Just want to do a quick rewind here, We’re talking about if Henry is worth the money, DJ gets brought up as overpaid and potentially crippling his team with his contract. Then DJ is considered over rated among the reasons why is teams don’t have to stack the box against him. I disagree on the point that “needing to stack the box” or not is a useful benchmark to whether a RB is overrated or not. To relate to the overall thread, I think his “over rated” idea could have been valid prediction but more so in hindsight of what he did after his payday. The season he put up is one of the best in the past 20 years and only also accomplished by regular league leaders that no one would question their paycheck almost entirely. Some of which stacking the box was a good move, some not (which is why I don’t think it’s valid for overrated or not). Because of the rarity of his production and the other names that accomplished it, cardinals were totally justified in paying for him (never mind that 3/39 isn’t all that bad) and had reason to believe he would be a name among the few other names to do what he did. I think guys like Faulk and Holmes helped change the RB position. (Roger Craig years before). The value of top RBs is not strictly running and that some of the most valuable all time were because of their receiving skills. Johnson can run and catch.