OT: Barkley considering sitting out this season

[RUDiddy777]

A bird in the hand as they say.

The people advising Barkley are not helping him in any way. Sitting out a season would be epically stupid.

Seriously, it’s not like RB will suddenly be a 15-20 mil per year position in 2024. He’s got 3-4 good years left. 10 mil is less than 13-14 mil, but a lot more than 0.

If the giants can get some good draft picks in return and free up cash for an elite WR in 2024…

 

[koleszar]

Someone will do it, there's always a sucker. Give it 6 months and wait for Jerry Jones to call!

LOL!

On another note, I have no idea what the Cowboys are going to do now that they tagged Pollard. They have $27.7 mil. tied up in RB's someone's either seriously getting their contract restructured or released.

 

[yessir321]

LOL!

On another note, I have no idea what the Cowboys are going to do now that they tagged Pollard. They have $27.7 mil. tied up in RB's someone's either seriously getting their contract restructured or released.

They already did, they released Zeke months ago. Pretty Sure they're rolling with Pollard, Ronald Jones and the rookie, Deuce Vaughn. Tbh though it's not like they couldn't go out and sign any one of however many awesome RB's available bc the RB market has dried up so bad.

 

[koleszar]

They already did, they released Zeke months ago.

I completely forgot my bad.

 

[yessir321]

I completely forgot my bad.

There's no way Pollard is there beyond this year though. Coming up they have to resign Micah, Diggs and Ceedee who are all still on rookie deals

 

[DJ Spanky]

Only on paper. He earned a little more than half of that before getting cut and taking a league minimum deal with the Chiefs. Everyone also remembers how he was terrible with the Jets after sitting out a year.

Little more than half of 52mm is a lot more than than 10mm.

You need to look at all the facts and stop cross mixing Bell and Barkley. Before the deadline, the Steelers offered Le'Veon Bell a 5 year, $70 million contract. That's $14 million a year: Bell wanted $17 million.

Le'Veon Bell reportedly turned down a monstrous $70 million deal from the Steelers
This is the final deal that the Steelers offered Le'Veon Bell

That contract had $33 million in guaranteed money. And if he had played, he would have made $14.5 million from the franchise tag.

 

[DJ Spanky]

The people advising Barkley are not helping him in any way. Sitting out a season would be epically stupid.

That's the problem, these players get people in their ear who tell them absolute horseshit and do not have the player's best interest at heart. Look no farther than our own Jaden Jones: what absolutely horrendous advice was whispered in his ear.

 

[bitnez]

Tony Pollard is exhibit A why you don’t sign a RB to a big second contract. Mid round pick who was better than the star RB for almost the entire second contract

 

[satnom]

It’s real simple. Without SB last season, Giants are lucky to win four games and not make the playoffs. The general market has devalued the rb position but you could argue that the value of SB to the Giant offense is higher than the general market.

If the Giants don’t offer SB more money before start of season they’re taking as much risk of being a below .500 team this season as much as SB not playing and never being able to make up the lost income.

Interesting game of chicken that’s happening.

GO RU

 

[ClassOf02v.2]

It’s real simple. Without SB last season, Giants are lucky to win four games and not make the playoffs. The general market has devalued the rb position but you could argue that the value of SB to the Giant offense is higher than the general market.

If the Giants don’t offer SB more money before start of season they’re taking as much risk of being a below .500 team this season as much as SB not playing and never being able to make up the lost income.

Interesting game of chicken that’s happening.

GO RU

It’s over, no more negotiating. The deadline to make a deal has come and gone. It’s down to either SB plays on the franchise tag or he chooses not to play.

 

[bitnez]

It’s over, no more negotiating. The deadline to make a deal has come and gone. It’s down to either SB plays on the franchise tag or he chooses not to play.

This. I guess some don’t understand the rules. They are not permitted to negotiate anymore. That deadline was last week.

 

[Postman_1]

I'm glad the Giants are not overpaying him. Availability is an ability. I like Barkley but, no of us knows what the offer was. We hear "reports" but truthfully none of us knows. These RB's are just sour the position has been devalued. I'd be sour too if I was a RB. It's not like they are making chump change

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/secret-nfl-rb-meeting-features-austin-ekeler-josh-jacobs/

 

[Jtung230]

Tony Pollard is exhibit A why you don’t sign a RB to a big second contract. Mid round pick who was better than the star RB for almost the entire second contract

Jury is still out on Pollard.

 

[bitnez]

Jury is still out on Pollard.

As star - sure

As better than Zeke the last 2 years - nope

 

[RUInsanityToo]

It’s real simple. Without SB last season, Giants are lucky to win four games and not make the playoffs. The general market has devalued the rb position but you could argue that the value of SB to the Giant offense is higher than the general market.

If the Giants don’t offer SB more money before start of season they’re taking as much risk of being a below .500 team this season as much as SB not playing and never being able to make up the lost income.

Interesting game of chicken that’s happening.

GO RU

Read up and learn the NFL CBA rules first to understand what is allowed to happen before making statements on what should happen.

 

[SkilletHead2]

Easy there professor. In my experience when someone resorts to personal inults during a debate it generally speaks to their own insecurity about the soundness of there own argument/logic.

If you want to keep things purely logical, I'm game. But you appear to be falling into the trap of mixing logic, emotion and opinion into your argument as well.

Lets start with where the Giants stand as a current franchise. They initiated a management change, strip down rebuild last year......but greatly exceeded expectations....albeit with a fairly weak NFL schedule. Their win projections for 2023 season stand at 7.5 against a very difficult schedule. They are a very young team with a still relatively unknown commodity at QB who they resigned to a $160m contract which will mostly load against the cap in the first 3 years. They signed Jones likely because his advanced stats in terms of efficiency, reads and running ability tell a much different story about what he is as a QB....also likely because cap situation limitation and their ability to get creative with his contract to the cap management - especially this year.

On to SB. He's going into his 6th year and 2nd contract industry where RBs average about 4 years and do not likely live up to high salaried 2nd contracts. He has missed over 25% of his career games due to injury but still retains an extemely high usage rate with over 1200 career touches. His salary demands would have put him in the top 5 RBs career earnings of ALL TIME. Even with his franchise tag salary, he will move into the top 15 of all time earnings at RB.

So...the question is....

From a logical perspective, if you were in Joe Schoen's position. Would you:

1) Stick to your negotiation limit.....accounting for the team rebuild, schedule and projected positioning as well as cap management over multiple years.... also knowing you had the one franchise tag leverage as insurance.

......OR..

2) Resign Barkley to the multi-year deal he was seeking @ about $14M per season guaranteed for 2 years as he likely has already reached his peak and likely will be starting decline during this contract extension.

To me its not just about this year. Its about building a long term franchise. If you are being honest with the situation, it is unlikely that Barkley will be part of that longer term beyond this season. Even if the parties agreed to sign for multiple seasons, his injury downtime potential would be pretty high based on wear and tear, high usage and previous injury history. So like it or not, likely get ready for what the rest of the NFL is doing. Rotating a group of RBs with different looks and in different schemes to mix things up and keep the defense guessing.

Couldn't agree more on the personal issue, and if you hadn't started, I wouldn't have responded. But let's drop that now.

Resigning Barkley for 2 years at $14 million would have been so intelligent. Signing Jones for 4 years at $40 million was insane. RBs may last for years, but the data on QBs is 4.4 years. Jones and Barkley are each 26 years old and will not be 28 during this season or next.

Jones is a Tier 2 QB at best, and SB is a Tier 1 RB. Jones is way better at QB when SB is in the game than when he is not. The stats on that are overwhelming. And now it looks like he won't have him.

As to the long term franchise building, the Giants have cast their lot with Jones, a guy who currently isn't in the top 10 of young QBs. Hell, he might not even be the best young QB named Jones. He sits behind Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, Jackson, Tagovailoa, Murray, Lawrence, Herbert, Hurts, and there are ones coming up behind them.

I've been a Giants fan for 45 years and really hope they can somehow sign Barkley somehow. Like Jones and hope he can develop, but he just isn't elite nor worth $40 million a year.

 

[SkilletHead2]

Fournette was a top draft choice and released by Jags before he even got into his fourth season. He signed with TB for little money after the season already started. If you don’t like the word “aged” that’s fine but teams weren’t jumping to get him. Moreover, if you think he was really good it further proves my point that you can get solid RBs off the scrap heap for reasonable money just about any time you want in the NFL.

I get it — many Giants fans think Jones isn’t as valuable as Barkley. That is very likely true but it doesn’t matter because it’s all about supply and demand. There are no QBs and there are a lot of RBs.

Let's see who the Giants get from that pool of great RBs and how well they do without SB. Should be an interesting year.

 

[NickRU714]

That's the problem, these players get people in their ear who tell them absolute horseshit and do not have the player's best interest at heart. Look no farther than our own Jaden Jones: what absolutely horrendous advice was whispered in his ear.

Look no further than this very thread.

There are multiple people saying the Giants should have overpaid and given Barkley what he wanted.

 

[bitnez]

Let's see who the Giants get from that pool of great RBs and how well they do without SB. Should be an interesting year.

I’m not a Giants fan so I don’t care but I do think it makes me a bit less invested in the desire to resign SB. And you can go sign Cook right now for $10-12 mm (and probably less) so there are still options.

 

[Jtung230]

Look no further than this very thread.

There are multiple people saying the Giants should have overpaid and given Barkley what he wanted.

I thought the difference was the guaranteed component. How is that overpaid?

 

[RUInsanityToo]

Couldn't agree more on the personal issue, and if you hadn't started, I wouldn't have responded. But let's drop that now.

Resigning Barkley for 2 years at $14 million would have been so intelligent. Signing Jones for 4 years at $40 million was insane. RBs may last for years, but the data on QBs is 4.4 years. Jones and Barkley are each 26 years old and will not be 28 during this season or next.

Jones is a Tier 2 QB at best, and SB is a Tier 1 RB. Jones is way better at QB when SB is in the game than when he is not. The stats on that are overwhelming. And now it looks like he won't have him.

As to the long term franchise building, the Giants have cast their lot with Jones, a guy who currently isn't in the top 10 of young QBs. Hell, he might not even be the best young QB named Jones. He sits behind Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, Jackson, Tagovailoa, Murray, Lawrence, Herbert, Hurts, and there are ones coming up behind them.

I've been a Giants fan for 45 years and really hope they can somehow sign Barkley somehow. Like Jones and hope he can develop, but he just isn't elite nor worth $40 million a year.

Not sure, but you seem to either not understand how guaranteed money in NFL contract works against the cap or you are conveniently leaving it out of the analysis.

Giants have guaranteed Jones $82m over 4 years with another $12m incentives likely achieved. The fourth year of his contract is non-guaranteed ($46m) in case they want to separate from him after 3 years. You say this is insane.....but not what you would have otherwise done in that situation if you were Schoen give the cap, Jones leverage and the QB landscape (top QBs are now going for over $50m per season).

Top RBs are now making $10-$12M per season. That is the range the Giants offered.

Note...per my previous post. Per the CBA rules the time for negotiation is done. There is no more hope that the Giants and Barkley will get a different deal done. Per rule at this point he either signs the tag or holds out. My guess is he will hold out for the pre-season and come back to play early into the season. I know in a previous post you projected the thoughts in his head rationalizing why he would hold out ..... but IMO most professional players seem to generally want/need to play more than anything else.

 

[Jtung230]

Not sure, but you seem to either not understand how guaranteed money in NFL contract works against the cap or you are conveniently leaving it out of the analysis.

Giants have guaranteed Jones $82m over 4 years with another $12m incentives likely achieved. The fourth year of his contract is non-guaranteed ($46m) in case they want to separate from him after 3 years. You say this is insane.....but not what you would have otherwise done in that situation if you were Schoen give the cap, Jones leverage and the QB landscape (top QBs are now going for over $50m per season).

Top RBs are now making $10-$12M per season. That is the range the Giants offered.

Note...per my previous post. Per the CBA rules the time for negotiation is done. There is no more hope that the Giants and Barkley will get a different deal done. Per rule at this point he either signs the tag or holds out. My guess is he will hold out for the pre-season and come back to play early into the season. I know in a previous post you projected the thoughts in his head rationalizing why he would hold out ..... but IMO most professional players seem to generally want/need to play more than anything else.

Comparing Jones to top QB is silly. He had a good year last year thanks to SB. His previous 2 w/o or with a limited SB was awful

 

[DJ Spanky]

Look no further than this very thread.

There are multiple people saying the Giants should have overpaid and given Barkley what he wanted.

Absolutely amazing those people aren't heading up NFL teams winning multiple Super Bowls!

 

[satnom]

Read up and learn the NFL CBA rules first to understand what is allowed to happen before making statements on what should happen.

Without having looked at the wording of the CBA are you saying Saquan, Pollard and Jacob’s are holding out under guidance from their respective representation with no hope of management caving in to rework a deal because they are now franchised and that the collective bargaining agreement rules are so airtight that the only option for them to return are to play under the tag? Somehow their agents, NFLPA and players may differ in your viewpoint.

You sir live in a world of absolutes.

GO RU

 

[SkilletHead2]

Not sure, but you seem to either not understand how guaranteed money in NFL contract works against the cap or you are conveniently leaving it out of the analysis.

Giants have guaranteed Jones $82m over 4 years with another $12m incentives likely achieved. The fourth year of his contract is non-guaranteed ($46m) in case they want to separate from him after 3 years. You say this is insane.....but not what you would have otherwise done in that situation if you were Schoen give the cap, Jones leverage and the QB landscape (top QBs are now going for over $50m per season).

Top RBs are now making $10-$12M per season. That is the range the Giants offered.

Note...per my previous post. Per the CBA rules the time for negotiation is done. There is no more hope that the Giants and Barkley will get a different deal done. Per rule at this point he either signs the tag or holds out. My guess is he will hold out for the pre-season and come back to play early into the season. I know in a previous post you projected the thoughts in his head rationalizing why he would hold out ..... but IMO most professional players seem to generally want/need to play more than anything else.

Nope. But here's the point. You seem to be arguing that Jones' contract was basically the only contract they could come up with or franchise him, which would have cost them more in cap hit in the short run. But that contract was negotiated and could have been negotiated for less, which would have given them more flexibility for SB.

My basic argument is that Jones is an unproven QB with maybe a limited ceiling, and the Giants have given him the sun and the moon. SB is a proven talent who could be seeing even better years the next three, and they franchise him with a take it or leave it ultimatum, when what he wanted was incredibly reasonable compared to Jones.

An interesting question here is what time frame the Giants have for the rebuild? Do they want to be competitive in 2-3 years, or longer? Do they want to be decent next year?

 

[NickRU714]

Without having looked at the wording of the CBA are you saying Saquan, Pollard and Jacob’s are holding out under guidance from their respective representation with no hope of management caving in to rework a deal because they are now franchised and that the collective bargaining agreement rules are so airtight that the only option for them to return are to play under the tag? Somehow their agents, NFLPA and players may differ in your viewpoint.

You sir live in a world of absolutes.

GO RU

Ummmm you’re completely wrong.
The CBA says exactly that Saquan, Pollard and Jacobs can ONLY play under the 1 year tag this year.
The teams are unable to negotiate a long term deal. The deadline passed last Monday.

Show where their agents, the NFLPA or the players have said anything different.

We live in a world of legal binding agreements (like the CBA) that create absolutes.

But at least you admitted you have zero actual knowledge of what’s in the CBA from the beginning.

 

[NickRU714]

Here’s the language directly from the NFL itself:

“Teams and franchise players can sign multi-year extensions until July 17 (the typical deadline is July 15 unless on a weekend; because July 15 is on a Saturday this year, the deadline is the following Monday). If there is no extension in place by that date, the team and player can only agree to a one-year contract for the current season.”

https://www.nfl.com/_amp/2023-nfl-f...ormation-on-franchise-tags-contract-term#tags

 

[DJ Spanky]

Dear god.

 

[satnom]

Here’s the language directly from the NFL itself:

“Teams and franchise players can sign multi-year extensions until July 17 (the typical deadline is July 15 unless on a weekend; because July 15 is on a Saturday this year, the deadline is the following Monday). If there is no extension in place by that date, the team and player can only agree to a one-year contract for the current season.”

https://www.nfl.com/_amp/2023-nfl-f...ormation-on-franchise-tags-contract-term#tags

So there you go. It’s a done deal. Saquan has no chance in hell of getting an upfront or back end signing bonus nor agreement for years beyond this season. He’s fighting a lost cause because of the strict wording of the CBA and rules or hard caps are never manipulated in sports.

Funny thing is I really don’t give a **** about the Giants and can see them finishing last in the division without Saquan.

GO RU

 

[SkilletHead2]

Not sure, but you seem to either not understand how guaranteed money in NFL contract works against the cap or you are conveniently leaving it out of the analysis.

Giants have guaranteed Jones $82m over 4 years with another $12m incentives likely achieved. The fourth year of his contract is non-guaranteed ($46m) in case they want to separate from him after 3 years. You say this is insane.....but not what you would have otherwise done in that situation if you were Schoen give the cap, Jones leverage and the QB landscape (top QBs are now going for over $50m per season).

Top RBs are now making $10-$12M per season. That is the range the Giants offered.

Note...per my previous post. Per the CBA rules the time for negotiation is done. There is no more hope that the Giants and Barkley will get a different deal done. Per rule at this point he either signs the tag or holds out. My guess is he will hold out for the pre-season and come back to play early into the season. I know in a previous post you projected the thoughts in his head rationalizing why he would hold out ..... but IMO most professional players seem to generally want/need to play more than anything else.

Here’s the language directly from the NFL itself:

“Teams and franchise players can sign multi-year extensions until July 17 (the typical deadline is July 15 unless on a weekend; because July 15 is on a Saturday this year, the deadline is the following Monday). If there is no extension in place by that date, the team and player can only agree to a one-year contract for the current season.”

https://www.nfl.com/_amp/2023-nfl-f...ormation-on-franchise-tags-contract-term#tags

Question on this. I'm reading different things on it from different sources. It's clear that this has to be a one-year deal for Saquon, but it doesn't say in the language I'm reading that the amount has to be the franchise tag amount. That is, can the Giants say, OK, we'll give you $14 million this year. Or are they both locked into the tag amount as well as the one year deal?

 

[satnom]

Here’s the language directly from the NFL itself:

“Teams and franchise players can sign multi-year extensions until July 17 (the typical deadline is July 15 unless on a weekend; because July 15 is on a Saturday this year, the deadline is the following Monday). If there is no extension in place by that date, the team and player can only agree to a one-year contract for the current season.”

https://www.nfl.com/_amp/2023-nfl-f...ormation-on-franchise-tags-contract-term#tags

Seems to me like a trade could be worked out since it’s a “non exclusive franchise tag” If there is no agreement between Giants and SB by start of the season:

“Non-exclusive franchise tag: A player who receives the non-exclusive franchise tag is free to negotiate with other teams. The player receives a one-year deal with a salary set at the greater of (a) the cap percentage average for his position (an amount equal to the sum of the franchise-tag figures at a player's position over the previous five seasons divided by the sum of the salary caps over the previous five seasons multiplied by the current year's salary cap) OR (b) 120 percent of his PYS (the player's cap number from the previous season, minus any performance incentives).
Let's use receiver Davante Adams as an example of how the 120 percent increase of a Prior Year Salary could be applied. Adams was traded last offseason to the Raiders, who signed him to a new contract. But before then, the Packers applied the tag to him. If he had played on the tag in Green Bay last season, his tag would have been worth $20.145 million, which was $1.726 million more than the standard wide receiver tag in 2022 ($18.419 million). This is because Adams had a PYS of $16,787,500 in 2021, and 120 percent of that is higher than the standard tag was.

Teams that use the non-exclusive franchise tag hold the right of first refusal. If a designated player signs an offer sheet with another team, the player's previous team has five days to match the offer sheet. Should it decide not to, the player's original team shall be entitled to draft-choice compensation equivalent to two first-round picks.

Players to receive the non-exclusive franchise tag in 2023: RB Saquon Barkley (Giants), TE Evan Engram (Jaguars), QB Lamar Jackson (Ravens), RB Josh Jacobs(Raiders), DT Daron Payne (Commanders), RB Tony Pollard (Cowboys).
2023 non-exclusive franchise tag salaries:

• QB: $32.416 million
• RB: $10.091 million
• WR: $19.743 million
• TE: $11.345 million
• OL: $18.244 million
• DE: $19.727 million
• DT: $18.937 million
• LB: $20.926 million
• CB: $18.140 million
• S: $14.460 million
• K/P: $5.393 million”

GO RU

 

[ashokan]

Comparing Jones to top QB is silly. He had a good year last year thanks to SB. His previous 2 w/o or with a limited SB was awful

To be fair Jones has had a lot of adversity.
The OL sucked most years (Hernandez was so bad) and Jones had new coaches every year.
Saquon was out for awhile and the WRs were medicore.
Toney was a headcase and Shepard was often hurt.
Evan Engram was an enigma and Golladay was horrible.

Despite all that Jones has shown progress every year
His first year he led the league in fumbles with 18 (11 lost) and last year he only lost 3.
He's not a turnover waiting to happen in the pocket and his awareness is better
He ran for 7 TDs (winning some games) and prior to that the most he had was 2
He only had 5 INTs after 12, 10 and 7 in prior years.

Sims and Eli weren't lights out in their first years
Eli could throw a screen pass and miss the receiver by a couple yards
Eli threw a few more TDs (low 20s) but he threw INTs like crazy and only ran for 7 TDs his whole career

 

[ashokan]

Otis Anderson making sense

https://nypost.com/2023/07/23/ottis...barkley-didnt-make-correct-contract-decision/

 

[DJ Spanky]

Otis Anderson making sense

https://nypost.com/2023/07/23/ottis...barkley-didnt-make-correct-contract-decision/

THAT'S the kind of person Barkley should have been listening to!

 

[RU Cheese]

Lot of strange takes in this thread... I don't understand what Jones has to do with this. I don't think he's a superstar QB but it's not like the Giants could've just given him less money to sign Barkley. He has, you know, an agent and all.

I also think the claims that Jones sucess last year was driven by Barkley are silly. You don't think it had to do with one of the better coaches and coordinators and their game plan? I posted earlier but no one commented - the NYG RB position ranked middle of the league in yards and yards per carry last year.

 

[Postman_1]

Otis Anderson making sense

https://nypost.com/2023/07/23/ottis...barkley-didnt-make-correct-contract-decision/

I just watched a replay of Super Bowl 25 the other day. He was 32 I believe at the time and still productive. Tiki was highly productive too in his early thirties when he retired. Seems RB’s lasted longer back then. They were used more too IMO. I agree with Anderson’s take.

 

[ashokan]

Lot of strange takes in this thread... I don't understand what Jones has to do with this. I don't think he's a superstar QB but it's not like the Giants could've just given him less money to sign Barkley. He has, you know, an agent and all.

I also think the claims that Jones sucess last year was driven by Barkley are silly. You don't think it had to do with one of the better coaches and coordinators and their game plan? I posted earlier but no one commented - the NYG RB position ranked middle of the league in yards and yards per carry last year.

Jones' salary bump is a sign of things to come with regard to salaries. As Giants get better they will be paying a lot more for other players. A mistake Giants made in the past was letting servicable OL leave to free-up cap space. They wont be doing that with new OL and DL. Part of the Giant's situation is setting the tone for future negotiations. You can't just toss money at players for being good guys. Belichick didn't win all thoise titles keeping favorite players around

 

[Plum Street]

I just watched a replay of Super Bowl 25 the other day. He was 32 I believe at the time and still productive. Tiki was highly productive too in his early thirties when he retired. Seems RB’s lasted longer back then. They were used more too IMO. I agree with Anderson’s take.

From that article here is an interesting tidbit


Anderson was one of seven running backs named MVP in the first 32 Super Bowls.

Not a single running back has been the MVP of any of the past 25 Super Bowls.

 

[RUScrew85]

Maybe ya'll Giants fans can arrange a NIL payout for him?

 

[ashokan]

I just watched a replay of Super Bowl 25 the other day. He was 32 I believe at the time and still productive. Tiki was highly productive too in his early thirties when he retired. Seems RB’s lasted longer back then. They were used more too IMO. I agree with Anderson’s take.

Giants had better blockers when Anderson and Tiki played (they also had fullbacks).
The two most injured positions are WR and OL.
OL gets injured a lot by their own teamates rolling-up on their legs.
If the RBs are getting stuck at the LOS they can get hurt the same ways.
Fortunately the older Giants could block

Plus RBs have different styles and some runners make sharp cuts where their legs are sticking-out when making a leaning cut. Paul James and Kordell Young ran like that. At Army I watched Young from the end zone and I realized how far his legs were out on lean cuts. It was no wonder he was often hurt. Otis was a power back and Tiki was a mighyt-mite. I hope Otis makes the HOF because he was a great player his whole career