I just recently got around to reading Michael Lewis‘s immensely entertaining book The Blind Side, even though it has been out for a few years now.
The book highlights how N.F.L. teams only slowly became aware of the immensely important role that offensive left tackles play in protecting the quarterback from blind-side hits. Although there is brief mention in the book that left tackle is the second highest-paid position after quarterback, it is a popular book and thus light on formal statistics.
Curious about the numbers, I put one of my loyal assistants Trevor Gallen on the problem, and here is what he reports back after crunching the numbers for every player in the starting lineup for the first game of the 2007-8 season:
1) As Michael Lewis argued, starting left tackles are indeed paid more on average than any other position on the field except for quarterbacks. The average starting quarterback makes about $5 million a year. The average starting left tackle gets $4 million. Defensive linemen and wide receivers also do pretty well.
2) There aren’t enough left-handed quarterbacks to do a rigorous analysis, but the blind-side theory is supported by the sparse data that exist on lefty quarterbacks. On those teams, right tackles tend to get paid much more than left tackles. Overall, the median blind-side tackles get paid over twice as much as the median non-blind-side tackles.
3) Punters and kickers make the least money — then safeties.
4) Perhaps the biggest surprise to me is how little running backs make. They are down toward the bottom of the list; I would guess that the wear and tear they face tends to shorten their careers, so they have fewer years over which to earn.
(Note: there are various ways to tally up N.F.L. salaries; Trevor used as the salary how much a player counts against the salary cap.)
and 
. You can also watch it on 
I’d be interested in how these salaries have evolved over time. I would imagine that running back salaries have declined (relative to the salary inflation of the rest of the league at least) in recent years as it has become more common to use a HB by committee approach.
Re: #4 and running backs … is it possible to compare running backs in (say) their 2nd year with other position-players in their 2nd year, 3rd year RBs with other 3rd year players, etc. and find out if the supposition is true?
Recall as well that annual salary figures are a function of contracts signed x years in the past. So, a meaningful analysis would control for contract length and total salary. Recall, too, that the only “guaranteed” money comes from signing bonuses, since players can be cut at any time and have their contracts voided.
Every organization has that one person who gets paid big money for strange reasons.
If you’re familiar with the John Phillip Souza marching band, you might find it interesting that the highest paid member of the band was the…
Bass drum player!!!
Why? The bass drum keeps the band in tempo, and therefore on-step!
Funny stuff…
Rico Garcia
http://1ideaperday.wordpress.com
Seeing the number of QBs that have be decimated in Chicago over the years, due to lack of blind side tackle, they are worth their weight in gold (or many multiples as the case may be).
Running backs are relatively cheap, as they are in much greater supply. The Denver Broncos have proven over the years, that if you have a solid line, you can basically plug in any slightly above average, college running back (plentiful in supply) and be successful. Except for the the top 3 or 4 RBs in the league, there’s not that much differentiation in production in terms of points and/or yardage. Many teams have taken to sharing the load between two or three RBs, probably because of this.
I think there are two main factors.
1. Relative scarcity of fast, strong, huge, athletically skilled people.
2. High variance in performance between the best of above group, and the rest.
When you throw in the importance of the position on the field, it’s a perfect recipe for high prices.
Someone (Football Outisders, maybe?) did a study comparing running backs to their own backups (who, presumably, run behind the same blockers, in the same offensive scheme, and alongside the same passing attack – to opposing defenses honest) and found that running backs are largely interchangeable. It’s the nature of the game that running backs get a lot of credit among fans and the media, since they’re the ones “racking up” the yards and touchdowns. (The rise of Fantasy Football has only exacerbated this trend.) But the relatively low salaries of running backs suggest an understanding among NFL decision-makers of the relatively low importance of running backs, especially compared to their blockers (who really determine whether a running back is successful).
That makes the game even more complex than before. Consider that if you have a right-handed quarterback, but the backup QB is left-handed, if the backup comes in, he is not nearly so well protected.
So it makes sense to do two things, it seems….
1) Ensure that all QBs are the same-handed (since I would think the left tackle may not be able to immediately translate all his instructions to the right side), and
2) That you have strong depth at the blind-side tackle (otherwise, if the tackle gets injured, you are back to a poorly protected QB concerning the blind side).
Of course, if people wanted to save a little money, they might just always place the tight end on the blind side…giving them two blockers (perhaps for the price of one) to keep out the defense (and someone who can step across the line and receive, etc.).
But you definitely have to KNOW what handed your QBs are come draft time, or you might draft someone who doesn’t work well with the blind side.