JPP looking for "At Least" Vernon money per Ralph

gone too.

In comment 13337624 Jon in NYC said:

Quote:

gone too.

+2. Somebody is going to offer him crazy coin. Not sure about Hankins, but he may be gone as well.

considering the number of plays he's made against them over the years and the fact that they desperately need a pass rush.

.

In comment 13337636 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

considering the number of plays he's made against them over the years and the fact that they desperately need a pass rush.

Dallas can afford him?

Seems like a good fit. I'm kinda hoping we're outbid.

In comment 13337637 Giants2012 said:

Quote:

.

+1

In comment 13337639 crick n NC said:

Quote:

In comment 13337636 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: considering the number of plays he's made against them over the years and the fact that they desperately need a pass rush. Dallas can afford him?

They're not going to let Tony Romo's contract just sit around on the bench while they're in a winning window.I have no idea what their cap is, but they're not letting $18-20m go to waste as a backup QB.

In comment 13337650 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

In comment 13337639 crick n NC said: Quote: In comment 13337636 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: considering the number of plays he's made against them over the years and the fact that they desperately need a pass rush. Dallas can afford him? They're not going to let Tony Romo's contract just sit around on the bench while they're in a winning window.I have no idea what their cap is, but they're not letting $18-20m go to waste as a backup QB.

the most the Cowboys can save this year is ~$5M by cutting or trading Romo and they're not in cap shape.

I'll be shocked if JPP winds up in Dallas when teams like Cleveland, Tennessee, SF, Jacksonville even New England have over 50M in cap space, (Cleveland over 100M) before any cap cuts by any of them.

They can't even afford their own roster. No idea how they will restructure Romo as is, the can't cut him and can't see anybody trading for all that cash with such a high risk of injury.

But I'm guessing agent setting the high mark now

.

In comment 13337636 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

considering the number of plays he's made against them over the years and the fact that they desperately need a pass rush.

THat would be disgusting but are they the only team over the cap?

Are you content letting the negotiations linger until after July 15 in which case his only option is to sign the tender, but we would be unable to negotiate a long-term contract after that date? Keep in mind that 17 mil must be allocated from the cap limiting our ability to react in the early days of FA to sign OL help.

In comment 13337659 Diver_Down said:

Quote:

Are you content letting the negotiations linger until after July 15 in which case his only option is to sign the tender, but we would be unable to negotiate a long-term contract after that date? Keep in mind that 17 mil must be allocated from the cap limiting our ability to react in the early days of FA to sign OL help.

We should have enough to make other moves and worst case scenario you recind it.

In comment 13337659 Diver_Down said:

Quote:

Are you content letting the negotiations linger until after July 15 in which case his only option is to sign the tender, but we would be unable to negotiate a long-term contract after that date? Keep in mind that 17 mil must be allocated from the cap limiting our ability to react in the early days of FA to sign OL help.

Yes

$17 million for one year and let him walk afterwards unless somebody else signs him after the tag is placed in him. I'd be willing to negotiate the two #1 price tag down

I really doubt we franchise him again. If anything, we should use the franchise tag on Hankins. It would be a lot cheaper.

of course the agent will ask for the moon. Tag him and we have leverage. If someone like Jacksonville wants him, they can give us their premium draft pick as compensation.

In comment 13337662 Danny Kanell said:

Quote:

I really doubt we franchise him again. If anything, we should use the franchise tag on Hankins. It would be a lot cheaper.

Eh, not really.The estimated franchise tag for a DT this year is 13.5M.

Hankins is absolutely freaking not worth that money.

In comment 13337662 Danny Kanell said:

Quote:

I really doubt we franchise him again. If anything, we should use the franchise tag on Hankins. It would be a lot cheaper.

Hankins doenst deserve a franchise tag.

hes expendable

In comment 13337663 David in LA said:

Quote:

of course the agent will ask for the moon. Tag him and we have leverage. If someone like Jacksonville wants him, they can give us their premium draft pick as compensation.

How do you know Jax will have a premium pick next year? Any draft pick compensation is given in the following year. Tag him and we do have leverage while it eats into our available cap by 17 mil. He is not going to sign the tag. He might force the Giants hand to pull the tag and make him a free agent. Of course the FA OL that can help us will be gone, but we can always count on Newhouse and Jerry to be available.

He's got no recourse. He sits out, he loses a year in his prime, money he's not making back.

I don't think anyone is paying him Vernon money either. He's older, has had back issues and plays with a special device on his hand. He's going to get paid without a doubt, but I don't think he's going to max out the position.

I can definitely see us giving him a big time contract.

It makes sense. This 2-4 year window is all we have before we will be shopping for a QB.

It makes no sense to roll over the cap space.


We're not going to choose Hankins, Cruz, or Jennings.

wouldnt be shocked at a DRC extension as a restructure either.

They should be using it to fix the offense.

as a NFL player, your shelf-life is not long. It's all about the money, and always will be.

I'm not a huge JPP fan but he was effective this year. We likely were going to add another pass rusher in the draft even if he were retained. Now we'd need to add 2. Yes this likely means we move on from Hankins, but I really think most DT's, even average ones like the 2016 version of Hankins, look better next to Snacks. We lose JPP and this defense falls off from top 10. Unless the offense is fixed to the point where they're top 10 in scoring next season, we're going to need a top defense again. We need to keep him, flaws and all.

In comment 13337675 jcn56 said:

Quote:

He's got no recourse. He sits out, he loses a year in his prime, money he's not making back. I don't think anyone is paying him Vernon money either. He's older, has had back issues and plays with a special device on his hand. He's going to get paid without a doubt, but I don't think he's going to max out the position.

He says he won't sign the tag. Of course, after the deadline passes for us to work out a long-term deal (July 15), then he'll sign it so he doesn't miss out on the year. With that being said, he can sit out all of training camp. If he signs the tag before, then we can fine him. When you get 17 mil guaranteed, 30k/day is no big deal and he doesn't have to be near the facility. If he doesn't sign the tag before camp, we can't fine a player who's not under contract. We could always rescind the tag, but in his case, there will be plenty of teams willing to pay him his market rate regardless if it is Aug. 31st.

On the OL (two are ideal) and maybe a WR to replace Cruz. Unless he'll sign the tag, which is a sticking point.

Wouldn't mind seeing them heavily invest in the OL as Eli winds down his career.

Defense played well without JPP other than one half of football.

but that doesn't mean they will just throw is at any and every FA. I'd be shocked if he gets in the neighborhood of Vernon money. I have no idea how this plays out but if they don't end up signing a top Guard or Tackle then yeah, I guess the franchise is in play.

That's all posturing until we get there. It's not in his favor to hold off until the last minute. Practices? He doesn't need to hold off of signing to avoid practices, he could just as easily 'pull a hamstring'. He'll sign, knowing that he has time to try to negotiate terms with the Giants while his agent works the phones with other teams to see what they're willing to pay.

Not unfamiliar territory for these guys. Cruz went the same route and came back with a deal. Here, the only question is whether the Giants are willing to commit so much money to the DE position.

pay him.

He is a bad man.

I hate that fans care so much about salary - as a negative - the gm's job is to build a talented roster - who give a crap about how much he is paid

They would just defer more guaranteed money for free agents towards 2018 when JPP is gone and his $17 million is available again.

Giants hold the cards

In comment 13337625 antdog24 said:

Quote:

lol This was my first thought. I love JPP and he probably deserves that kind of money but I can't see the Giants doing it. Too much money for a guy who seems to always have some kind of injury happening.

In comment 13337675 jcn56 said:

Quote:

He's got no recourse. He sits out, he loses a year in his prime, money he's not making back. I don't think anyone is paying him Vernon money either. He's older, has had back issues and plays with a special device on his hand. He's going to get paid without a doubt, but I don't think he's going to max out the position.

I Agree 100%

In comment 13337636 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

considering the number of plays he's made against them over the years and the fact that they desperately need a pass rush.

They have zero chance of signing him. They'll be lucky to keep Terrell McLain much less sign an $85m JPP.

the Jags will pony up

In comment 13337637 Giants2012 said:

Quote:

.

Yep

Sucks for him, but that's business

And the fact that Jacksonville was in on Vernon but misses out, Florida makes the most sense...

F R A N C H I S E

... Skins should use with Cousins. JPP has trade value and the Giants can pick up an asset if they don't match.

He can run his mouth all he wants about not signing his tender or playing under the tag. If he wants his service time he has no choice. As far as Vernon money he's delusional. Worst case scenario for the Giants is he plays under the tag and sits out awhile. Hell technically the Giants can tag him twice as they avoided using it on him this past season.

Bottomline is he's not going anywhere unless we trade him out of the division.

see ya

Sign O line and draft 🌮

and thats what he should look for.. but what he is looking for and what he will get are two different things.

In comment 13337671 huygens20 said:

Quote:

In comment 13337662 Danny Kanell said: Quote: I really doubt we franchise him again. If anything, we should use the franchise tag on Hankins. It would be a lot cheaper. Hankins doenst deserve a franchise tag. hes expendable

a) no he's not.
2) you can't just wish away everyone who you think is expendable, trust me. I wouldn't have to reply to your post if that was the case

In comment 13337676 huygens20 said:

Quote:

I can definitely see us giving him a big time contract. It makes sense. This 2-4 year window is all we have before we will be shopping for a QB. It makes no sense to roll over the cap space. We're not going to choose Hankins, Cruz, or Jennings.

Hankins is not in the same stratosphere as Cruz or Jennings. It's almost like you're as anti-Hankins as that John Jerry dupe was pro-Jerry. And equally wrong.

He is a valuable player but there is no way we can have two Vernon contracts on the DLine.

Nor would I franchise tag him.

Lets keep getting younger, healthier and better...

In comment 13337700 big_blue said:

Quote:

pay him. He is a bad man. I hate that fans care so much about salary - as a negative - the gm's job is to build a talented roster - who give a crap about how much he is paid

It's really not that hard to understand.

If there was no cap most fans wouldn't care about individual players salaries but because of how much individual players are paid affects the teams ability to sign other players is why fans care about how much payers are paid.