Ryan Dunleavy
@rydunleavy
·
2h
Important note: #Giants Daniel Jones says that after surgery it was determined that it was just an ACL injury, no other structural damage
Art Stapleton
@art_stapleton
·
1h
Replying to
@art_stapleton
Daniel Jones says there was no further damage to his right knee. The surgery was to repair his ACL, but everything else was structurally sound and intact. #NYGiants
will have to wait another year. The Giant have 3 picks in the first 2 rounds, they can improve their oline, dline and pass rush. After that they can hopefully find a wr or two.
The inevitability of Jones's departure is much exaggerated.
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
RE: Great news! This is now means the draft a qb in the 1st rd mob
will have to wait another year. The Giant have 3 picks in the first 2 rounds, they can improve their oline, dline and pass rush. After that they can hopefully find a wr or two.
But I have reliable asshat info -- an attending nurse snuck a few shards of glass into the joint before they sewed it up. DJ's bad luck that his surgical team included a hating BBIer.
will have to wait another year. The Giant have 3 picks in the first 2 rounds, they can improve their oline, dline and pass rush. After that they can hopefully find a wr or two.
I don’t think Daniel s availability is necessarily tied to whether the Giants draft a quarterback round 1. I think that decision is tied solely to their conviction on whomever is still on the board at that position when they pick.
However, Daniel s potential recovery relieves some of the urgency to draft a qb there by preventing any temptation to reach
I know the posters on this board who will totally disagree with any suggestion that Daniel offers any reason not to draft a qb early.
But I m of the opinion the circumstances surrounding the Giants failure this season were much more complex than poor quarterback play
I think last season s Daniel, especially late in the season is much more indicative of who he is than this season.
Where the Giants will be drafting is still to be determined, and I m hoping for a much better season next year, I know that is possible with Jones.
RE: RE: Great news! This is now means the draft a qb in the 1st rd mob
will have to wait another year. The Giant have 3 picks in the first 2 rounds, they can improve their oline, dline and pass rush. After that they can hopefully find a wr or two.
I don’t think Daniel s availability is necessarily tied to whether the Giants draft a quarterback round 1. I think that decision is tied solely to their conviction on whomever is still on the board at that position when they pick.
However, Daniel s potential recovery relieves some of the urgency to draft a qb there by preventing any temptation to reach
I know the posters on this board who will totally disagree with any suggestion that Daniel offers any reason not to draft a qb early.
But I m of the opinion the circumstances surrounding the Giants failure this season were much more complex than poor quarterback play
I think last season s Daniel, especially late in the season is much more indicative of who he is than this season.
Where the Giants will be drafting is still to be determined, and I m hoping for a much better season next year, I know that is possible with Jones.
Down the stretch last season when the team closed out the season going 2-5-1, won a playoff game by 7 and then lost a playoff game by 31?
In those last 10 games, the team only hit 24 points three times - twice against Minnesota and once against Indy, the two worst defenses in the NFL.
This is what you are hoping to see again? This is the goal?
The standards need to be raised. The Giants clinched the playoffs against a Colts team which quit being led by a TV personality.
Did anyone watch that Niners-Eagles game last week and think Jones could sit in the pocket, go through progressions and deliver a completion on his third read?
I hope Jones a full recovery, but I'm tired of being a division doormat. The Eagles and Cowboys laugh at the Giants.
Put it this way, what do the Eagles & Cowboys want the Giants to do?
The standards need to be raised. The Giants clinched the playoffs against a Colts team which quit being led by a TV personality.
Did anyone watch that Niners-Eagles game last week and think Jones could sit in the pocket, go through progressions and deliver a completion on his third read?
I hope Jones a full recovery, but I'm tired of being a division doormat. The Eagles and Cowboys laugh at the Giants.
Put it this way, what do the Eagles & Cowboys want the Giants to do?
I bet they would be ecstatic if they could play the Giants 2022 offense every week of the year.
The standards need to be raised. The Giants clinched the playoffs against a Colts team which quit being led by a TV personality.
Did anyone watch that Niners-Eagles game last week and think Jones could sit in the pocket, go through progressions and deliver a completion on his third read?
I hope Jones a full recovery, but I'm tired of being a division doormat. The Eagles and Cowboys laugh at the Giants.
Put it this way, what do the Eagles & Cowboys want the Giants to do?
Maybe - and I'm just spitballing here -- the Giants looked at last season's offense and said we need to raise the bar.
So they tried. A couple moves look great. Others not so much.
RE: RE: Great news! This is now means the draft a qb in the 1st rd mob
will have to wait another year. The Giant have 3 picks in the first 2 rounds, they can improve their oline, dline and pass rush. After that they can hopefully find a wr or two.
I don’t think Daniel s availability is necessarily tied to whether the Giants draft a quarterback round 1. I think that decision is tied solely to their conviction on whomever is still on the board at that position when they pick.
However, Daniel s potential recovery relieves some of the urgency to draft a qb there by preventing any temptation to reach
I know the posters on this board who will totally disagree with any suggestion that Daniel offers any reason not to draft a qb early.
But I m of the opinion the circumstances surrounding the Giants failure this season were much more complex than poor quarterback play
I think last season s Daniel, especially late in the season is much more indicative of who he is than this season.
Where the Giants will be drafting is still to be determined, and I m hoping for a much better season next year, I know that is possible with Jones.
The real Jones is the one who plays well sometimes. The fake Jones is the one who plays poorly most of the time.
RE: RE: RE: Great news! This is now means the draft a qb in the 1st rd mob
will have to wait another year. The Giant have 3 picks in the first 2 rounds, they can improve their oline, dline and pass rush. After that they can hopefully find a wr or two.
I don’t think Daniel s availability is necessarily tied to whether the Giants draft a quarterback round 1. I think that decision is tied solely to their conviction on whomever is still on the board at that position when they pick.
However, Daniel s potential recovery relieves some of the urgency to draft a qb there by preventing any temptation to reach
I know the posters on this board who will totally disagree with any suggestion that Daniel offers any reason not to draft a qb early.
But I m of the opinion the circumstances surrounding the Giants failure this season were much more complex than poor quarterback play
I think last season s Daniel, especially late in the season is much more indicative of who he is than this season.
Where the Giants will be drafting is still to be determined, and I m hoping for a much better season next year, I know that is possible with Jones.
The real Jones is the one who plays well sometimes. The fake Jones is the one who plays poorly most of the time.
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You appear guilty of making assumptions here.
LOL. "It's rude and childish to call names you monkey-brained a**hole!"
The inevitability of Jones's departure is much exaggerated.
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
DJ has a much greater chance of being the "next great thing" that Devito does...
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Great news! This is now means the draft a qb in the 1st rd mob
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You appear guilty of making assumptions here.
You re right I am, not a good look in either direction.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Great news! This is now means the draft a qb in the 1st rd mob
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You appear guilty of making assumptions here.
LOL. "It's rude and childish to call names you monkey-brained a**hole!"
The standards need to be raised. The Giants clinched the playoffs against a Colts team which quit being led by a TV personality.
Did anyone watch that Niners-Eagles game last week and think Jones could sit in the pocket, go through progressions and deliver a completion on his third read?
I hope Jones a full recovery, but I'm tired of being a division doormat. The Eagles and Cowboys laugh at the Giants.
Put it this way, what do the Eagles & Cowboys want the Giants to do?
When was the last time a Giant QB could "sit in the pocket"?
Jones appears to have suffered a routine ACL tear that should put him back in business by the end of camp.
I think the odds are quite high DeVito is the opening day starter and Jones get his job back before the end of Summer.
Then you don't think very highly of Schoen which would have been a change of opinion for you.
On one end, you have said that Schoen did not make an overly aggressive commitment to Jones and given the 3rd year guarantees not conveying until 2025, the contract was a victory for Team Schoen back in the summer.
Now, you are suggesting the QB room won't be addressed at all and the Giants will roll with DeVito and hand the starting role to Jones. This after the ACL and missing 3 1/2 games due to the neck since giving that tier 3 contract to Jones.
I'm surprised to see you arriving at this conclusion unless your initial view of the Jones contract and Schoen has changed.
If that is the opinion it pretty much shows zero confidence in Schoen. And if Schoen goes that route, he can go at the end of 2024.
I would say it a little differently than that. If the plan is to have Daniel Jones be the starter for the entire year (assuming good health) he had better be absolutely correct that Jones can play 17 games and produce consistently at a level he has done only in a few games in his career.
If he is wrong, and 2024 goes down in flames with Jones at the helm, he should absolutely be sent packing. Daniel Jones struggling to run a productive offense is not something he can pretend was unexpected.
If he wants to hitch his wagon to that, good luck. His right hand man is Brandon Brown who was right there when the Eagles drafted Hurts in 2020 with an established QB in Wentz.
I can't believe that Schoen, Brown, Cowden, Daboll & Kafka (if he's here) will all agree that a QB room of Jones-DeVito-Taylor in 2024 is the best option.
If he wants to hitch his wagon to that, good luck. His right hand man is Brandon Brown who was right there when the Eagles drafted Hurts in 2020 with an established QB in Wentz.
I can't believe that Schoen, Brown, Cowden, Daboll & Kafka (if he's here) will all agree that a QB room of Jones-DeVito-Taylor in 2024 is the best option.
These are the same guys that were in the building when Jones got paid, and when Barkley is being treated like he's a special player. Tough to trust anyone right now.
Schoen liked Jones enough to see how he progressed over two years. I just don't see how after 6 games and a simple torn ACL that's all out of the window.
Schoen liked Jones enough to see how he progressed over two years. I just don't see how after 6 games and a simple torn ACL that's all out of the window.
A good GM will scout the 2024 QB's against Jones. A good GM would also scout the 2024 QB's against the 2025 QB's. I'd like to think Schoen has more foresight.
Christian is trolling right now. Or out to lunch. Jones showed nothing this season before getting hurt.
I wouldn't apply the troll card.
I just don't think we can so easily rule out that Schoen is still comfortable with Jones as his franchise QB.
As much as you and I know Jones has contributed to the offensive woes, I could see someone thinking the offense around Jones failed him more than he failed them. Especially if you believe that Jones just isn't good enough to put a team on his back but might be good enough with a good team around him.
That went out at least to '26. No way you get a GM job without that.
And then obviously adjusted continually over time.
QB was a yellow position box in '22's plan. It changed to green for 23 and 24. Now -- due to QB injury far more than the early season shitshow -- it's a yellow box for '24. Might change color any time, one way or the other. Might have a trend. Schoen will have a plan for each (any decent GM would). But we won't know till about the ides of March what color the box is, though the rest of this season will be telling.
If they believed in Jones enough to pay him, 6 games and a torn ACL (at age 26) shouldn't be enough to destroy that belief.
They've already reversed themselves once by signing him after not picking up the fifth year option. After they going to reverse themselves again? I thought it would be a long time before I saw the Giants do something dumber than picking Barkley #2 overall. Turns out it was only about five years before they did. So, so damaging.
he's not the answer going forward. even with a terrible surrounding cast, Jones was awful. no way Schoen bets his future on him.
and the "after only 6 games" calculus cuts both ways. he's being paid like a franchise QB and only managed to be on the field for 6 games, where other than 30 minutes he was awful. that's enough. Schoen will have a strong contingency going into 2024.
he's not the answer going forward. even with a terrible surrounding cast, Jones was awful. no way Schoen bets his future on him.
and the "after only 6 games" calculus cuts both ways. he's being paid like a franchise QB and only managed to be on the field for 6 games, where other than 30 minutes he was awful. that's enough. Schoen will have a strong contingency going into 2024.
That's precisely the way it should work if you have a well-run organization. For anything.
Recognize you made a mistake, which happens, and pivot to a new solution.
he's not the answer going forward. even with a terrible surrounding cast, Jones was awful. no way Schoen bets his future on him.
and the "after only 6 games" calculus cuts both ways. he's being paid like a franchise QB and only managed to be on the field for 6 games, where other than 30 minutes he was awful. that's enough. Schoen will have a strong contingency going into 2024.
I don't buy the terrible surrounding cast. They have one of the top 5 RBs in the league and 2 up and coming WRs, plus Slayton has bounced back this year, and they still have a decent Hodgins. Bellinger is not a bad TE. Their OL has been bad, but the "supporting cast" is not.
the Giants presumptive franchise QB. I look forward to the next QB and I hope the team doesn't make the same mistake again, of a prolonged internship, without results, without competition.
Imagine being Schoen and telling Mara Jones isn't the solution. After telling Mara 9 months ago Jones was the solution to the tune of 82M.
Does anyone on this board doubt Mara's response will be go fix it for Jones?
I think the Giants pick a QB on the second round. But I'd be flooded if the Giants pick a QB on round one.
I wouldn't. The Giants gave Beckham a huge contract just to trade him a year later.
I don't see Schoen passing on a strong QB talent when he gave Jones $82M. Again Christian, you called this a "tier 3" contract and a victory for Schoen in comparison to the other QB deals. So, now he's strapped by this same contract coming off a neck and ACL (clean or not).
This reminds me when the Giants were sitting at 4-10 in 2021 and people saying Mara was going to promote Abrams for GM.
I think the way to frame the QB discussion, the opportunity may not be there depending on where NYG is picking in the first round. But, I don't see Schoen passing on a QB because of Jones contract.
It feels like the goalposts around the contract are being moved based on how bad the Giants season is which is part of the reason why the contract was structured like it was.
It was a big mistake by Schoen. But, I don't expect the contract to be the reason Schoen passes on QB.
And any owner would be upset given the check that is being written for Jones, but it's Schoen's job to sell it to Mara. If he can't, he's the wrong person for the job.
The thing is, we won't know most likely. Because my guess is Schoen will need to trade up, but I expect him to try.
I think it depends on which college qbs are there when we pick. For
example, if Daniels is there when our turn comes up, we may go for it - maybe even for Nix. Or maybe there's someone we like who we think will be there on day 2. Jones is too injury prone to depend on. I don't think we'll mortgage the future to trade up, but that doesn't mean we won't pull the string if someone we like is there when we pick.
Imagine being Schoen and telling Mara Jones isn't the solution. After telling Mara 9 months ago Jones was the solution to the tune of 82M.
Does anyone on this board doubt Mara's response will be go fix it for Jones?
I think the Giants pick a QB on the second round. But I'd be flooded if the Giants pick a QB on round one.
Jones was coming off an acceptable campaign (he didn't play well all the time, but he won some games) - very hard to toss out a working car even with its limitations or dents, to try and chase after a Ferrari. I don't think he's anywhere close to a franchise QB who can compete with the top passers and I don't commit to him long-term.
But, the commitment here is short-term and is now even shorter term, with an added injury onto it - dramatically changing the prism of the current mess, and going forward, with new pressures on all parties. The Giants had very few immediate alternatives for Jones the last year and this season has showed why it is so important to stock alternatives.
Solutions now in NFL are short-term, even for QBs making big money, maybe even more-so for them actually given their cap-choking payscales and cap hit dilemmas they present.
If Schoen decides with his team, they love a QB and they present it to Mara, I have a really hard time seeing Mara strike it down or put it against Schoen.
Imagine being Schoen and telling Mara Jones isn't the solution. After telling Mara 9 months ago Jones was the solution to the tune of 82M.
Does anyone on this board doubt Mara's response will be go fix it for Jones?
I think the Giants pick a QB on the second round. But I'd be flooded if the Giants pick a QB on round one.
Doesn’t seem far fetched at all and likely happens more than you think in sports. Mara, like anyone else, can change his mind on things with more data - not sure why this can’t be one of those times. Add in another neck injury along with the knee and this seems like a fairly reasonable conversation to have with your boss.
I don't think it's the financials that are the barrier per se. I think the principals made a collective investment in Jones as their guy, and the money represents that. I doubt they are biding time for his inevitable departure. I believe they actually like him.
These aren't career threatening injuries. And in classic Jones luck, there's a metric ton of cover for why he played so poorly this year.
I think the operating plan was give Jones two years, and I don't think they'll move off that plan.
DeVito's stat line at the end of the year will be relevant to Jones' status as the Giants starting qb. I am not saying the deciding factor, but questions should be asked if a player like DeVito (maybe he is better than we think, I don't know) can step in and have the production that he has had.
Switching quarterbacks is not necessarily an easy comparison though. Comparisons should be made in regard to the quality of play from the OL, RB's, and WR's. Also, a comparison in the play calls. What are the differences?
Those certainly are not all of the things to be looked at when analyzing the difference between Jones and DeVito.
If it is found that DeVito had a significantly better playing situation then his stats won't carry as much weight. However, if the playing conditions for DeVito are about the same then, to me, his stats carry much more weight.
I don't think it's the financials that are the barrier per se. I think the principals made a collective investment in Jones as their guy, and the money represents that. I doubt they are biding time for his inevitable departure. I believe they actually like him.
These aren't career threatening injuries. And in classic Jones luck, there's a metric ton of cover for why he played so poorly this year.
I think the operating plan was give Jones two years, and I don't think they'll move off that plan.
Well it was structured to be a "stuck" plan anyhow. But this isn't about 2024. This is about 2025.
Was perfectly played, other than you'd hope it was for less dollars as you would with any contract given the cap.
Letting Jones walk wasn't an option (nor should it have been). His 2023 performance was better than average and his and the team's arrow were clearly pointed upward.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
2) Sign Jones to a multi-year long-term deal committing to him as Giants franchise QB for many years.
3) Sign Jones to a multi-year short term deal with a manageable '23 cap hit. By definition that would be 3-5 years. It made even more sense because they needed a QB in '24 also (no replacement on the roster).
An upper-tier journeyman starter (say Smith or Garropolo) is ~ $25 million, with prices rising each year.
I think it's outrageous to pay $20 for a great cocktail, but that's what it costs at nicer spots in Austin.
Based on past performance the Giants overpaid by some number, which all teams do at times, for continuity and/or in the expectation of continued improvement from a 26-year old QB with system stability for the first time in his career. They also paid more to only make what is really is a 2-year deal (Jones team likely wanted a real 5 year commitment).
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
Was perfectly played, other than you'd hope it was for less dollars as you would with any contract given the cap.
This seems accurate. I know some fans would propose letting Jones walk and signing a Baker Mayfield type, but this cannot be a serious option given the success the Giants had in 2022
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
You can only use one tag per year. Doesn't matter which tag you use, using any tag rules out all others.
The inevitability of Jones's departure is much exaggerated.
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
DJ has a much greater chance of being the "next great thing" that Devito does...
I agree. But the popular stance is to say how much DJ sucks and that Devito is showing that there are plays to be had. It doesn't matter either way, I 100% believe the Giants are drafting a QB this year, and my guess is DJ is gone after 2024.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
You can only use one tag per year. Doesn't matter which tag you use, using any tag rules out all others.
I'm not a CBA expert; I thought you could use both if you withdraw one before the final deadline.
Was perfectly played, other than you'd hope it was for less dollars as you would with any contract given the cap.
Letting Jones walk wasn't an option (nor should it have been). His 2023 performance was better than average and his and the team's arrow were clearly pointed upward.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
2) Sign Jones to a multi-year long-term deal committing to him as Giants franchise QB for many years.
3) Sign Jones to a multi-year short term deal with a manageable '23 cap hit. By definition that would be 3-5 years. It made even more sense because they needed a QB in '24 also (no replacement on the roster).
An upper-tier journeyman starter (say Smith or Garropolo) is ~ $25 million, with prices rising each year.
I think it's outrageous to pay $20 for a great cocktail, but that's what it costs at nicer spots in Austin.
Based on past performance the Giants overpaid by some number, which all teams do at times, for continuity and/or in the expectation of continued improvement from a 26-year old QB with system stability for the first time in his career. They also paid more to only make what is really is a 2-year deal (Jones team likely wanted a real 5 year commitment).
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
Keep telling yourself paying $100M for a bad QB was perfectly played. Lol.
The inevitability of Jones's departure is much exaggerated.
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
DJ has a much greater chance of being the "next great thing" that Devito does...
DJs chances of being the next great thing are zero.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
You can only use one tag per year. Doesn't matter which tag you use, using any tag rules out all others.
I'm not a CBA expert; I thought you could use both if you withdraw one before the final deadline.
Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on if you're a front office or a player), the CBA doesn't allow for that because it's really the first week or two of free agency where the tag represents the biggest impediment to a free agent seeking a new contract. Once the market has spent much of its resources, revoking a tag doesn't do much to repair a player's financial opportunity.
The Jones contract is not a contract that you give to a solution at qb
Exactly and that opinion was shared by many, so it does feel disingenuous to then say NYG will ignore QB in the first round because of Jones.
I don't think the contract is a reason to ignore a QB in the first round.
I think Schoen is a reason why we will ignore a QB in the first round.
I hope and think you're wrong. There is no way anyone can believe Jones is the long term answer. I believe Schoen is smarter than that. Jones may not be as bad as he looked this year, but this year is closer to what we've gotten from him over 5 years than last year was. And, while nothing special, DeVito's play at least shows there are plays to be made throwing the ball that simply weren't being made. Taylor showed that as well, outside of the game he got hurt in.
DeVito is also most certainly not a long term answer for anything other than MAYBE backup. But, his play should at least help advise that Jones isn't either.
Same with Jones...for now. In the long haul, only time will tell whether either of the two were overpaid. This idea that 2022 was a mirage and he should only be judged by the mistakes he's made is for the birds. It's unusual that a QB spends five seasons as your starter and yet the jury is still out on him, but that is the curious case of Daniel Jones. His inconsistency can easily be correlated with the lack of any semblance of continuity surrounding him. And, yes, correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation, but it does mean that we can't truly know his upside until we see how he performs under more stable circumstances. None of the so-called bonehead plays we've seen out of him are anything we haven't also seen out Josh Allen or Patrick Mahomes, it's more a matter of how often do they occur and how often are they counter-balanced with brilliant plays. There's no such thing as "that's a throw that a franchise QB needs to make" because there isn't a franchise QB who hasn't missed one of those throws at one time or another. Again, it's about probabilities, but it's difficult to compare probabilities when the two sample sets aren't occurring on an even playing field.
None of this means that they shouldn't prioritize QB in the draft (if for no other reason than Jones's injuries), but even if it should be a top ten pick that they use, it won't mean the end of the line for Jones (even as a Giant). I'm not sure what his upside is, but his floor is that of a starting quality QB. If you can win a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler, Nick Foles, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Flacco (none of whom were remotely close to elite), you can win with Daniel Jones.
p.s.--Picture this: the Giants select Jayden Daniels with their first round pick, but Daniel Jones is cleared to practice for training camp and begins the year as the starter, the team has a remarkably healthy year that includes significant player development among their second- and third-year players (specifically Evan Neal, Josh Ezeudu, Wan'Dale Robinson, and Jalin Hyatt), and the Giants win the Super Bowl. Much stranger things have happened in the NFL and it would leave the Giants with the best 1-2-3 at QB in the league (let's include DeVito just for fun)!
Same with Jones...for now. In the long haul, only time will tell whether either of the two were overpaid. This idea that 2022 was a mirage and he should only be judged by the mistakes he's made is for the birds. It's unusual that a QB spends five seasons as your starter and yet the jury is still out on him, but that is the curious case of Daniel Jones. His inconsistency can easily be correlated with the lack of any semblance of continuity surrounding him. And, yes, correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation, but it does mean that we can't truly know his upside until we see how he performs under more stable circumstances. None of the so-called bonehead plays we've seen out of him are anything we haven't also seen out Josh Allen or Patrick Mahomes, it's more a matter of how often do they occur and how often are they counter-balanced with brilliant plays. There's no such thing as "that's a throw that a franchise QB needs to make" because there isn't a franchise QB who hasn't missed one of those throws at one time or another. Again, it's about probabilities, but it's difficult to compare probabilities when the two sample sets aren't occurring on an even playing field.
None of this means that they shouldn't prioritize QB in the draft (if for no other reason than Jones's injuries), but even if it should be a top ten pick that they use, it won't mean the end of the line for Jones (even as a Giant). I'm not sure what his upside is, but his floor is that of a starting quality QB. If you can win a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler, Nick Foles, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Flacco (none of whom were remotely close to elite), you can win with Daniel Jones.
p.s.--Picture this: the Giants select Jayden Daniels with their first round pick, but Daniel Jones is cleared to practice for training camp and begins the year as the starter, the team has a remarkably healthy year that includes significant player development among their second- and third-year players (specifically Evan Neal, Josh Ezeudu, Wan'Dale Robinson, and Jalin Hyatt), and the Giants win the Super Bowl. Much stranger things have happened in the NFL and it would leave the Giants with the best 1-2-3 at QB in the league (let's include DeVito just for fun)!
Sure, franchise QBs will miss throws or make bad decisions here and there. The difference is they aren't missing most (almost all) throws to be made. They aren't generally 1 read QBs in their progressions. It's easy to say that's all OL because without protection how can they go through the progressions? But, how many plays does Mahomes make outside the pocket, for example? When he breaks the pocket his eyes are downfield, he knows where his receivers are SUPPOSED to be, and he makes a throw more often than not.
I If you can win a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler, Nick Foles, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Flacco (none of whom were remotely close to elite), you can win with Daniel Jones.
Hostetler - no salary cap, one of the best defenses in NFL history
Dilfer - paid virtually nothing, one of the best defenses in NFL history
Foles - paid virtually nothing, Foles got absurdly hot briefly
Flacco - rookie contract, played at an elite level in Super Bowl run, at the end of a four-year stretch in which he averaged 22 TDs and 11 INTs per season.
Point being, in the current NFL if you're going to get average QB play and want to put together a Super Bowl team, it had better be on a rookie-type contract. I'm not convinced Daniel Jones even on a rookie deal is capable of that, but when he's a huge chunk of the cap I'm certain he isn't.
Schoen giving up on Jones 6+ games into a multi-year agreement would be nearly unprecedented.
The only contemporary example I can think of that's close is Carson Wentz. And that's what I think is the most likely outcome.
I don't think the Giants are picking a first round QB, and certainly not trading up early in the first round. I think they'll pick a QB in the second round and give Jones every opportunity to keep his job.
Schoen giving up on Jones 6+ games into a multi-year agreement would be nearly unprecedented.
Agree, but the injuries complicate things and that's how unprecedented things happen. Also, signing your QB to a multi-year contract after passing on his 5th year option was also unprecedented.
Quote:
I don't think the Giants are picking a first round QB, and certainly not trading up early in the first round. I think they'll pick a QB in the second round and give Jones every opportunity to keep his job.
I don't see them trading up for a QB in the first round, but I could see them taking one with their own pick if it's not a reach. I would still give Jones every opportunity to keep his job. If Jones shines, now you have a problem that every team would love to have. Think of situations like the Packers with Favre and Rodgers or the Chargers with Brees and Rivers.
I If you can win a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler, Nick Foles, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Flacco (none of whom were remotely close to elite), you can win with Daniel Jones.
Hostetler - no salary cap, one of the best defenses in NFL history
Dilfer - paid virtually nothing, one of the best defenses in NFL history
Foles - paid virtually nothing, Foles got absurdly hot briefly
Flacco - rookie contract, played at an elite level in Super Bowl run, at the end of a four-year stretch in which he averaged 22 TDs and 11 INTs per season.
Point being, in the current NFL if you're going to get average QB play and want to put together a Super Bowl team, it had better be on a rookie-type contract. I'm not convinced Daniel Jones even on a rookie deal is capable of that, but when he's a huge chunk of the cap I'm certain he isn't.
I hate these types of arguments. All those QBs won the SB with excellent teams around them. They weren't tasked with winning the SB as much as not losing it. Yes, you can win that way. But, you have to START with a really good team and add the QB at the end of that process. When you draft a guy at #6, you are expecting him to be part of the solution, not requiring an entirely built team around him.
When you draft a guy at #6, you are expecting him to be part of the solution, not requiring an entirely built team around him.
More importantly--at this point--is that when you give a QB a 4-year contract that includes $82M in guaranteed money, you expect him to be part of the solution. And I think Jones can be part of the solution, he just doesn't have to carry the team on his back the way he did in 2022. In today's NFL, in which there are no great teams, you can build a team around Daniel Jones that will get you to the Super Bowl. Of course he needs to stay healthy.
p.s.--Unless you just took a QB in the first round a year or two earlier (and he's playing well for you), I don't think any team should pass on a QB in the first round if he is the BPA when you're on the clock.
Was perfectly played, other than you'd hope it was for less dollars as you would with any contract given the cap.
Letting Jones walk wasn't an option (nor should it have been). His 2023 performance was better than average and his and the team's arrow were clearly pointed upward.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
2) Sign Jones to a multi-year long-term deal committing to him as Giants franchise QB for many years.
3) Sign Jones to a multi-year short term deal with a manageable '23 cap hit. By definition that would be 3-5 years. It made even more sense because they needed a QB in '24 also (no replacement on the roster).
An upper-tier journeyman starter (say Smith or Garropolo) is ~ $25 million, with prices rising each year.
I think it's outrageous to pay $20 for a great cocktail, but that's what it costs at nicer spots in Austin.
Based on past performance the Giants overpaid by some number, which all teams do at times, for continuity and/or in the expectation of continued improvement from a 26-year old QB with system stability for the first time in his career. They also paid more to only make what is really is a 2-year deal (Jones team likely wanted a real 5 year commitment).
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
Keep telling yourself paying $100M for a bad QB was perfectly played. Lol.
As long as you keep telling yourself you have a clue.
When you draft a guy at #6, you are expecting him to be part of the solution, not requiring an entirely built team around him.
More importantly--at this point--is that when you give a QB a 4-year contract that includes $82M in guaranteed money, you expect him to be part of the solution. And I think Jones can be part of the solution, he just doesn't have to carry the team on his back the way he did in 2022. In today's NFL, in which there are no great teams, you can build a team around Daniel Jones that will get you to the Super Bowl. Of course he needs to stay healthy.
p.s.--Unless you just took a QB in the first round a year or two earlier (and he's playing well for you), I don't think any team should pass on a QB in the first round if he is the BPA when you're on the clock.
When you are wrong and have buyers remorse, you don't double down on it. You pivot fast out and away.
If Jones is their guy, I can't think of worse decision than to take a QB in the top 10.
Even if you groom the pick, there's virtually no chance you get back what you paid for him in a trade.
If Jones is their guy, they damn well better be drafting a skill player on round one.
Past decisions be damned, do you honestly think that if they draft a QB in round 1 that they think “Jones is their guy”? Seriously? That makes no freakin sense. If they draft a QB in round 1, they obviously don’t think Jones is their guy.
If Jones is their guy, I can't think of worse decision than to take a QB in the top 10.
Even if you groom the pick, there's virtually no chance you get back what you paid for him in a trade.
If Jones is their guy, they damn well better be drafting a skill player on round one.
I'm surprised you are going this route, christian. It isn't consistent with what you were saying back in the summer.
The Giants you say made a 2 year commitment to Jones. They will be half way into that commitment by the time April rolls around. In the first year of the commitment, Jones (a running QB who threw 15 TD's last season) tore his ACL. He also had his second career neck injury.
Did that contract really say that Jones was their guy? Or was it a transitional contract based on what the top QB's have gotten paid?
And if Jones is their guy as you mention, why bother taking a QB in the 2nd round either?
I just don't buy that. The value may not match up with QB, but it won't be due to Jones' contract or Jones being their guy.
Was perfectly played, other than you'd hope it was for less dollars as you would with any contract given the cap.
Letting Jones walk wasn't an option (nor should it have been). His 2023 performance was better than average and his and the team's arrow were clearly pointed upward.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
2) Sign Jones to a multi-year long-term deal committing to him as Giants franchise QB for many years.
3) Sign Jones to a multi-year short term deal with a manageable '23 cap hit. By definition that would be 3-5 years. It made even more sense because they needed a QB in '24 also (no replacement on the roster).
An upper-tier journeyman starter (say Smith or Garropolo) is ~ $25 million, with prices rising each year.
I think it's outrageous to pay $20 for a great cocktail, but that's what it costs at nicer spots in Austin.
Based on past performance the Giants overpaid by some number, which all teams do at times, for continuity and/or in the expectation of continued improvement from a 26-year old QB with system stability for the first time in his career. They also paid more to only make what is really is a 2-year deal (Jones team likely wanted a real 5 year commitment).
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
Keep telling yourself paying $100M for a bad QB was perfectly played. Lol.
As long as you keep telling yourself you have a clue.
You think flushing a $100M down the toilet is perfect business, and I'm the one who doesn't have a clue. Ok, skippy.
If Jones is their guy, I can't think of worse decision than to take a QB in the top 10.
Even if you groom the pick, there's virtually no chance you get back what you paid for him in a trade.
If Jones is their guy, they damn well better be drafting a skill player on round one.
I'm surprised you are going this route, christian. It isn't consistent with what you were saying back in the summer.
The Giants you say made a 2 year commitment to Jones. They will be half way into that commitment by the time April rolls around. In the first year of the commitment, Jones (a running QB who threw 15 TD's last season) tore his ACL. He also had his second career neck injury.
Did that contract really say that Jones was their guy? Or was it a transitional contract based on what the top QB's have gotten paid?
And if Jones is their guy as you mention, why bother taking a QB in the 2nd round either?
I just don't buy that. The value may not match up with QB, but it won't be due to Jones' contract or Jones being their guy.
I swear someone has hacked christians account. He’s had some bizarre posts for him recently
If the Giants draft a QB in round one Jones is effectively done here, and that would be a major reversal from the statement they made when they signed Jones. Removing whatever you think about Jones, from a timeline perspective drafting a QB doesn't make sense - you'll have $47M in cap space sitting on the bench in 2024. It makes more sense to wait until 2025 or 2026, when you can take full advantage of the cheap rookie QB contract.
I'll emphasize as I have before that this is not the path I would take. I would consider the Jones money thrown away, come out of this draft with two QB picks, and put both Jones and Barkley in the past. But the Giants never do anything I think they should so I'll assume they won't here.
If the Giants draft a QB in round one Jones is effectively done here, and that would be a major reversal from the statement they made when they signed Jones. Removing whatever you think about Jones, from a timeline perspective drafting a QB doesn't make sense
Removing whatever you think about Jones, the recent injuries make passing on a QB worthy of a top ten pick malpractice.[quot]- you'll have $47M in cap space sitting on the bench in 2024.[/quote]No, you'll have $6M in cap space sitting on the bench if Jones rebounds with a healthy year. It worked for Philip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers.
Quote:
It makes more sense to wait until 2025 or 2026, when you can take full advantage of the cheap rookie QB contract.
Believe me, under no scenario will Schoen and Daboll be operating under the assumption they will be selecting anywhere near the top ten again. When it happens, you don't pass on a QB worthy of the pick, I don't care if Patrick Mahomes is your QB.
If the Giants draft a QB in round one Jones is effectively done here, and that would be a major reversal from the statement they made when they signed Jones. Removing whatever you think about Jones, from a timeline perspective drafting a QB doesn't make sense - you'll have $47M in cap space sitting on the bench in 2024. It makes more sense to wait until 2025 or 2026, when you can take full advantage of the cheap rookie QB contract.
I'll emphasize as I have before that this is not the path I would take. I would consider the Jones money thrown away, come out of this draft with two QB picks, and put both Jones and Barkley in the past. But the Giants never do anything I think they should so I'll assume they won't here.
I get what you’re saying but man I sure hope the Giants prove you wrong. I have absolutely zero appetite for watching Daniel Jones for another year and then deal with another year of the constant debates as to why the offense was allergic to touchdowns, again.
As for christian, it doesn’t really have anything to do with agreeing with him or not agreeing with him. As Sean has stated several times, christians recent posts completely fly in the face of what he’s been saying since the contract was signed. From the day it was signed he was telling us all how great a deal it was for the Giants because of the escape clause and that it was essentially a two year deal that showed at the time the Giants were still not sold on Jones. But suddenly in the past couple of weeks, he’s acting like the contract is a huge anchor and since the Giants proved that they think Jones is the guy by giving him that contract, it would be stupid to draft his replacement. Makes no sense based on his prior opinions on the topic…
I think on one end of the plausible spectrum there was the franchise tender, and on the other there was something in the neighborhood of what Prescott received (3 years of virtually guaranteed money at 100M+). The Giants opted for something in the middle.
I don't think guaranteeing 82M was cavalier. That's a vote of some confidence. It's not the iron clad vote someone like Watson, or even Jackson got. But I don't think it's a vote that gets dismissed because of a torn ACL.
It's just a 2 yr anchor rather than a 3 or 5 yr anchor.
The correct move was to let both Jones and Barkley hit unrestricted free agency, not FT, not sign beforehand. None of the FT crew has successfully defended why FT was better than letting them walk.
It's just a 2 yr anchor rather than a 3 or 5 yr anchor.
The correct move was to let both Jones and Barkley hit unrestricted free agency, not FT, not sign beforehand. None of the FT crew has successfully defended why FT was better than letting them walk.
That was the best choice - yes.
But that wasn't going to happen once Jones displayed a pulse and played relatively well in 2022. So, if you accept that reality, the best approach in compensation was another prove-it offer - the FT.
I think my perspective is pretty consistent. The Giants made a 2 year commitment to Jones. I think when the dust settles and the Giants do the post mortem on the season two things will be pretty clear.
1) Jones's injuries are not career threateners
2) There will be enough plausible deniability (again) to cast doubt on whether Jones is the problem
I think Jones is getting the full two years, with the full faith of the organization. I don't think Schoen gave him those two years and then says JK over a torn ACL and a third of a season behind a pretty disastrous offensive line.
If Schoen was tepid on Jones he would have franchised him.
If you go pick a QB with a lottery pick, you're slamming the door on Jones, or at least you better be.
But I view this as christian saying he doesn't think Schoen et al are ready to move on from Jones. Not as much as many of us think or want.
And it has less to do with the money/contract and more to do with the likelihood they really like Jones.
So, they want it to work. And they will cue up audition #6 by bringing in more infantry for Jones.
Exactly. It's in Schoen's professional best interest for Jones to work out. If Jones is a throw away after one season, that doesn't bode well for Schoen's bona fides at quarterback evaluation.
"Hey John, I know I fucked up with Dan. But don't worry, all I gotta do is trade a bunch of picks and get the real right guy. Trust me."
This isn't the Browns dealing with a shitty person on top of an albatross of a contract. Joe Flacco probably played the best QB all year for them, that's saying something with what they are paying Watson.
This is not a situation where the Giants are trapped. It's a bad contract, but it's nowhere near an upper echelon QB contract.
The implication by some on this thread is the Giants would pass on Caleb Williams with the first pick because they've committed to Jones. No chance Schoen would do that. He's putting all these air miles on just for show? Come on.
The Giants need a QB. I keep hearing about the clean ACL tear, but what about the fact that Jones missed games in 2019. Jones missed games in 2020. Jones missed the final 6 games in 2021. Jones missed 3 games in 2023 before the ACL. Then add in the ACL for a running QB.
The contract was not a full endorsement by any means. If it was, it wouldn't have been such a tough negotiation and there wouldn't have been an out after 2024.
The contract is not good, but it's much closer to Carr and Garoppolo than Herbert or Burrow.
They might not take a QB in the first round. I don't know if it does make sense to trade up and give up a lot of draft capital. They might be picking outside of the top QB's. At most, Jones is an expensive transition QB in 2024 imo who will probably ultimately be benched because of the injury guarantee in 2025.
If you go pick a QB with a lottery pick, you're slamming the door on Jones, or at least you better be.
Why? If Jones is healthy, he will be the starter. Your lottery pick QB sitting for a year doesn't mean the year is wasted and an argument can be made that it's actually for the best. And it would be especially true for a rookie QB playing behind a shaky OL and throwing to mostly young, relatively inexperienced pass catchers. So you start Jones and see what kind of year he and the team have and take it from there.
Duggan had a good write up today that covers a few things, including why the backups have exposed Jones’ flaws. Some interesting stuff… How backups have revealed Daniel Jones’ flaws - ( New Window )
Duggan had a good write up today that covers a few things, including why the backups have exposed Jones’ flaws. Some interesting stuff… How backups have revealed Daniel Jones’ flaws - ( New Window )
I read that. He called Jones 'gun shy'. I don't that changing.
If Jones is their guy, I can't think of worse decision than to take a QB in the top 10.
Even if you groom the pick, there's virtually no chance you get back what you paid for him in a trade.
If Jones is their guy, they damn well better be drafting a skill player on round one.
I'm surprised you are going this route, christian. It isn't consistent with what you were saying back in the summer.
The Giants you say made a 2 year commitment to Jones. They will be half way into that commitment by the time April rolls around. In the first year of the commitment, Jones (a running QB who threw 15 TD's last season) tore his ACL. He also had his second career neck injury.
Did that contract really say that Jones was their guy? Or was it a transitional contract based on what the top QB's have gotten paid?
And if Jones is their guy as you mention, why bother taking a QB in the 2nd round either?
I just don't buy that. The value may not match up with QB, but it won't be due to Jones' contract or Jones being their guy.
I think my perspective is pretty consistent. The Giants made a 2 year commitment to Jones. I think when the dust settles and the Giants do the post mortem on the season two things will be pretty clear.
1) Jones's injuries are not career threateners
2) There will be enough plausible deniability (again) to cast doubt on whether Jones is the problem
I think Jones is getting the full two years, with the full faith of the organization. I don't think Schoen gave him those two years and then says JK over a torn ACL and a third of a season behind a pretty disastrous offensive line.
If Schoen was tepid on Jones he would have franchised him.
If you go pick a QB with a lottery pick, you're slamming the door on Jones, or at least you better be.
Huh? Talk about moving the goalposts. You were among the crowd who were going against the idea of doing the 5th year guarantee because he was hurt two years ago! He’s hurt again now, twice!!!
If Jones has a marginal season in 2024 you assume they’re just going to run it back again in 2025 while they wait for a QB prospect to fall in their laps or god forbid force another Jones like pick in 2026 or 2027 if they stink again?
Unlikely. Not impossible. But unlikely.
If Schoen runs it back with Jones in 2024 with no winning season and no backup plan, he’s getting fired sooner than later whether it’s in one year or two.
Schoen has to get a buy in and longer term sell of hope in the QB room.
Jones got $40 million a year- the highest of all the free agent qb's available. The dead cap hit in 2025 when he is cut is $22 million I believe, the highest of any of the free agent qb's available. For perspective, that is what Thomas got on his extension and double what Barkley got. So it will cost good LT or 2 primo rb's money to rid ourselves of Jones at the end of next year.
And the warning signs were there: the passing numbers in line with what he had done the previous two seasons, the passing metrics compared to the League were bad, the fact that Jones threw for over 200 yards just twice in the first 9 games where we went 7-2, the 2-5-1 finish, the debacle against the Eagles in the playoffs.
There was no reason to automatically run it back with Jones or to bend over and give in to his demands to be a $40 million per year player and this was stupidly played based on a narrative that Jones had turned this big corner and opposing DC's would go to sleep on his running and not spend the season devising defenses to reign in running qb's.
There were several way this could have been played; bending over and giving in to the demands of a mediocre player was the worst of the options.
The inevitability of Jones's departure is much exaggerated.
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
DJ has a much greater chance of being the "next great thing" that Devito does...
DJs chances of being the next great thing are zero.
Jones got $40 million a year- the highest of all the free agent qb's available. The dead cap hit in 2025 when he is cut is $22 million I believe, the highest of any of the free agent qb's available. For perspective, that is what Thomas got on his extension and double what Barkley got. So it will cost good LT or 2 primo rb's money to rid ourselves of Jones at the end of next year.
And the warning signs were there: the passing numbers in line with what he had done the previous two seasons, the passing metrics compared to the League were bad, the fact that Jones threw for over 200 yards just twice in the first 9 games where we went 7-2, the 2-5-1 finish, the debacle against the Eagles in the playoffs.
There was no reason to automatically run it back with Jones or to bend over and give in to his demands to be a $40 million per year player and this was stupidly played based on a narrative that Jones had turned this big corner and opposing DC's would go to sleep on his running and not spend the season devising defenses to reign in running qb's.
There were several way this could have been played; bending over and giving in to the demands of a mediocre player was the worst of the options.
This is exactly right. The sad thing is that there are very smart football guys on this thread that continue to believe that this contract was a "sensible hedge" because of the easy out after two years. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is no easy out, especially for a team that is rebuilding. As you say Homer, the twenty percent cap hit in 2024 is an unmitigated disaster and the 2025 dead money is equivalent to the AAV of an elite starting left tackle. And let's hope that DJ doesn't get injured in 2024 forcing Schoen to cut him while injured, literally doubling the dead money hit.
The DJ contract was as dumb a move by any GM in NFL history. And no, this is not hyperbole. Please do not compare this to the Watson or Wilson contracts - these were both pro bowl players who have not lived up to legitimate expectations based on actual prior performance. Schoen made a massive bet on the come believing that DJ is a top ten quarterback talent, when he is in fact no better than backups like Marcus Mariota or Mitchell Trubisky.
Or Tyrod Taylor. Or Tommy DeVito. And that entire locker room knows it. So there is no "running DJ back". If Schoen is going to move forward in denial with such a plan, than the "DJ Era" will become synonymous with the "Reign of Schoen" as the worst nightmare in Giants history, replacing the Handley era, the 1970s and the recent three stooges coaching triumvirate as the pinnacle of that which should never be named...
Huh? Talk about moving the goalposts. You were among the crowd who were going against the idea of doing the 5th year guarantee because he was hurt two years ago! He’s hurt again now, twice!!!
I felt Jones was a risk because he couldn't protect himself well running. That's something he's greatly improved.
The neck injury this year cleared up quickly enough he was back on the field, and we all know ACLs are not career enders for QBS.
I think many of you underestimate the support he enjoys in the organization. I don't believe Schoen is operating with an imperative to replace Jones. Rather, I believe he's operating with the hope Jones succeeds.
That's not to say he won't draft a quarterback. But I don't believe he'll pick one in the top 10.
I think the more likely outcome is they trade into the end of round one or pick one on top of round two.
When you draft a guy at #6, you are expecting him to be part of the solution, not requiring an entirely built team around him.
More importantly--at this point--is that when you give a QB a 4-year contract that includes $82M in guaranteed money, you expect him to be part of the solution. And I think Jones can be part of the solution, he just doesn't have to carry the team on his back the way he did in 2022. In today's NFL, in which there are no great teams, you can build a team around Daniel Jones that will get you to the Super Bowl. Of course he needs to stay healthy.
p.s.--Unless you just took a QB in the first round a year or two earlier (and he's playing well for you), I don't think any team should pass on a QB in the first round if he is the BPA when you're on the clock.
First off, Barkley did a lot of that heavy lifting on his back last year. Second of all, if that is carrying the team on his back, it isn't much of a solution. It was a mediocre offense.
Jones got $40 million a year- the highest of all the free agent qb's available. The dead cap hit in 2025 when he is cut is $22 million I believe, the highest of any of the free agent qb's available. For perspective, that is what Thomas got on his extension and double what Barkley got. So it will cost good LT or 2 primo rb's money to rid ourselves of Jones at the end of next year.
And the warning signs were there: the passing numbers in line with what he had done the previous two seasons, the passing metrics compared to the League were bad, the fact that Jones threw for over 200 yards just twice in the first 9 games where we went 7-2, the 2-5-1 finish, the debacle against the Eagles in the playoffs.
There was no reason to automatically run it back with Jones or to bend over and give in to his demands to be a $40 million per year player and this was stupidly played based on a narrative that Jones had turned this big corner and opposing DC's would go to sleep on his running and not spend the season devising defenses to reign in running qb's.
There were several way this could have been played; bending over and giving in to the demands of a mediocre player was the worst of the options.
This is exactly right. The sad thing is that there are very smart football guys on this thread that continue to believe that this contract was a "sensible hedge" because of the easy out after two years. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is no easy out, especially for a team that is rebuilding. As you say Homer, the twenty percent cap hit in 2024 is an unmitigated disaster and the 2025 dead money is equivalent to the AAV of an elite starting left tackle. And let's hope that DJ doesn't get injured in 2024 forcing Schoen to cut him while injured, literally doubling the dead money hit.
The DJ contract was as dumb a move by any GM in NFL history. And no, this is not hyperbole. Please do not compare this to the Watson or Wilson contracts - these were both pro bowl players who have not lived up to legitimate expectations based on actual prior performance. Schoen made a massive bet on the come believing that DJ is a top ten quarterback talent, when he is in fact no better than backups like Marcus Mariota or Mitchell Trubisky.
Or Tyrod Taylor. Or Tommy DeVito. And that entire locker room knows it. So there is no "running DJ back". If Schoen is going to move forward in denial with such a plan, than the "DJ Era" will become synonymous with the "Reign of Schoen" as the worst nightmare in Giants history, replacing the Handley era, the 1970s and the recent three stooges coaching triumvirate as the pinnacle of that which should never be named...
I don't like anyone referring to that as an "easy out". It requires an obscene amount of additional guaranteed money next season in the form of salary, which can't be amortized. There is nothing easy about the ridiculous cap cost next year for a mediocre QB.
Jones got $40 million a year- the highest of all the free agent qb's available. The dead cap hit in 2025 when he is cut is $22 million I believe, the highest of any of the free agent qb's available. For perspective, that is what Thomas got on his extension and double what Barkley got. So it will cost good LT or 2 primo rb's money to rid ourselves of Jones at the end of next year.
And the warning signs were there: the passing numbers in line with what he had done the previous two seasons, the passing metrics compared to the League were bad, the fact that Jones threw for over 200 yards just twice in the first 9 games where we went 7-2, the 2-5-1 finish, the debacle against the Eagles in the playoffs.
There was no reason to automatically run it back with Jones or to bend over and give in to his demands to be a $40 million per year player and this was stupidly played based on a narrative that Jones had turned this big corner and opposing DC's would go to sleep on his running and not spend the season devising defenses to reign in running qb's.
There were several way this could have been played; bending over and giving in to the demands of a mediocre player was the worst of the options.
100%. The ONLY reasons I got on board with re-signing him after the season were a) he seemed to have entrenched himself as THE leader of this team and b) I was resigned to the fact that it seemed inevitable. But, I maintained throughout the off season through the present that re-signing him should never have been over the $20-25M range. I didn't want to hear the "market for QBs" because he still hadn't proven himself as a top 10 QB.
I think a couple made salient points to remind us that comparing his deal to Watson or Wilson is apples to oranges because his was based 100% on hope, while theirs were based on past performance. That said, their deals were both stupid as well.
The real comp would be Hurts. Is anyone happier with Jones than Hurts?
I think the more likely outcome is they trade into the end of round one or pick one on top of round two.
The problem with that (from the pro-Jones perspective) is that the QBs that figure to be there at the 1/2 turn are going to be far more talented prospects than Jones.
If they draft Penix or Nix, sitting either of them behind Jones is both a waste of time and a misallocation of resources. Either of them becomes the most talented QB on the team the day they're drafted.
I think the more likely outcome is they trade into the end of round one or pick one on top of round two.
The problem with that (from the pro-Jones perspective) is that the QBs that figure to be there at the 1/2 turn are going to be far more talented prospects than Jones.
If they draft Penix or Nix, sitting either of them behind Jones is both a waste of time and a misallocation of resources. Either of them becomes the most talented QB on the team the day they're drafted.
I agree, but also wouldn't draft Penix and I'm hot and cold on Nix. Neither faces a lot of pressure for one. So, it is difficult to gauge. But, Penix has had 4 major injuries already. I just wouldn't chance it.
If they just miss out on Williams, Maye, or Daniels (my personal favorite of the 3), it will be an interesting thing to watch. I don't think any of the other QBs are worthy of a top 10 pick. Will they spend one on guys who are certainly talented, but less likely to be sure things in the pros?
I think the more likely outcome is they trade into the end of round one or pick one on top of round two.
The problem with that (from the pro-Jones perspective) is that the QBs that figure to be there at the 1/2 turn are going to be far more talented prospects than Jones.
If they draft Penix or Nix, sitting either of them behind Jones is both a waste of time and a misallocation of resources. Either of them becomes the most talented QB on the team the day they're drafted.
To be clear, I think you know my preference is they trade whatever is necessary to draft Daniels. And then hold Jones out with the small hope they can recoup some nominal compensation in a trade when he's healthy.
But that's fantasy world stuff.
Why should I believe the Giants won't give Jones every opportunity to keep the job?
I don't think that scenario is anywhere near fantasy land. I just don't believe Schoen is as sold on Jones as you do.
The contract is awful, but it's not like it was unexpected. Most of BBI predicted the AAV to be around $37M. Schoen valued the QB over the RB. He was wrong.
I don't think he'll double down on Jones and get himself fired in 2025/26. Daboll has even more pressure.
This is a franchise that listens to the fans. Duggan's poll had 77% of fans wanting to move on from Jones.
You’ve been making (depressingly) sensible points throughout the thread. But one obstacle to the “run it back with Jones argument” is that Daboll absolutely cannot have his third season torpedoed by the type of QB play Jones was displaying this year. And Jones is so inconsistent we don’t know what type of player will show up. Daboll would be playing Russian Roulette with a Jones 2024 campaign.
So Daboll can’t just anoint Jones the QB. That suggests his preference would be a pretty high draftee at the position and with open competition and the guy playing the best in camp earning the week 1 start.
The timing of this also needs to be considered. If I were Daboll, and Mara and Schoen told me that the Jones would be the starting QB next year, I’d start making phone calls to see if the rumored openings with the chargers and Bills represented an alternative. But this needs to be resolved in January, when NFL HCs are hired. So the timing presents another complication.
Sure hope our front office is already hashing this out this month.
People get memorized sometimes by college numbers. Injury prone. Immobile. Too many high rush throws.
Looks good because he plays with the 2nd best WRs group in the nation in the worst defensive conference in football.
Where were these gaudy stats at Indiana? Kid played six years of college football. For perspective - he’s been in college longer than Jones has been in the NFL.
Lol
Penix is then one guy inbound absolutely stay away from
@charlottecrrll
·
2h
Daniel Jones says it was just the ACL injury. Says they didn’t find anything else during surgery #giants
Jones says goal is to be back by training camp
@art_stapleton
·
1h
Replying to
@art_stapleton
Daniel Jones says there was no further damage to his right knee. The surgery was to repair his ACL, but everything else was structurally sound and intact. #NYGiants
I am sure we can all agree on that.
Hard to imagine it would be worse.
I am sure we can all agree on that.
Hope for the best and come back strong
Good Luck, Danny! Here's to a quick and painless recovery!
Always.
Draft a QB though.
I hope we can all return to our real reality!
+1
I am sure we can all agree on that.
Are you new here? :-)
His contract makes it impossible which we know. We are going to see what direction Schoen goes in a few short months. Will be fascinating.
Quote:
Rooting for Jones to bounce back from this injury. He will be a Giant next year and hopefully he has a better season in 2024.
Hard to imagine it would be worse.
It can always be worse. SB took a full year to get his confidence back even though the knee was better than before the surgery
Says who?
Quote:
It’s in his neck!
Says who?
I wasn’t being 100% serious as I’m not his doctor. 2 neck injuries in 3 season though, just sayin…
Agree. He has to be on the roster due to salary cap reasons, but he doesn’t have to QB1
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
the mediocrity you root is astounding
+1
I don’t think Daniel s availability is necessarily tied to whether the Giants draft a quarterback round 1. I think that decision is tied solely to their conviction on whomever is still on the board at that position when they pick.
However, Daniel s potential recovery relieves some of the urgency to draft a qb there by preventing any temptation to reach
I know the posters on this board who will totally disagree with any suggestion that Daniel offers any reason not to draft a qb early.
But I m of the opinion the circumstances surrounding the Giants failure this season were much more complex than poor quarterback play
I think last season s Daniel, especially late in the season is much more indicative of who he is than this season.
Where the Giants will be drafting is still to be determined, and I m hoping for a much better season next year, I know that is possible with Jones.
Quote:
will have to wait another year. The Giant have 3 picks in the first 2 rounds, they can improve their oline, dline and pass rush. After that they can hopefully find a wr or two.
I don’t think Daniel s availability is necessarily tied to whether the Giants draft a quarterback round 1. I think that decision is tied solely to their conviction on whomever is still on the board at that position when they pick.
However, Daniel s potential recovery relieves some of the urgency to draft a qb there by preventing any temptation to reach
I know the posters on this board who will totally disagree with any suggestion that Daniel offers any reason not to draft a qb early.
But I m of the opinion the circumstances surrounding the Giants failure this season were much more complex than poor quarterback play
I think last season s Daniel, especially late in the season is much more indicative of who he is than this season.
Where the Giants will be drafting is still to be determined, and I m hoping for a much better season next year, I know that is possible with Jones.
Down the stretch last season when the team closed out the season going 2-5-1, won a playoff game by 7 and then lost a playoff game by 31?
In those last 10 games, the team only hit 24 points three times - twice against Minnesota and once against Indy, the two worst defenses in the NFL.
This is what you are hoping to see again? This is the goal?
Did anyone watch that Niners-Eagles game last week and think Jones could sit in the pocket, go through progressions and deliver a completion on his third read?
I hope Jones a full recovery, but I'm tired of being a division doormat. The Eagles and Cowboys laugh at the Giants.
Put it this way, what do the Eagles & Cowboys want the Giants to do?
Did anyone watch that Niners-Eagles game last week and think Jones could sit in the pocket, go through progressions and deliver a completion on his third read?
I hope Jones a full recovery, but I'm tired of being a division doormat. The Eagles and Cowboys laugh at the Giants.
Put it this way, what do the Eagles & Cowboys want the Giants to do?
I bet they would be ecstatic if they could play the Giants 2022 offense every week of the year.
Did anyone watch that Niners-Eagles game last week and think Jones could sit in the pocket, go through progressions and deliver a completion on his third read?
I hope Jones a full recovery, but I'm tired of being a division doormat. The Eagles and Cowboys laugh at the Giants.
Put it this way, what do the Eagles & Cowboys want the Giants to do?
Maybe - and I'm just spitballing here -- the Giants looked at last season's offense and said we need to raise the bar.
So they tried. A couple moves look great. Others not so much.
Quote:
will have to wait another year. The Giant have 3 picks in the first 2 rounds, they can improve their oline, dline and pass rush. After that they can hopefully find a wr or two.
I don’t think Daniel s availability is necessarily tied to whether the Giants draft a quarterback round 1. I think that decision is tied solely to their conviction on whomever is still on the board at that position when they pick.
However, Daniel s potential recovery relieves some of the urgency to draft a qb there by preventing any temptation to reach
I know the posters on this board who will totally disagree with any suggestion that Daniel offers any reason not to draft a qb early.
But I m of the opinion the circumstances surrounding the Giants failure this season were much more complex than poor quarterback play
I think last season s Daniel, especially late in the season is much more indicative of who he is than this season.
Where the Giants will be drafting is still to be determined, and I m hoping for a much better season next year, I know that is possible with Jones.
The real Jones is the one who plays well sometimes. The fake Jones is the one who plays poorly most of the time.
Quote:
In comment 16315376 Jack Stroud said:
Quote:
will have to wait another year. The Giant have 3 picks in the first 2 rounds, they can improve their oline, dline and pass rush. After that they can hopefully find a wr or two.
I don’t think Daniel s availability is necessarily tied to whether the Giants draft a quarterback round 1. I think that decision is tied solely to their conviction on whomever is still on the board at that position when they pick.
However, Daniel s potential recovery relieves some of the urgency to draft a qb there by preventing any temptation to reach
I know the posters on this board who will totally disagree with any suggestion that Daniel offers any reason not to draft a qb early.
But I m of the opinion the circumstances surrounding the Giants failure this season were much more complex than poor quarterback play
I think last season s Daniel, especially late in the season is much more indicative of who he is than this season.
Where the Giants will be drafting is still to be determined, and I m hoping for a much better season next year, I know that is possible with Jones.
The real Jones is the one who plays well sometimes. The fake Jones is the one who plays poorly most of the time.
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You appear guilty of making assumptions here.
We wish him a speedy recovery with a good outcome.
That might not happen.
It is fair to say Jones is an injury risk
We should draft or trade for a QB
Plan B is a must.
Jones gets a chance in 2024 if he is able.
Jones will not be traded or cut if he is rehab goes well
Is what it is.
Quote:
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You appear guilty of making assumptions here.
LOL. "It's rude and childish to call names you monkey-brained a**hole!"
Quote:
The inevitability of Jones's departure is much exaggerated.
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
DJ has a much greater chance of being the "next great thing" that Devito does...
Quote:
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You appear guilty of making assumptions here.
You re right I am, not a good look in either direction.
Quote:
In comment 16315731 joeinpa said:
Quote:
You shouldn’t make assumptions about the meaning of another’s take, it s not a good look. But I ll help you. I don’t think the Giants should reach with their first pick
But if you prefer that they do indeed reach to satisfy your desire to have any quarterback but Jones l, that s not a take many objective fans would agree with
You appear guilty of making assumptions here.
LOL. "It's rude and childish to call names you monkey-brained a**hole!"
You’re correct, very childish.
Did anyone watch that Niners-Eagles game last week and think Jones could sit in the pocket, go through progressions and deliver a completion on his third read?
I hope Jones a full recovery, but I'm tired of being a division doormat. The Eagles and Cowboys laugh at the Giants.
Put it this way, what do the Eagles & Cowboys want the Giants to do?
When was the last time a Giant QB could "sit in the pocket"?
I think the odds are quite high DeVito is the opening day starter and Jones get his job back before the end of Summer.
I think the odds are quite high DeVito is the opening day starter and Jones get his job back before the end of Summer.
Damn, 2024 season is over already before it started.
I think the odds are quite high DeVito is the opening day starter and Jones get his job back before the end of Summer.
Then you don't think very highly of Schoen which would have been a change of opinion for you.
On one end, you have said that Schoen did not make an overly aggressive commitment to Jones and given the 3rd year guarantees not conveying until 2025, the contract was a victory for Team Schoen back in the summer.
Now, you are suggesting the QB room won't be addressed at all and the Giants will roll with DeVito and hand the starting role to Jones. This after the ACL and missing 3 1/2 games due to the neck since giving that tier 3 contract to Jones.
I'm surprised to see you arriving at this conclusion unless your initial view of the Jones contract and Schoen has changed.
I think the odds are quite high DeVito is the opening day starter and Jones get his job back before the end of Summer.
This seems like a tongue in cheek/troll post. Schoen would be an idiot if it plays out like this.
I think the odds are quite high DeVito is the opening day starter and Jones get his job back before the end of Summer.
I expect it'll be Jones on opening day. I think the backup is either Taylor or another similarly priced vet.
I think the odds are quite high DeVito is the opening day starter and Jones get his job back before the end of Summer.
Alas, I/we can't rule that out.
And that's extremely depressing.
I would say it a little differently than that. If the plan is to have Daniel Jones be the starter for the entire year (assuming good health) he had better be absolutely correct that Jones can play 17 games and produce consistently at a level he has done only in a few games in his career.
If he is wrong, and 2024 goes down in flames with Jones at the helm, he should absolutely be sent packing. Daniel Jones struggling to run a productive offense is not something he can pretend was unexpected.
I can't believe that Schoen, Brown, Cowden, Daboll & Kafka (if he's here) will all agree that a QB room of Jones-DeVito-Taylor in 2024 is the best option.
I can't believe that Schoen, Brown, Cowden, Daboll & Kafka (if he's here) will all agree that a QB room of Jones-DeVito-Taylor in 2024 is the best option.
These are the same guys that were in the building when Jones got paid, and when Barkley is being treated like he's a special player. Tough to trust anyone right now.
A good GM will scout the 2024 QB's against Jones. A good GM would also scout the 2024 QB's against the 2025 QB's. I'd like to think Schoen has more foresight.
I wouldn't apply the troll card.
I just don't think we can so easily rule out that Schoen is still comfortable with Jones as his franchise QB.
As much as you and I know Jones has contributed to the offensive woes, I could see someone thinking the offense around Jones failed him more than he failed them. Especially if you believe that Jones just isn't good enough to put a team on his back but might be good enough with a good team around him.
I don't buy that, but it is a place to go...
And then obviously adjusted continually over time.
QB was a yellow position box in '22's plan. It changed to green for 23 and 24. Now -- due to QB injury far more than the early season shitshow -- it's a yellow box for '24. Might change color any time, one way or the other. Might have a trend. Schoen will have a plan for each (any decent GM would). But we won't know till about the ides of March what color the box is, though the rest of this season will be telling.
They've already reversed themselves once by signing him after not picking up the fifth year option. After they going to reverse themselves again? I thought it would be a long time before I saw the Giants do something dumber than picking Barkley #2 overall. Turns out it was only about five years before they did. So, so damaging.
and the "after only 6 games" calculus cuts both ways. he's being paid like a franchise QB and only managed to be on the field for 6 games, where other than 30 minutes he was awful. that's enough. Schoen will have a strong contingency going into 2024.
and the "after only 6 games" calculus cuts both ways. he's being paid like a franchise QB and only managed to be on the field for 6 games, where other than 30 minutes he was awful. that's enough. Schoen will have a strong contingency going into 2024.
That's precisely the way it should work if you have a well-run organization. For anything.
Recognize you made a mistake, which happens, and pivot to a new solution.
The double-down is what kills careers.
and the "after only 6 games" calculus cuts both ways. he's being paid like a franchise QB and only managed to be on the field for 6 games, where other than 30 minutes he was awful. that's enough. Schoen will have a strong contingency going into 2024.
Does anyone on this board doubt Mara's response will be go fix it for Jones?
I think the Giants pick a QB on the second round. But I'd be flooded if the Giants pick a QB on round one.
Does anyone on this board doubt Mara's response will be go fix it for Jones?
I think the Giants pick a QB on the second round. But I'd be flooded if the Giants pick a QB on round one.
I wouldn't. The Giants gave Beckham a huge contract just to trade him a year later.
I don't see Schoen passing on a strong QB talent when he gave Jones $82M. Again Christian, you called this a "tier 3" contract and a victory for Schoen in comparison to the other QB deals. So, now he's strapped by this same contract coming off a neck and ACL (clean or not).
This reminds me when the Giants were sitting at 4-10 in 2021 and people saying Mara was going to promote Abrams for GM.
I think the way to frame the QB discussion, the opportunity may not be there depending on where NYG is picking in the first round. But, I don't see Schoen passing on a QB because of Jones contract.
It feels like the goalposts around the contract are being moved based on how bad the Giants season is which is part of the reason why the contract was structured like it was.
And any owner would be upset given the check that is being written for Jones, but it's Schoen's job to sell it to Mara. If he can't, he's the wrong person for the job.
The thing is, we won't know most likely. Because my guess is Schoen will need to trade up, but I expect him to try.
Exactly and that opinion was shared by many, so it does feel disingenuous to then say NYG will ignore QB in the first round because of Jones.
So, why is this contract now a barrier to drafting a QB in the first round?
If they don't come away with a first round QB, they most likely aren't in a position to draft one or couldn't trade up.
Link - ( New Window )
Does anyone on this board doubt Mara's response will be go fix it for Jones?
I think the Giants pick a QB on the second round. But I'd be flooded if the Giants pick a QB on round one.
Jones was coming off an acceptable campaign (he didn't play well all the time, but he won some games) - very hard to toss out a working car even with its limitations or dents, to try and chase after a Ferrari. I don't think he's anywhere close to a franchise QB who can compete with the top passers and I don't commit to him long-term.
But, the commitment here is short-term and is now even shorter term, with an added injury onto it - dramatically changing the prism of the current mess, and going forward, with new pressures on all parties. The Giants had very few immediate alternatives for Jones the last year and this season has showed why it is so important to stock alternatives.
Solutions now in NFL are short-term, even for QBs making big money, maybe even more-so for them actually given their cap-choking payscales and cap hit dilemmas they present.
If Schoen decides with his team, they love a QB and they present it to Mara, I have a really hard time seeing Mara strike it down or put it against Schoen.
What difference would that make?
Does anyone on this board doubt Mara's response will be go fix it for Jones?
I think the Giants pick a QB on the second round. But I'd be flooded if the Giants pick a QB on round one.
Doesn’t seem far fetched at all and likely happens more than you think in sports. Mara, like anyone else, can change his mind on things with more data - not sure why this can’t be one of those times. Add in another neck injury along with the knee and this seems like a fairly reasonable conversation to have with your boss.
Quote:
The Jones contract is not a contract that you give to a solution at qb
Exactly and that opinion was shared by many, so it does feel disingenuous to then say NYG will ignore QB in the first round because of Jones.
I don't think the contract is a reason to ignore a QB in the first round.
I think Schoen is a reason why we will ignore a QB in the first round.
These aren't career threatening injuries. And in classic Jones luck, there's a metric ton of cover for why he played so poorly this year.
I think the operating plan was give Jones two years, and I don't think they'll move off that plan.
Switching quarterbacks is not necessarily an easy comparison though. Comparisons should be made in regard to the quality of play from the OL, RB's, and WR's. Also, a comparison in the play calls. What are the differences?
Those certainly are not all of the things to be looked at when analyzing the difference between Jones and DeVito.
If it is found that DeVito had a significantly better playing situation then his stats won't carry as much weight. However, if the playing conditions for DeVito are about the same then, to me, his stats carry much more weight.
These aren't career threatening injuries. And in classic Jones luck, there's a metric ton of cover for why he played so poorly this year.
I think the operating plan was give Jones two years, and I don't think they'll move off that plan.
Well it was structured to be a "stuck" plan anyhow. But this isn't about 2024. This is about 2025.
Letting Jones walk wasn't an option (nor should it have been). His 2023 performance was better than average and his and the team's arrow were clearly pointed upward.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
2) Sign Jones to a multi-year long-term deal committing to him as Giants franchise QB for many years.
3) Sign Jones to a multi-year short term deal with a manageable '23 cap hit. By definition that would be 3-5 years. It made even more sense because they needed a QB in '24 also (no replacement on the roster).
An upper-tier journeyman starter (say Smith or Garropolo) is ~ $25 million, with prices rising each year.
I think it's outrageous to pay $20 for a great cocktail, but that's what it costs at nicer spots in Austin.
Based on past performance the Giants overpaid by some number, which all teams do at times, for continuity and/or in the expectation of continued improvement from a 26-year old QB with system stability for the first time in his career. They also paid more to only make what is really is a 2-year deal (Jones team likely wanted a real 5 year commitment).
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
I joked a few weeks back when Burrow got hurt that the Bengals fans now know how Giants fans felt when we lost our "franchise" QB.
I really hope you aren't suggesting what you may be suggesting... ;)
But Burrow isn't overpaid. He's injured.
This seems accurate. I know some fans would propose letting Jones walk and signing a Baker Mayfield type, but this cannot be a serious option given the success the Giants had in 2022
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
You can only use one tag per year. Doesn't matter which tag you use, using any tag rules out all others.
Quote:
In comment 16315366 christian said:
Quote:
The inevitability of Jones's departure is much exaggerated.
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
DJ has a much greater chance of being the "next great thing" that Devito does...
I agree. But the popular stance is to say how much DJ sucks and that Devito is showing that there are plays to be had. It doesn't matter either way, I 100% believe the Giants are drafting a QB this year, and my guess is DJ is gone after 2024.
Quote:
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
You can only use one tag per year. Doesn't matter which tag you use, using any tag rules out all others.
I'm not a CBA expert; I thought you could use both if you withdraw one before the final deadline.
Quote:
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
I joked a few weeks back when Burrow got hurt that the Bengals fans now know how Giants fans felt when we lost our "franchise" QB.
I really hope you aren't suggesting what you may be suggesting... ;)
But Burrow isn't overpaid. He's injured.
No, you know me better than that. I mean I like DJ but...
I'm saying anyone highly paid who can't play for an extended period is overpaid.
Letting Jones walk wasn't an option (nor should it have been). His 2023 performance was better than average and his and the team's arrow were clearly pointed upward.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
2) Sign Jones to a multi-year long-term deal committing to him as Giants franchise QB for many years.
3) Sign Jones to a multi-year short term deal with a manageable '23 cap hit. By definition that would be 3-5 years. It made even more sense because they needed a QB in '24 also (no replacement on the roster).
An upper-tier journeyman starter (say Smith or Garropolo) is ~ $25 million, with prices rising each year.
I think it's outrageous to pay $20 for a great cocktail, but that's what it costs at nicer spots in Austin.
Based on past performance the Giants overpaid by some number, which all teams do at times, for continuity and/or in the expectation of continued improvement from a 26-year old QB with system stability for the first time in his career. They also paid more to only make what is really is a 2-year deal (Jones team likely wanted a real 5 year commitment).
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
Keep telling yourself paying $100M for a bad QB was perfectly played. Lol.
Quote:
In comment 16315366 christian said:
Quote:
The inevitability of Jones's departure is much exaggerated.
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
DJ has a much greater chance of being the "next great thing" that Devito does...
DJs chances of being the next great thing are zero.
Quote:
In comment 16316359 HBart said:
Quote:
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
You can only use one tag per year. Doesn't matter which tag you use, using any tag rules out all others.
I'm not a CBA expert; I thought you could use both if you withdraw one before the final deadline.
Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on if you're a front office or a player), the CBA doesn't allow for that because it's really the first week or two of free agency where the tag represents the biggest impediment to a free agent seeking a new contract. Once the market has spent much of its resources, revoking a tag doesn't do much to repair a player's financial opportunity.
Quote:
In comment 16316193 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
The Jones contract is not a contract that you give to a solution at qb
Exactly and that opinion was shared by many, so it does feel disingenuous to then say NYG will ignore QB in the first round because of Jones.
I don't think the contract is a reason to ignore a QB in the first round.
I think Schoen is a reason why we will ignore a QB in the first round.
DeVito is also most certainly not a long term answer for anything other than MAYBE backup. But, his play should at least help advise that Jones isn't either.
None of this means that they shouldn't prioritize QB in the draft (if for no other reason than Jones's injuries), but even if it should be a top ten pick that they use, it won't mean the end of the line for Jones (even as a Giant). I'm not sure what his upside is, but his floor is that of a starting quality QB. If you can win a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler, Nick Foles, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Flacco (none of whom were remotely close to elite), you can win with Daniel Jones.
p.s.--Picture this: the Giants select Jayden Daniels with their first round pick, but Daniel Jones is cleared to practice for training camp and begins the year as the starter, the team has a remarkably healthy year that includes significant player development among their second- and third-year players (specifically Evan Neal, Josh Ezeudu, Wan'Dale Robinson, and Jalin Hyatt), and the Giants win the Super Bowl. Much stranger things have happened in the NFL and it would leave the Giants with the best 1-2-3 at QB in the league (let's include DeVito just for fun)!
Quote:
Burrow isn't overpaid. He's injured.
Same with Jones...for now. In the long haul, only time will tell whether either of the two were overpaid. This idea that 2022 was a mirage and he should only be judged by the mistakes he's made is for the birds. It's unusual that a QB spends five seasons as your starter and yet the jury is still out on him, but that is the curious case of Daniel Jones. His inconsistency can easily be correlated with the lack of any semblance of continuity surrounding him. And, yes, correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation, but it does mean that we can't truly know his upside until we see how he performs under more stable circumstances. None of the so-called bonehead plays we've seen out of him are anything we haven't also seen out Josh Allen or Patrick Mahomes, it's more a matter of how often do they occur and how often are they counter-balanced with brilliant plays. There's no such thing as "that's a throw that a franchise QB needs to make" because there isn't a franchise QB who hasn't missed one of those throws at one time or another. Again, it's about probabilities, but it's difficult to compare probabilities when the two sample sets aren't occurring on an even playing field.
None of this means that they shouldn't prioritize QB in the draft (if for no other reason than Jones's injuries), but even if it should be a top ten pick that they use, it won't mean the end of the line for Jones (even as a Giant). I'm not sure what his upside is, but his floor is that of a starting quality QB. If you can win a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler, Nick Foles, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Flacco (none of whom were remotely close to elite), you can win with Daniel Jones.
p.s.--Picture this: the Giants select Jayden Daniels with their first round pick, but Daniel Jones is cleared to practice for training camp and begins the year as the starter, the team has a remarkably healthy year that includes significant player development among their second- and third-year players (specifically Evan Neal, Josh Ezeudu, Wan'Dale Robinson, and Jalin Hyatt), and the Giants win the Super Bowl. Much stranger things have happened in the NFL and it would leave the Giants with the best 1-2-3 at QB in the league (let's include DeVito just for fun)!
Hostetler - no salary cap, one of the best defenses in NFL history
Dilfer - paid virtually nothing, one of the best defenses in NFL history
Foles - paid virtually nothing, Foles got absurdly hot briefly
Flacco - rookie contract, played at an elite level in Super Bowl run, at the end of a four-year stretch in which he averaged 22 TDs and 11 INTs per season.
Point being, in the current NFL if you're going to get average QB play and want to put together a Super Bowl team, it had better be on a rookie-type contract. I'm not convinced Daniel Jones even on a rookie deal is capable of that, but when he's a huge chunk of the cap I'm certain he isn't.
The only contemporary example I can think of that's close is Carson Wentz. And that's what I think is the most likely outcome.
I don't think the Giants are picking a first round QB, and certainly not trading up early in the first round. I think they'll pick a QB in the second round and give Jones every opportunity to keep his job.
When you use a lottery pick on a QB and he doesn't play, that's not a good problem to have. That's a blown pick or a QB controversy.
Quote:
I If you can win a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler, Nick Foles, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Flacco (none of whom were remotely close to elite), you can win with Daniel Jones.
Hostetler - no salary cap, one of the best defenses in NFL history
Dilfer - paid virtually nothing, one of the best defenses in NFL history
Foles - paid virtually nothing, Foles got absurdly hot briefly
Flacco - rookie contract, played at an elite level in Super Bowl run, at the end of a four-year stretch in which he averaged 22 TDs and 11 INTs per season.
Point being, in the current NFL if you're going to get average QB play and want to put together a Super Bowl team, it had better be on a rookie-type contract. I'm not convinced Daniel Jones even on a rookie deal is capable of that, but when he's a huge chunk of the cap I'm certain he isn't.
p.s.--Unless you just took a QB in the first round a year or two earlier (and he's playing well for you), I don't think any team should pass on a QB in the first round if he is the BPA when you're on the clock.
Quote:
Was perfectly played, other than you'd hope it was for less dollars as you would with any contract given the cap.
Letting Jones walk wasn't an option (nor should it have been). His 2023 performance was better than average and his and the team's arrow were clearly pointed upward.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
2) Sign Jones to a multi-year long-term deal committing to him as Giants franchise QB for many years.
3) Sign Jones to a multi-year short term deal with a manageable '23 cap hit. By definition that would be 3-5 years. It made even more sense because they needed a QB in '24 also (no replacement on the roster).
An upper-tier journeyman starter (say Smith or Garropolo) is ~ $25 million, with prices rising each year.
I think it's outrageous to pay $20 for a great cocktail, but that's what it costs at nicer spots in Austin.
Based on past performance the Giants overpaid by some number, which all teams do at times, for continuity and/or in the expectation of continued improvement from a 26-year old QB with system stability for the first time in his career. They also paid more to only make what is really is a 2-year deal (Jones team likely wanted a real 5 year commitment).
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
Keep telling yourself paying $100M for a bad QB was perfectly played. Lol.
As long as you keep telling yourself you have a clue.
Quote:
When you draft a guy at #6, you are expecting him to be part of the solution, not requiring an entirely built team around him.
More importantly--at this point--is that when you give a QB a 4-year contract that includes $82M in guaranteed money, you expect him to be part of the solution. And I think Jones can be part of the solution, he just doesn't have to carry the team on his back the way he did in 2022. In today's NFL, in which there are no great teams, you can build a team around Daniel Jones that will get you to the Super Bowl. Of course he needs to stay healthy.
p.s.--Unless you just took a QB in the first round a year or two earlier (and he's playing well for you), I don't think any team should pass on a QB in the first round if he is the BPA when you're on the clock.
When you are wrong and have buyers remorse, you don't double down on it. You pivot fast out and away.
Even if you groom the pick, there's virtually no chance you get back what you paid for him in a trade.
If Jones is their guy, they damn well better be drafting a skill player on round one.
Even if you groom the pick, there's virtually no chance you get back what you paid for him in a trade.
If Jones is their guy, they damn well better be drafting a skill player on round one.
Past decisions be damned, do you honestly think that if they draft a QB in round 1 that they think “Jones is their guy”? Seriously? That makes no freakin sense. If they draft a QB in round 1, they obviously don’t think Jones is their guy.
Even if you groom the pick, there's virtually no chance you get back what you paid for him in a trade.
If Jones is their guy, they damn well better be drafting a skill player on round one.
I'm surprised you are going this route, christian. It isn't consistent with what you were saying back in the summer.
The Giants you say made a 2 year commitment to Jones. They will be half way into that commitment by the time April rolls around. In the first year of the commitment, Jones (a running QB who threw 15 TD's last season) tore his ACL. He also had his second career neck injury.
Did that contract really say that Jones was their guy? Or was it a transitional contract based on what the top QB's have gotten paid?
And if Jones is their guy as you mention, why bother taking a QB in the 2nd round either?
I just don't buy that. The value may not match up with QB, but it won't be due to Jones' contract or Jones being their guy.
Quote:
In comment 16316359 HBart said:
Quote:
Was perfectly played, other than you'd hope it was for less dollars as you would with any contract given the cap.
Letting Jones walk wasn't an option (nor should it have been). His 2023 performance was better than average and his and the team's arrow were clearly pointed upward.
Schoen's other options were:
1) Franchise or transition tag for Jones and the other for Barkley. But that wasn't an option since it required $40MM+ in cap space in July. Not possible; even a long-term Barkley deal (which made no sense) would require $35MM.
2) Sign Jones to a multi-year long-term deal committing to him as Giants franchise QB for many years.
3) Sign Jones to a multi-year short term deal with a manageable '23 cap hit. By definition that would be 3-5 years. It made even more sense because they needed a QB in '24 also (no replacement on the roster).
An upper-tier journeyman starter (say Smith or Garropolo) is ~ $25 million, with prices rising each year.
I think it's outrageous to pay $20 for a great cocktail, but that's what it costs at nicer spots in Austin.
Based on past performance the Giants overpaid by some number, which all teams do at times, for continuity and/or in the expectation of continued improvement from a 26-year old QB with system stability for the first time in his career. They also paid more to only make what is really is a 2-year deal (Jones team likely wanted a real 5 year commitment).
Jones was obviously overpaid for '23. So is Joe Burrow. And so? His contract isn't an issue. He's either back on track or gone in a year.
Keep telling yourself paying $100M for a bad QB was perfectly played. Lol.
As long as you keep telling yourself you have a clue.
You think flushing a $100M down the toilet is perfect business, and I'm the one who doesn't have a clue. Ok, skippy.
Quote:
If Jones is their guy, I can't think of worse decision than to take a QB in the top 10.
Even if you groom the pick, there's virtually no chance you get back what you paid for him in a trade.
If Jones is their guy, they damn well better be drafting a skill player on round one.
I'm surprised you are going this route, christian. It isn't consistent with what you were saying back in the summer.
The Giants you say made a 2 year commitment to Jones. They will be half way into that commitment by the time April rolls around. In the first year of the commitment, Jones (a running QB who threw 15 TD's last season) tore his ACL. He also had his second career neck injury.
Did that contract really say that Jones was their guy? Or was it a transitional contract based on what the top QB's have gotten paid?
And if Jones is their guy as you mention, why bother taking a QB in the 2nd round either?
I just don't buy that. The value may not match up with QB, but it won't be due to Jones' contract or Jones being their guy.
I swear someone has hacked christians account. He’s had some bizarre posts for him recently
I'll emphasize as I have before that this is not the path I would take. I would consider the Jones money thrown away, come out of this draft with two QB picks, and put both Jones and Barkley in the past. But the Giants never do anything I think they should so I'll assume they won't here.
I'll emphasize as I have before that this is not the path I would take. I would consider the Jones money thrown away, come out of this draft with two QB picks, and put both Jones and Barkley in the past. But the Giants never do anything I think they should so I'll assume they won't here.
I get what you’re saying but man I sure hope the Giants prove you wrong. I have absolutely zero appetite for watching Daniel Jones for another year and then deal with another year of the constant debates as to why the offense was allergic to touchdowns, again.
As for christian, it doesn’t really have anything to do with agreeing with him or not agreeing with him. As Sean has stated several times, christians recent posts completely fly in the face of what he’s been saying since the contract was signed. From the day it was signed he was telling us all how great a deal it was for the Giants because of the escape clause and that it was essentially a two year deal that showed at the time the Giants were still not sold on Jones. But suddenly in the past couple of weeks, he’s acting like the contract is a huge anchor and since the Giants proved that they think Jones is the guy by giving him that contract, it would be stupid to draft his replacement. Makes no sense based on his prior opinions on the topic…
I wanna vomit.
I don't think guaranteeing 82M was cavalier. That's a vote of some confidence. It's not the iron clad vote someone like Watson, or even Jackson got. But I don't think it's a vote that gets dismissed because of a torn ACL.
And it has less to do with the money/contract and more to do with the likelihood they really like Jones.
So, they want it to work. And they will cue up audition #6 by bringing in more infantry for Jones.
The correct move was to let both Jones and Barkley hit unrestricted free agency, not FT, not sign beforehand. None of the FT crew has successfully defended why FT was better than letting them walk.
The correct move was to let both Jones and Barkley hit unrestricted free agency, not FT, not sign beforehand. None of the FT crew has successfully defended why FT was better than letting them walk.
That was the best choice - yes.
But that wasn't going to happen once Jones displayed a pulse and played relatively well in 2022. So, if you accept that reality, the best approach in compensation was another prove-it offer - the FT.
1) Jones's injuries are not career threateners
2) There will be enough plausible deniability (again) to cast doubt on whether Jones is the problem
I think Jones is getting the full two years, with the full faith of the organization. I don't think Schoen gave him those two years and then says JK over a torn ACL and a third of a season behind a pretty disastrous offensive line.
If Schoen was tepid on Jones he would have franchised him.
If you go pick a QB with a lottery pick, you're slamming the door on Jones, or at least you better be.
And it has less to do with the money/contract and more to do with the likelihood they really like Jones.
So, they want it to work. And they will cue up audition #6 by bringing in more infantry for Jones.
Exactly. It's in Schoen's professional best interest for Jones to work out. If Jones is a throw away after one season, that doesn't bode well for Schoen's bona fides at quarterback evaluation.
"Hey John, I know I fucked up with Dan. But don't worry, all I gotta do is trade a bunch of picks and get the real right guy. Trust me."
This is not a situation where the Giants are trapped. It's a bad contract, but it's nowhere near an upper echelon QB contract.
The implication by some on this thread is the Giants would pass on Caleb Williams with the first pick because they've committed to Jones. No chance Schoen would do that. He's putting all these air miles on just for show? Come on.
The Giants need a QB. I keep hearing about the clean ACL tear, but what about the fact that Jones missed games in 2019. Jones missed games in 2020. Jones missed the final 6 games in 2021. Jones missed 3 games in 2023 before the ACL. Then add in the ACL for a running QB.
The contract was not a full endorsement by any means. If it was, it wouldn't have been such a tough negotiation and there wouldn't have been an out after 2024.
The contract is not good, but it's much closer to Carr and Garoppolo than Herbert or Burrow.
They might not take a QB in the first round. I don't know if it does make sense to trade up and give up a lot of draft capital. They might be picking outside of the top QB's. At most, Jones is an expensive transition QB in 2024 imo who will probably ultimately be benched because of the injury guarantee in 2025.
If you go pick a QB with a lottery pick, you're slamming the door on Jones, or at least you better be.
How backups have revealed Daniel Jones’ flaws - ( New Window )
Subscribe, not prescribe, lol
I read that. He called Jones 'gun shy'. I don't that changing.
Can we please move the fuck on?
Quote:
If Jones is their guy, I can't think of worse decision than to take a QB in the top 10.
Even if you groom the pick, there's virtually no chance you get back what you paid for him in a trade.
If Jones is their guy, they damn well better be drafting a skill player on round one.
I'm surprised you are going this route, christian. It isn't consistent with what you were saying back in the summer.
The Giants you say made a 2 year commitment to Jones. They will be half way into that commitment by the time April rolls around. In the first year of the commitment, Jones (a running QB who threw 15 TD's last season) tore his ACL. He also had his second career neck injury.
Did that contract really say that Jones was their guy? Or was it a transitional contract based on what the top QB's have gotten paid?
And if Jones is their guy as you mention, why bother taking a QB in the 2nd round either?
I just don't buy that. The value may not match up with QB, but it won't be due to Jones' contract or Jones being their guy.
^This
1) Jones's injuries are not career threateners
2) There will be enough plausible deniability (again) to cast doubt on whether Jones is the problem
I think Jones is getting the full two years, with the full faith of the organization. I don't think Schoen gave him those two years and then says JK over a torn ACL and a third of a season behind a pretty disastrous offensive line.
If Schoen was tepid on Jones he would have franchised him.
If you go pick a QB with a lottery pick, you're slamming the door on Jones, or at least you better be.
Huh? Talk about moving the goalposts. You were among the crowd who were going against the idea of doing the 5th year guarantee because he was hurt two years ago! He’s hurt again now, twice!!!
If Jones has a marginal season in 2024 you assume they’re just going to run it back again in 2025 while they wait for a QB prospect to fall in their laps or god forbid force another Jones like pick in 2026 or 2027 if they stink again?
Unlikely. Not impossible. But unlikely.
If Schoen runs it back with Jones in 2024 with no winning season and no backup plan, he’s getting fired sooner than later whether it’s in one year or two.
Schoen has to get a buy in and longer term sell of hope in the QB room.
Jones got $40 million a year- the highest of all the free agent qb's available. The dead cap hit in 2025 when he is cut is $22 million I believe, the highest of any of the free agent qb's available. For perspective, that is what Thomas got on his extension and double what Barkley got. So it will cost good LT or 2 primo rb's money to rid ourselves of Jones at the end of next year.
And the warning signs were there: the passing numbers in line with what he had done the previous two seasons, the passing metrics compared to the League were bad, the fact that Jones threw for over 200 yards just twice in the first 9 games where we went 7-2, the 2-5-1 finish, the debacle against the Eagles in the playoffs.
There was no reason to automatically run it back with Jones or to bend over and give in to his demands to be a $40 million per year player and this was stupidly played based on a narrative that Jones had turned this big corner and opposing DC's would go to sleep on his running and not spend the season devising defenses to reign in running qb's.
There were several way this could have been played; bending over and giving in to the demands of a mediocre player was the worst of the options.
Quote:
In comment 16315506 Johnny5 said:
Quote:
In comment 16315366 christian said:
Quote:
The inevitability of Jones's departure is much exaggerated.
Doesn't mean they aren't going to draft a QB though. Unless by some miracle Tommy Cutlets becomes the next big thing (Well, and then stays the next big thing... lol).
DJ has a much greater chance of being the "next great thing" that Devito does...
DJs chances of being the next great thing are zero.
I guess it takes one to know one.... eh?
Jones got $40 million a year- the highest of all the free agent qb's available. The dead cap hit in 2025 when he is cut is $22 million I believe, the highest of any of the free agent qb's available. For perspective, that is what Thomas got on his extension and double what Barkley got. So it will cost good LT or 2 primo rb's money to rid ourselves of Jones at the end of next year.
And the warning signs were there: the passing numbers in line with what he had done the previous two seasons, the passing metrics compared to the League were bad, the fact that Jones threw for over 200 yards just twice in the first 9 games where we went 7-2, the 2-5-1 finish, the debacle against the Eagles in the playoffs.
There was no reason to automatically run it back with Jones or to bend over and give in to his demands to be a $40 million per year player and this was stupidly played based on a narrative that Jones had turned this big corner and opposing DC's would go to sleep on his running and not spend the season devising defenses to reign in running qb's.
There were several way this could have been played; bending over and giving in to the demands of a mediocre player was the worst of the options.
This is exactly right. The sad thing is that there are very smart football guys on this thread that continue to believe that this contract was a "sensible hedge" because of the easy out after two years. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is no easy out, especially for a team that is rebuilding. As you say Homer, the twenty percent cap hit in 2024 is an unmitigated disaster and the 2025 dead money is equivalent to the AAV of an elite starting left tackle. And let's hope that DJ doesn't get injured in 2024 forcing Schoen to cut him while injured, literally doubling the dead money hit.
The DJ contract was as dumb a move by any GM in NFL history. And no, this is not hyperbole. Please do not compare this to the Watson or Wilson contracts - these were both pro bowl players who have not lived up to legitimate expectations based on actual prior performance. Schoen made a massive bet on the come believing that DJ is a top ten quarterback talent, when he is in fact no better than backups like Marcus Mariota or Mitchell Trubisky.
Or Tyrod Taylor. Or Tommy DeVito. And that entire locker room knows it. So there is no "running DJ back". If Schoen is going to move forward in denial with such a plan, than the "DJ Era" will become synonymous with the "Reign of Schoen" as the worst nightmare in Giants history, replacing the Handley era, the 1970s and the recent three stooges coaching triumvirate as the pinnacle of that which should never be named...
I felt Jones was a risk because he couldn't protect himself well running. That's something he's greatly improved.
The neck injury this year cleared up quickly enough he was back on the field, and we all know ACLs are not career enders for QBS.
I think many of you underestimate the support he enjoys in the organization. I don't believe Schoen is operating with an imperative to replace Jones. Rather, I believe he's operating with the hope Jones succeeds.
That's not to say he won't draft a quarterback. But I don't believe he'll pick one in the top 10.
I think the more likely outcome is they trade into the end of round one or pick one on top of round two.
Quote:
When you draft a guy at #6, you are expecting him to be part of the solution, not requiring an entirely built team around him.
More importantly--at this point--is that when you give a QB a 4-year contract that includes $82M in guaranteed money, you expect him to be part of the solution. And I think Jones can be part of the solution, he just doesn't have to carry the team on his back the way he did in 2022. In today's NFL, in which there are no great teams, you can build a team around Daniel Jones that will get you to the Super Bowl. Of course he needs to stay healthy.
p.s.--Unless you just took a QB in the first round a year or two earlier (and he's playing well for you), I don't think any team should pass on a QB in the first round if he is the BPA when you're on the clock.
Quote:
all the sugar coating in the world won't hide it.
Jones got $40 million a year- the highest of all the free agent qb's available. The dead cap hit in 2025 when he is cut is $22 million I believe, the highest of any of the free agent qb's available. For perspective, that is what Thomas got on his extension and double what Barkley got. So it will cost good LT or 2 primo rb's money to rid ourselves of Jones at the end of next year.
And the warning signs were there: the passing numbers in line with what he had done the previous two seasons, the passing metrics compared to the League were bad, the fact that Jones threw for over 200 yards just twice in the first 9 games where we went 7-2, the 2-5-1 finish, the debacle against the Eagles in the playoffs.
There was no reason to automatically run it back with Jones or to bend over and give in to his demands to be a $40 million per year player and this was stupidly played based on a narrative that Jones had turned this big corner and opposing DC's would go to sleep on his running and not spend the season devising defenses to reign in running qb's.
There were several way this could have been played; bending over and giving in to the demands of a mediocre player was the worst of the options.
This is exactly right. The sad thing is that there are very smart football guys on this thread that continue to believe that this contract was a "sensible hedge" because of the easy out after two years. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is no easy out, especially for a team that is rebuilding. As you say Homer, the twenty percent cap hit in 2024 is an unmitigated disaster and the 2025 dead money is equivalent to the AAV of an elite starting left tackle. And let's hope that DJ doesn't get injured in 2024 forcing Schoen to cut him while injured, literally doubling the dead money hit.
The DJ contract was as dumb a move by any GM in NFL history. And no, this is not hyperbole. Please do not compare this to the Watson or Wilson contracts - these were both pro bowl players who have not lived up to legitimate expectations based on actual prior performance. Schoen made a massive bet on the come believing that DJ is a top ten quarterback talent, when he is in fact no better than backups like Marcus Mariota or Mitchell Trubisky.
Or Tyrod Taylor. Or Tommy DeVito. And that entire locker room knows it. So there is no "running DJ back". If Schoen is going to move forward in denial with such a plan, than the "DJ Era" will become synonymous with the "Reign of Schoen" as the worst nightmare in Giants history, replacing the Handley era, the 1970s and the recent three stooges coaching triumvirate as the pinnacle of that which should never be named...
Jones got $40 million a year- the highest of all the free agent qb's available. The dead cap hit in 2025 when he is cut is $22 million I believe, the highest of any of the free agent qb's available. For perspective, that is what Thomas got on his extension and double what Barkley got. So it will cost good LT or 2 primo rb's money to rid ourselves of Jones at the end of next year.
And the warning signs were there: the passing numbers in line with what he had done the previous two seasons, the passing metrics compared to the League were bad, the fact that Jones threw for over 200 yards just twice in the first 9 games where we went 7-2, the 2-5-1 finish, the debacle against the Eagles in the playoffs.
There was no reason to automatically run it back with Jones or to bend over and give in to his demands to be a $40 million per year player and this was stupidly played based on a narrative that Jones had turned this big corner and opposing DC's would go to sleep on his running and not spend the season devising defenses to reign in running qb's.
There were several way this could have been played; bending over and giving in to the demands of a mediocre player was the worst of the options.
I think a couple made salient points to remind us that comparing his deal to Watson or Wilson is apples to oranges because his was based 100% on hope, while theirs were based on past performance. That said, their deals were both stupid as well.
The real comp would be Hurts. Is anyone happier with Jones than Hurts?
I think the more likely outcome is they trade into the end of round one or pick one on top of round two.
The problem with that (from the pro-Jones perspective) is that the QBs that figure to be there at the 1/2 turn are going to be far more talented prospects than Jones.
If they draft Penix or Nix, sitting either of them behind Jones is both a waste of time and a misallocation of resources. Either of them becomes the most talented QB on the team the day they're drafted.
Quote:
I think the more likely outcome is they trade into the end of round one or pick one on top of round two.
The problem with that (from the pro-Jones perspective) is that the QBs that figure to be there at the 1/2 turn are going to be far more talented prospects than Jones.
If they draft Penix or Nix, sitting either of them behind Jones is both a waste of time and a misallocation of resources. Either of them becomes the most talented QB on the team the day they're drafted.
If they just miss out on Williams, Maye, or Daniels (my personal favorite of the 3), it will be an interesting thing to watch. I don't think any of the other QBs are worthy of a top 10 pick. Will they spend one on guys who are certainly talented, but less likely to be sure things in the pros?
The problem with that (from the pro-Jones perspective) is that the QBs that figure to be there at the 1/2 turn are going to be far more talented prospects than Jones.
If they draft Penix or Nix, sitting either of them behind Jones is both a waste of time and a misallocation of resources. Either of them becomes the most talented QB on the team the day they're drafted.
To be clear, I think you know my preference is they trade whatever is necessary to draft Daniels. And then hold Jones out with the small hope they can recoup some nominal compensation in a trade when he's healthy.
But that's fantasy world stuff.
Why should I believe the Giants won't give Jones every opportunity to keep the job?
The contract is awful, but it's not like it was unexpected. Most of BBI predicted the AAV to be around $37M. Schoen valued the QB over the RB. He was wrong.
I don't think he'll double down on Jones and get himself fired in 2025/26. Daboll has even more pressure.
This is a franchise that listens to the fans. Duggan's poll had 77% of fans wanting to move on from Jones.
So Daboll can’t just anoint Jones the QB. That suggests his preference would be a pretty high draftee at the position and with open competition and the guy playing the best in camp earning the week 1 start.
The timing of this also needs to be considered. If I were Daboll, and Mara and Schoen told me that the Jones would be the starting QB next year, I’d start making phone calls to see if the rumored openings with the chargers and Bills represented an alternative. But this needs to be resolved in January, when NFL HCs are hired. So the timing presents another complication.
Sure hope our front office is already hashing this out this month.
Go get Jayden Daniels.
I don't think there's much doubling down required.
I think a very plausible outcome is Jones is PUP until mid-August, and the other two quarterbacks on the roster are DeVito and say Penix.
When Jones gets healthy he gets his job back. If he plays poorly, Daboll goes to the rookie.
Looks good because he plays with the 2nd best WRs group in the nation in the worst defensive conference in football.
Where were these gaudy stats at Indiana? Kid played six years of college football. For perspective - he’s been in college longer than Jones has been in the NFL.
Lol
Not necessarily. It tells us the Giants want to develop a quarterback behind Jones. Which is exactly what I think they want to do.
When the Giants moved up to take Baker at 30, it cost them number 37, 132, and 142. And the 30th pick has a 2.5M cap hit in 2024.
That's a pretty light investment pick and cap wise. And it doesn't have the emotional weight of using a lottery pick on a QB.
He's a tremendous back shoulder thrower, especially to his strong side. And he throws a very catchable deep ball.
Those are fine attributes, but not enough - for me - to invest any high pick. Although I do think he throws the ball considerably better than Jones.