stay on the roster because in the Super Bowl, they trusted and I don't get this one and I crushed them for this.

They trusted Samaje Piran more at the end of the game than Joe Mixon. So it's kind of like a game right now. I don't want to call it a stalemate because the owners and the general managers are winning. But you have one side doing something that I understand and the other side, I understand their frustration.

And you're kind of just running into each other butting heads and nothing's going to really change. And, you know, could you maybe get some of the big name running backs hold out one day in training camp or whatever? But then that affects their pockets because unless you're the guys that haven't set a franchise tag, then you're going to have to pay money to those teams. So maybe next year during the voluntary OTAs, you have no running back show up and you get people talking about it. But outside of getting people talking about it, that's all that's going to happen because it's not as if if running backs do that, then all of a sudden, general managers and owners are going to say, oh, now I got to go pay these guys more.

So it's one of those where you feel like you got to do something if you're running back. But it's got to be so frustrating because, you know, whatever you do, it's not going to change until you see maybe a few highly paid Bell Cow backs win some Super Bowls. Because, as I said, for the last 10 years outside of Marshawn Lynch, listen to the names again. Isaiah Pacheco, Sony, Michelle twice, Ronald Jones, Damian Williams, LeGarrette Blount twice, Ronnie Hillman and Jonas Gray.

Those were your regular season leading rushers on eventual Super Bowl champions. It is the Zach Gelb show on CBS Sports Radio 8 5 5 2 1 2 4 CBS 8 5 5 2 1 2 42 27. Do you think the running backs have a point or are the owners and general managers in the right?

We'll come on back after these short messages. You're listening to the Zach Gelb show. So, Hank, you actually have an answer to your question. After much deliberation, which was like an extra five seconds of thinking once we did go to the break, you said, is there a team that ever really regret giving out money to a running back? I kind of have an answer for you. Todd Gurley.

Now, here's why that's yes and no. So, Todd Gurley, which was in July of 2018, signed a four year contract extension. Now, that contract did run through 2023. So, technically, that contract was the the extension didn't pick up until the 2020 regular season. He didn't even see the 2020 regular season with the Rams because his last year with the Rams was 2019. So, financially, you give a player an extension, he doesn't even reach the extension year.

You could regret it. But you look at the Rams who were in the Super Bowl in 2018. Then in 2019, they missed the playoffs where they go nine and seven. And then after that, 2020, no Gurley, they lose in the divisional round. The next year, they win the Super Bowl and now they're back to five and twelve. So, it's not as if them giving that contract to Todd Gurley, even though the Rams never got to see him play on that actual extension, ended up derailing that franchise because that team got their act together and they made back to back years in the playoffs. And they won the ultimate prize of the Lombardi Trophy. And because of how early they cut him, I'm sure they had to eat more money than any other team that had to move on from a running back. And like you said, second round of the playoffs, Super Bowl win in the two consecutive years since cutting them. I'd say not bad.

855-212-4CBS, 855-212-4227. I'll give you a thought on Dalvin Cook in just a second, but let's go to James in Texas. First up on the Zach Gelb show on CBS Sports Radio. James, what's happening?

How are you doing, Matt? I was thinking, I'm trying to figure out how to word this, but we all know that running backs are super, super important. I mean, I think they are.

But yet, they're probably one of the lowest paid positions because of their short shelf life. Yeah, like a Todd Gurley who we were just talking about. Yeah, so I'm wondering if there's a way, and of course I'm not very smart at math, but I'm wondering if there's a way that the NFL could say, well, we're going to allow you to have a certain percentage of the cap for running backs that doesn't kill the salary cap overall. So what you're saying is the running backs just wouldn't count against the cap?

Is that what you're saying? Well, they would count, but like, you know, I'm not sure how they do the Supermax and the NBA, but I wonder how some of these guys, like, you know, how the Dallas Mavericks are able to keep, you know, Luca and Irving and stuff like that, maybe have like running backs count, but maybe their salary is only a percentage of the overall cap. So that these running backs can try and long-term deals get paid.

I mean, if you think about it, they have a short shelf life because they get hit a lot and they get hurt. And it almost seems that they're very important, but yet it almost seems like the NFL doesn't care about them. And after about five years, they don't want to tie them to a second contract. So there's got to be a way that they could do that where they say, OK, well, we're going to pay you 15 million, but the only only like seven or eight million is going to count against the cap or something like that.

So, James, appreciate the phone call. Here's why that would never happen. If nothing's really getting done right now, usually when you have these labor negotiations, which is what it's going to have to go through, nine times out of 10, the owners are going to defeat the players. So if you're an owner, why would you, when you don't have to give out that money, say, OK, we could alter the cap a little bit in terms of how much that contract will actually count against the cap. And then I'm just going to give you more money when right now the system is in favor of NFL owners.

And the other thing, Hickey, why that would never work is also. Where do you draw the line? Like if you make an exception for a running back, what happens if other positions start to bitch, even though they're getting paid an enormous amount of money? I don't think you could really do anything here.

And and let's be real. As I said a few seconds ago, whenever you get in these labor disputes, the owners are going to win. And right now they have the upper hand.

So I don't think there's anything you could do that. All of a sudden, the owners are going to say, even if you alter the salary cap rules a little bit, now we're going to get these running backs even more money. And we're seeing in sports now, the issue is when certain styles or certain ways to play the game are working, that means other areas falter. In baseball now, if you don't hit home runs, you don't get paid. In basketball, if you are only a back to the basket center, if you can't shoot three, you can't pass. I think everyone in the NBA gets paid these days.

No, but I'm saying like, you know, if you're not a Nicole Yocich or Giannis, you can do multiple things. If you're just a general big man, there's not a big need for you right now in terms of getting a big contract and teams clapping for your services. And now in the NFL, it's quarterbacks getting paid, receivers getting paid. And it's also the guys that are stopping them, like corners, defensive ends, like that's where the money is in the passing game. It used to be a running game when back in the 1940s and even the 60s and 70s, it was still a lot of ground and pound run the ball. Now the game has changed. And so now if the running game is or a single running back is less important to winning, it just doesn't make financial sense to pay a still a good amount of money to a position that is just truly less valued.

Oh, let's just be real. The individual is not valued anymore at the running back position. We all know you need to run the football at some capacity to win, but you don't need a guy that's going to go for 1800 yards in a season because it's not set up that way anymore with how much this league is predicated on throwing the football these days.

That's just a matter of the fact. It stinks for running backs, but there's really nothing that could be done. So all these running backs are now coming together right now in the offseason to try to make a point, which I don't think it's going to lead to anything. Could Dalvin Cook maybe go the other way, where he takes advantage of the Raiders situation right now or he takes advantage of the Giants situation right now? Because we all know when Dalvin Cook signs a contract, in all likelihood, it's going to be a one year deal.

And it's going to be very cheap. Maybe he could get an extra million or two with the status of Josh Jacobs and Saquon Barkley, what their next move is going to be, which is very ambiguous. So ultimately, they'll sign the franchise tag and play. But how many games are going to miss? Are they going to hold out?

How is that going to go down? And then maybe you go to a Saquon and you go to a Josh Jacobs and go, OK, we got Dalvin Cook. Sign the tag and then we'll work to try to trade you somewhere else. And we'll see what another team is going to do, even though right now we're past the deadline of giving out an extension anyway.

But you go somewhere else and we'll get something back for you. And you could try with another team this time next year. I'll be shocked, truly shocked, because I also I don't think I think if Dalvin Cook won a sign for less, he'd already be signed. If he won a sign for six million dollars, let's say, I think he would have.

So let's say if right now his best offer is four million dollars. Could he go get maybe an extra two million dollars right now and make it to six from the Raiders of the Giants? The Giants probably not, because even though Josh Jacobs is very valuable, Saquon Barkley is more valuable than their quarterback. You make the case that Josh Jacobs is more valuable and I would than Jimmy Garoppolo. But the Giants just made the playoffs.

The Raiders are a disaster. I do think the Giants intend to have Saquon on the roster moving forward. But when you look at the Raiders, they didn't even give Josh Jacobs the fifth year option when that was available a year ago. So it wouldn't shock me where if the Raiders ended up doing something with Dalvin Cook, where it would stun me if the Giants ended up doing that, because if I'm Saquon and that happens, I tell the Giants to go screw and I'm not going to play those games. I also wonder now with DeAndre Hopkins off the board, if maybe a team that was considering DeAndre Hopkins, I know it's a different position, but you still have a big name and there's still a role for running backs. If maybe some of the, like a team like the Patriots who were thinking about spending certain resources to go get DeAndre Hopkins, if now that could drive up the price by like an extra million and a half, two million dollars, whatever it may be, to go get Dalvin Cook to New England. That's just something that I thought of as well with DeAndre Hopkins now out of play.

So we'll see what happens with Dalvin Cook. It is the Zach Gilp show on CBS Sports Radio. Is Paul Feinbaum a moron? That's the tease. We'll tell you why we're even asking that question when we come on back in five minutes. You're listening to the Zach Gilp show. It is the Zach Gilp show on CBS Sports Radio. So I saw this clip on Twitter.

I think it was yesterday with the start of SEC media days. And this is some of the dumbest commentary I've ever heard. And this is not hyperbole. This is not in the moment, freak out about something.

And then tomorrow you wake up and you go, oh, I was a little bit too harsh on this person. But this is longtime college football pundit Paul Feinbaum. He was on, I think this was first take. So this was on ESPN. And you just be the judge. Listen up to what he had to say about Nick Saban.

I think, yes, you have to. And first of all, nothing is going to take away from what he's accomplished. And for those who don't follow this closely, he's won six national championships at Alabama since arriving in 2007. He won another one at LSU.

But if he is in the same league as somebody who has now, at the end of this season, won three, then that's a big hit on his legacy. And I think you have to, you also have to question Saban for what happened last year. He had the best team in the country going in.

They were nearly unanimous. And at the NFL draft, in case anyone wasn't paying attention, let me refresh your memory, he had the best offensive player and the best defensive player. Some of the coaching was subpar, too. I mean, Nick Saban, I've never seen a Nick Saban team get scorched like they did in the final minute against Tennessee in Knoxville.

So those are serious questions. So he was asked if his legacy, Nick Saban's legacy, will take a hit if Alabama misses the college football playoff in back to back years. The fact that that answer was yes, and then he went on to have, what, 56 seconds of verbal diarrhea is an absolute disgrace. Nick Saban is one of the greatest college football coaches of all time. And I don't care what the heck he does this year, it will not impact his legacy for one second.

The guy is 285-69-1. Nick Saban has won seven national championships, six at Alabama, one at LSU. I don't care if he is not one of the last four teams standing this year. And yeah, college football is wide open.

There's no doubt about it. And yes, Georgia has been the best team in the nation the last two years. And I think the world of Kirby Smart, who learned from Nick Saban. But even if Kirby Smart goes back to back to back, that's a big time statement.

That's a huge deal. That's a dynasty. But you still have a long ways to go in terms of dethroning Nick Saban's legacy. If you want to say that Kirby Smart's the best coach right now in college football, you could say that. If you want to say that if Kirby Smart wins another national championship this year, unanimously passes Nick Saban just right now. But when you talk about legacy, give me a break, Nick Saban could not win a game this year. And we all know that won't happen and he will still walk away as an all-time great coach because of what he's done.

And this is the problem now with members of the media. They make every game and every season as if it impacts someone's legacy. If Nick Saban had one national championship, different conversation. But Nick Saban has already been thrown in a legitimate goat conversation. And once you get thrown in that conversation, and Nick Saban who could go coach for another decade, but he's sitting there right now at 71 turns 72 on Halloween.

It doesn't matter what happens this year. He's not going to fall out of that conversation, even if he's not one of the last four teams that's remaining in college football. And as far as last year, Paul, you talk a lot about college football.

I get it. Nick Saban had Bryce Young, number one offensive player that was picked in the draft, number one player period. He had Will Anderson Jr., the third player picked in the draft and was the first defensive player off the board. You also had Jameer Gibbs, who did go in the top 15 of the draft. But those wide receivers weren't any good last year.

So don't tell me and I'm not even saying Nick Saban did this great job last year. They had two losses. That's a bad season for Alabama.

But think about that. That's a bad season for Alabama. Their standard is higher than anybody else. And those two games that they lost, I don't even want to defend Saban here, but I'm going to have to. Those games are close. So don't give me this nonsense. And I'm not saying that last year was a great season for Alabama because it's championship robust for them. But to think that his legacy could get impacted by this year, like Paul Feinbaum. Did Nick Saban take a number one or a number two in your Cheerios yesterday morning? Like, that's just someone with an agenda that is just trying to say something to get our eyes out of people, and he doesn't actually believe what he says right there. Because there's no way, whether you love Saban or not, that you could legitimately think that in any way, even for one second, that the legacy of Nick Saban is going to get impacted off an outcome of one individual season this upcoming year.

That was a joke, Hickey. An absolute joke and a disgrace by Paul Feinbaum. And ESPN had some good programming this week. They played a lot of our audio. Good programming. You know, I like a lot of people over at ESPN.

A lot of good, hardworking people. But the fact that that's even a question is a disgrace. And the fact that Paul Feinbaum didn't just laugh at the question and said his legacy is it impacted whatsoever, regardless of what happens this year. And he didn't just laugh for 45 seconds is even more of a disgrace.

I'm with Paul. Oh, you stink! Tom Brady is not the GOAT of the NFL. You want to know why? He was eight and nine and lost to the Cowboys in the first round of the playoffs this past year.

Michael Jordan, not the GOAT of basketball. You want to know why? Let's go back to his Wizards finale. Yeah, that was pretty ugly, right? Remember that? That was bad. I'm sorry.

I'm with Paul. Saban misses the playoffs this year. He's out.

Throw it in the tank. Not even a top five coach in Alabama history if he goes ten and two again this year and misses the playoffs. Fire him.

Good job. I thought you were being serious for a second. Come on, come on. Well, you say some outlandish things to begin with, but if you were serious, we have about three hours left to the show. I would have gone out into the newsroom. I would have left, left the show. But then you're thinking, oh, maybe I should then say something that's really stupid because you would get to host. I would make sure that your microphone would be detached and I would find anyone with the pulse out there in the newsroom to host the show for the next three hours. If you were someone that actually believed that.

Heck, you don't even have to have a pulse. I'll take dead air for three hours than hearing anyone defend Paul Feinbaum and actually think that any part of the legacy of Nick Saban is on the line with this upcoming season of Alabama football. So good job out of you in being sarcastic right there. But there's been times where I've like gone off on this show and you go, oh, no, you actually I think the other person's right.

And then you carry out the argument. I'm happy that you're not being serious there. And also you're an SEC hater and an Alabama. No, that's no, I'm not. No, I actually have a lot of respect for Alabama.

I do. Your takes on that were not very good last year. I feel like I had to come out on that. But this that's stupid.

But also, I don't like all seriousness. And part of that rant was what is going to, quote unquote, knock down his legacy? How if Kirby Smart wins three in a row or three and four years, whatever. How is that an indictment on Nick Saban?

That's what I don't understand. He won six. But if a guy in his league wins three, what does that mean? He taught him.

What do you mean now? Someone else's success. How is that going to knock down yours? If Mike McDaniel goes on to win two Super Bowls in a row the next two years, is that going to take away from Bill Belichick's legacy?

No. Well, they're in the same division, according to Paul Feynman, so it should. But nothing that Bill Belichick has accomplished is going to be diminished because Mike McDaniel, the Dolphins, win two Super Bowls. For example, like when Parcells, right, and Belichick, how close they were, then it got ugly. When Belichick won, let's just say, his first Super Bowl, or even two, and I know then at that time they weren't directly, right, coaching up against one another. I know Parcells eventually returned to coach the Dallas Cowboys. It would be like at that time when it was two and two, and even then they were even at that point, if someone said, oh, this impacts the legacy of Bill Parcells in a negative way. If anything, Belichick learned so much for Parcells, it's even a positive for Parcells.

The only way that it ever, I don't even want to say it impacted Parcells' legacy, but yes, Belichick exceeded Parcells because the guy ended up going to win six Super Bowls. So if you tell me Kirby Smart one day is a nine-time national champion and Nick Saban doesn't win another Super Bowl, I don't think we all of a sudden look at Nick Saban and think he's like gum in the bottom of your shoe, but then you do say that Kirby Smart is a better coach than Nick Saban, and if that's the case, you still take either coach if that were to happen. But you're also not, in either instance, we're not knocking Nick Saban if Kirby Smart wins nine championships. We're praising Kirby Smart as the best coach we've ever seen in college football. There's no, you don't have to knock someone down in order to praise someone else, and that's maybe what he was getting at, but just because Kirby Smart has won now two titles, maybe three, does not mean now we have to look differently on the six championships that Saban has won in Alabama. I would actually love to see Alabama win the national championship this year, and I hope Nick Saban, who's a very petty man, gets on the podium. This would be very un-Nick Saban-like, but if he gets on the podium and goes, Paul, how's my legacy now? and drops the mic, and then never talks to Paul Feinbaum again. I don't usually advocate an athlete or a coach to talk to a media member that way, but this would be justified.

Or remember, you just pointed to a certain body part. According to one former Alabama player, Nick Saban likes those cajones jokes. Maybe he could work that into that speech as well if Alabama wins the national championship this year, directed to Paul. Harry Myers joins us next at Kelp Show CBS Sports Radio.