for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Saquon Barkley's Future With The Giants

nyjuggernaut2 : 2/12/2020 1:08 pm
Just had a conversation with a fellow Giants fan at my work about Saquon. He was very disappointed when the Giants used the #2 pick on him, and at the time wanted them to get Sam Darnold instead. But our conversation got me thinking about Saquon's future with the team.

As it stands right now, Saquon has two years remaining on his rookie contract. I wouldn't be surprised if come this time next year we start hearing grumblings from Saquon's camp of him wanting to "get paid" and extend his deal, and hopefully it doesn't lead to possible hold-out threats. It's almost certain he is going to look for a contract close to $100 million (Zeke Elliot signed a 6yr/$90mil extenstion). It's also considered by many NFL "gurus" to be unwise for a team to have a good portion of their salary cap allocated toward the RB position, as history shows good RBs can be found all over the draft.

With that said, when the time comes to make a decision, do you think the Giants end up re-signing Saquon, letting him walk, or possibly trading him away next off-season?
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
I'm not..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2020 10:06 pm : link
sure what "big money" is supposed to mean:

Quote:
I think you meant to say big $$.

Is it detrimental to success? Most of the time, yes.


Relative money says that all 4 SB teams the past two years have spent pretty well on the RB position, including SF who was #1 this season.

Worst was 14th place and the rest were 4th and 9th. I'm sure you are trying to make a point, but I'm not sure what it is. The #1 spending team was literally just in the SB.
RE: RE: Let's..  
Leg of Theismann : 2/12/2020 10:26 pm : link
In comment 14810073 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 14810063 FatMan in Charlotte said:


Quote:


bottom line this.

Is allocating $$ to the RB position detrimental to a team's success. Can teams succeed when they do that?



I think you meant to say big $$.

Is it detrimental to success? Most of the time, yes.

There are always exceptions - if you are a great team and are in full luxury mode - but why risk it when you can pump money into other vital positions. Upgrade the OL, upgrade the pass rush, upgrade the secondary, etc. Don't those ideas just sound better for improving a football team?

We've been down this road many, many times. It's always easier to hedge on RB because you can usually count on the available supply. The examples seem endless...


Guys, winning a super bowl is not about having more money tied up in one position compared to another. The main thing is you just donít want a bunch of money either tied up in dead cap or in shitty players who arenít worth the big contracts you gave them. Barkley is a difference maker and a fantastic player, if you bet heís going to continue being a great player, you pay him and you donít worry about it. GREAT players are worth big money, regardless of their position (besides maybe punter, but even a great punter is worth the market price of a great punter). The exception is when they cause more trouble than their worth (like OBJ perhaps), but Barkley is not that guy. Heís an awesome leader and presence in the locker room.

If this past year in the NFL has taught us anything, itís that there is no ďone way to winĒ. Old school /new school /new age... doesnít matter, there are a million ways to skin a cat, just do what you do better than anyone else does their thing and you can win. One common denominator though: Having good players on your team regardless of position and using them correctly and efficiently is how you win football games.

Maybe QB is the one position where it especially helps your SB Chances to have a good player on a rookie deal (especially when a mediocre starting QB can cost like $40M ), but for the most part if you have a guy who is a top 5 player at his position, is a proven difference maker as opposed to just being an easily replaceable piece, and is a fantastic influence on the team from a leadership/intangibles standpoint, you pay that guy and keep him on your team. Getting rid of him or trading him doesnít guarantee that youíre replacing him and his cap number with equal or better value.

This team does not suck because of Barkley, nor will we suck because we paid him. Weíve sucked because of awful drafting mostly by Jerry Reese for a long long time and we suck because of the dead cap and 10s of millions of $ in resources tied up in shitty things: like ogletree, solder, the ghost of Odell Beckham, and this past season our backup QB (no offense Eli). Saquon freakiní Barkley and the $15m per year we pay him should be the least of our concerns, he will not be the end all be all reason why we donít win a super bowl, trust me.
Btw  
Leg of Theismann : 2/12/2020 10:27 pm : link
What about the half a decade between Bradshaw and Barkley? Those were the dark ages of the Giants RB position. We were lucky enough to land Bradshaw in the 7th round and he had a great career here, but the way people talk like you can just replace Barkleyís production with any old Joe (and iím not talking Joe Morris nor Joe Morrison, ha, anywayó) is just ignoring the fact that that position was awful for so many years here. We finally get that position right, heís one of the best in the league, and now everyone wants to trade the guy for unknown values.
Want to see how his health holds up  
Giant John : 2/12/2020 10:30 pm : link
Next season.
RE: RE: ...  
christian : 2/12/2020 10:31 pm : link
In comment 14810041 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 14810032 christian said:


Quote:


The Cowboys signed Dak to a very favorable deal. The Rams signed Gurley to a horror show.

If Barkley and his team sign-ups for the discount Dak did, that's good for the Giants.



You had me combing the internet for a Dak signing. Not understanding your post.


Lord Almighty, in my defense I took a long flight today and am jet lagged.

I meant Zeke.

Elliot signed an incredibly favorable deal. When you add up what his rookie deal 4th and 5th year salary were, the Cowboys didn't actually commit too much more in guarantees.
I sure..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2020 10:31 pm : link
pine for the days of watching a plodding Peyton Hillis trudging in Big Blue!
Assuming he has a relatively healthy year...  
Milton : 2/13/2020 12:05 am : link
...and is as explosive as he was his rookie year, I would give him an extension. It's the right thing to do, he will have earned it.
RE: I'm not..  
bw in dc : 2/13/2020 12:07 am : link
In comment 14810078 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
sure what "big money" is supposed to mean:



Quote:


I think you meant to say big $$.

Is it detrimental to success? Most of the time, yes.



Relative money says that all 4 SB teams the past two years have spent pretty well on the RB position, including SF who was #1 this season.

Worst was 14th place and the rest were 4th and 9th. I'm sure you are trying to make a point, but I'm not sure what it is. The #1 spending team was literally just in the SB.


Re: 9ers cap situation with RBs. You failed to add context. So I will. As you know, McKinnon's has been hurt and they've had to invest in replacements. They aren't big costs, but compounded with McKinnon's contract, the numbers inflate overall.

But here is the key piece you overlook - the costs for the running back position includes BOTH RBs and FBs. And the 9ers have invested a big chunk in their FB, Juszczyk. And that spills into that total cost. But his value is in his blocking. He's essentially another lineman to their running game and that is an enormous asset. Money very wisely spent...

So, of the top ten teams with most money spent on RBs, only 3 made the playoffs. Those teams were the 9ers, Pats, and Ravens. Throw the Pats out because, well, they are the Pats and they can afford to take luxury chances. And now we have more color on the 9ers situation. Incidentally, McKinnon's cap hit in 2020 is only $8.8M.

Of the next ten teams with most money spent on RBs, 6 made the playoffs.

Of the bottom twelve teams, 3 made the playoffs.

So you can see where the distribution is across the league. Essentially, the majority of the teams who made the playoffs were not in the top ten in RB spend. And 3 made it in the bottom end. The Chiefs, btw, were 20th in RB spend...

What do you..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/13/2020 12:23 am : link
mean "they aren't big costs"??

The Niners have the most allocation to the RB position in the NFL.

That, by definition, is the largest cost out there.
And..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/13/2020 12:25 am : link
the Chiefs were 14th in RB spend in the NFL
RE: And..  
bw in dc : 2/13/2020 12:38 am : link
In comment 14810123 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
the Chiefs were 14th in RB spend in the NFL


I was using both 2019 and 2020 Spotrac data. I wanted to see McKinnon's cap hit in 2020.

In 2019, the Chiefs are 17th. They are going to be 20th in 2020...pending the outcome of free agency.
Top Spend by Position. - ( New Window )
RE: What do you..  
bw in dc : 2/13/2020 12:46 am : link
In comment 14810122 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
mean "they aren't big costs"??

The Niners have the most allocation to the RB position in the NFL.

That, by definition, is the largest cost out there.


The total costs are high, but they haven't over-invested in replacements for McKinnon. They have just spread the costs over more bodies in their RBBC format.

And they thought highly enough of Juscczyk to make him an old school blocking FB. Essentially another blocker. An unconventional move in today's game...
Look  
aGiantGuy : 2/13/2020 1:23 am : link
Some of you guys take analytics way too close to heart. Statistics are just data that needs to be interpreted, it doesnít prove anything and canít be used as a proof.

The Giants had success with Rb by committee before, but before that they had a decade of success with Tiki Barber. Trends in the NFL are constantly cycling. Positional value is not the freakin Bible and even if it was, it should be questioned.

Belicheck traded away Chandler Jones in his prime for a second rd pick, a trade that just spits in the face of the whole positional value concept and just look where those teams are.
I repeat, positional value is not gospel.
RE: Let's point out..  
WalterSobchak : 2/13/2020 6:01 am : link
In comment 14810066 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
that the past two SB's have had two teams in the top 5 in salary allocation to RB's. And the other two teams were in the top 10 and top 15.


The Rams may have been top 5 with rb salary . But who is the other team ? Pats are not top 5 nor the chiefs ? Maybe the 49ers since they signed Mckinnon and he never played? Either way , go ask Les Snead about how the Rams feel about investing all that $ into a rb who has an arthritic knee. Also Gurley was good in the regualar season in 2018 but contributed very little on their run to the Superbowl.
Rams would love to get out of the Gurley deal , one of the all time dumbest nfl contracts (signed him with 2 years left on his rookie deal).
49ers are paying Mostert less then 3mill per and he signed the deal after the nfc champ game.
Barkley is good but it was a dumb pick with how many holes we had to fill and an oline that was/is awful. Like someone living in a shanty and spending all their money on Lexus.
Ohh no the Gurley deal  
UConn4523 : 2/13/2020 6:49 am : link
you can find an example of anything to counter an argument in the nfl. There arenít 20 deals like Gurleys, not sure why people post as such. His knee went, it happens. But they are in cap hell for other reasons too - care to talk about all the other players they signed and traded away picks for? They shouldnít have paid Goff, thatís a problem bigger than Gurley as well.

And the Chiefs have the best QB in the league - of course they donít need to go out and spend a ton on a RB. That said Iím not convinced they donít pay Hunt if he didnít fuck himself over.
RE: RE: Let's point out..  
aGiantGuy : 2/13/2020 7:17 am : link
In comment 14810146 WalterSobchak said:
Quote:
In comment 14810066 FatMan in Charlotte said:


Quote:


that the past two SB's have had two teams in the top 5 in salary allocation to RB's. And the other two teams were in the top 10 and top 15.



The Rams may have been top 5 with rb salary . But who is the other team ? Pats are not top 5 nor the chiefs ? Maybe the 49ers since they signed Mckinnon and he never played? Either way , go ask Les Snead about how the Rams feel about investing all that $ into a rb who has an arthritic knee. Also Gurley was good in the regualar season in 2018 but contributed very little on their run to the Superbowl.
Rams would love to get out of the Gurley deal , one of the all time dumbest nfl contracts (signed him with 2 years left on his rookie deal).
49ers are paying Mostert less then 3mill per and he signed the deal after the nfc champ game.
Barkley is good but it was a dumb pick with how many holes we had to fill and an oline that was/is awful. Like someone living in a shanty and spending all their money on Lexus.


With Gurley healthy the Rams are a top 3 team in the NFL, without Gurley they canít even make the playoffs. If Gurley doesnít deserve a contract, who does??

Thatís like me saying when Cam Newton is healthy the Panthers are a playoff team, now that Cam has been consistently hurt for 3 years and theyíve been a bottom dwelling team for most of that period, they shouldíve never gave Newton that 5 yr contract. The contract was a waste.

Your example has nothing to do with the position that is being played. All positions get hurt, you donít want to sign anyone to a long term contract that is going to get hurt.

You pay your best players, or you play like Belicheck and pay who you want to pay with your inside info. But you live and die by that as well
RE: Btw  
LBH15 : 2/13/2020 7:18 am : link
In comment 14810086 Leg of Theismann said:
Quote:
What about the half a decade between Bradshaw and Barkley? Those were the dark ages of the Giants RB position. We were lucky enough to land Bradshaw in the 7th round and he had a great career here, but the way people talk like you can just replace Barkleyís production with any old Joe (and iím not talking Joe Morris nor Joe Morrison, ha, anywayó) is just ignoring the fact that that position was awful for so many years here. We finally get that position right, heís one of the best in the league, and now everyone wants to trade the guy for unknown values.


That time period also coincides when Reese was basically the worst drafter in the NFL. And the RB position did not escape that fact. He used plenty of picks on RBs and they all pretty much sucked and had major flaws.
i'd consider trading saquon for the right return  
MM_in_NYC : 2/13/2020 7:38 am : link
with this roster combined with recent results i'd consider trading anyone if i could do so to improve the team overall.

that doesn't mean i think sb isn't good.

it also doesn't mean team's can't win with money invested in rb.

it does mean that you need to be much better constructing the rest of your roster at the traditionally higher priced positions.

and that is harder.

and so it does increase your risk of not attaining the success we seek.

so i am wary of giving a rb a massive, long term contract. yet, we have sb on our team now and we can't squander that.

unless we can get an overwhelming offer now i don't view this as decision we need to make until after his 4th year - i don't think the original post correctly values the 5th year option we have.

let's judge where our roster is then. i'd play hard ball of this.

RE: Ohh no the Gurley deal  
Chris684 : 2/13/2020 8:07 am : link
In comment 14810150 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
you can find an example of anything to counter an argument in the nfl. There arenít 20 deals like Gurleys, not sure why people post as such. His knee went, it happens. But they are in cap hell for other reasons too - care to talk about all the other players they signed and traded away picks for? They shouldnít have paid Goff, thatís a problem bigger than Gurley as well.

And the Chiefs have the best QB in the league - of course they donít need to go out and spend a ton on a RB. That said Iím not convinced they donít pay Hunt if he didnít fuck himself over.


Gurley's knee has also been an issue since college.

Saquon's knees are not.
I think the problem is that Barkleys talent has not  
Rudy5757 : 2/13/2020 10:11 am : link
made this team better and thats why a lot of people still have a hard time with him being picked where he was. There are still holes in his game and for a guy that was picked #2 overall and getting paid like he's already done it he needed to be better out of the gate. Great stats his 1st year but he can't block. Coaching and play calling have not done him any justice either.

I dont think the question is whether the team would be better with Darnold because I dont think Gettlemen and crew thought he was a franchise QB or he would have been the pick. I think the question is would this team have been better picking up a positional player like Nelson or even trading the pick for multiple picks. I think that answer is yes.

I don't hate Barkley, I got my kids Barkley Jerseys because he is the kind of kid you want them to root for but the RB position was not the problem on this team. the guys blocking for him continue to be the problem. the lack of players on D are the problem. 1 offensive lineman can improve the whole unit. We had arguably the best WR and barkley in 2018 and the O still sucked. In 2017 we were 21st in total O, in 2018 we were 16th. the Colts on the other hand went from 31st in 2017 to 6th in 2018. Is it all because of nelson no, but it cant be ignored.
RE: Ohh no the Gurley deal  
christian : 2/13/2020 10:48 am : link
In comment 14810150 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
you can find an example of anything to counter an argument in the nfl. There arenít 20 deals like Gurleys, not sure why people post as such.


If you look at the top 10 AAV for running backs, and subtract the guys on rookie deals you have plenty of cautionary tales.

Gurley, Bell, David Johnson, Devonta Freeman, and McKinnon are all deals that don't look great now.

We'll see if Elliot can buck the trend.

There just aren't a lot of running backs that are big time players 5+ years.

You can find individuals who were, but in my view there are many more who fizzle out.
RE: RE: Ohh no the Gurley deal  
WalterSobchak : 2/13/2020 12:28 pm : link
In comment 14810343 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 14810150 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


you can find an example of anything to counter an argument in the nfl. There arenít 20 deals like Gurleys, not sure why people post as such.



If you look at the top 10 AAV for running backs, and subtract the guys on rookie deals you have plenty of cautionary tales.

Gurley, Bell, David Johnson, Devonta Freeman, and McKinnon are all deals that don't look great now.

We'll see if Elliot can buck the trend.

There just aren't a lot of running backs that are big time players 5+ years.

You can find individuals who were, but in my view there are many more who fizzle out.


Yup whole lot of cautionary tales . And just to be clear , the reason Gurleys contract was so dumb for the Rams was he had 2+ full seasons of cheap control when they extended him. Why wouldn't they wait at least till one year left on such a fragile position ? If they had ,his knee condition would be known and they could have had him cheap or just let go. I get keeping players happy but it was a poorly thought out move by LA
Never has so much worry or concern been made  
djm : 2/13/2020 12:32 pm : link
Over such a great player here with the giants. Chris in philly says it best. You guys are exhausting.
RE: Never has so much worry or concern been made  
PatersonPlank : 2/13/2020 12:58 pm : link
In comment 14810464 djm said:
Quote:
Over such a great player here with the giants. Chris in philly says it best. You guys are exhausting.


+1. I agree. Its amazing to me that a top, premier talent like Barkley (who is also a good citizen and Giant) generates this much dislike. He is an awesome player who is constantly striking fear in the defense (really our only offensive player that does). Even in 2019, when he was out for 3.5 games and injured for another 4, he still got to 1k yards rushing. Plus he's a great receiver.

As for he hasn't turned the team around single handedly, who can? There are 22 players out there. Did Jones turn us around? You need to pick up a number of good players to turn it around, and Barkley is the key piece to that puzzle (along with Jones).
Christian  
UConn4523 : 2/13/2020 1:16 pm : link
yes, those are examples of some bad contracts. Now apply that to the rest of the roster, especially at more expensive positions. There are a lot there too.

David Johnson is somewhat a victim of circumstance as well. That entire team changed, Rosen stunk at getting him the ball (coupled with the old Offense which was terribly contracted) so they just wasted signing him. I don't think he fell off a cliff, its just mis management at its finest. His contract also isn't backbreaking like many would lead you to believe RB contracts are. Generally speaking the guaranteed money is a lot lower than most other positions (check them vs WR's for a good laugh) so cutting them is much easier if need be.

Again, look at Elliotts contract. Its unbelievably flexible for Dallas to get out of.
Giants should  
AdamBrag : 2/13/2020 1:28 pm : link
Bring in another RB and decrease Saquon's snaps by a good chunk. His value for his next contract will be lower, but his longevity will be longer.
granted this is almost a year old  
UConn4523 : 2/13/2020 1:30 pm : link
and is subjective, but it breaks down some absurd contracts that are being handed out across the league. 1 RB is on it (unless i missed another).
Worst contract for each team - ( New Window )
sorry  
UConn4523 : 2/13/2020 1:31 pm : link
there are 2.
On the Zeke contract...  
bw in dc : 2/13/2020 1:52 pm : link
keep in mind Jerry had some leverage there because of Zeke's off the field idiocy. Team Zeke knew they couldn't play total hardball due to the possibility Zeke was a suspension risk...

So I wouldn't call that contract a benchmark, in terms of Dallas's flexibility, going forward.
its a fair point  
UConn4523 : 2/13/2020 1:59 pm : link
but he's also a top 3 RB in the league so not that many would even qualify to surpass that anyway. Say we had to pay Barkley this year, I don't think we'd be looking at doubling the guarantees or anything.
RE: Christian  
christian : 2/13/2020 3:48 pm : link
In comment 14810525 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
yes, those are examples of some bad contracts. Now apply that to the rest of the roster, especially at more expensive positions. There are a lot there too.

David Johnson is somewhat a victim of circumstance as well. That entire team changed, Rosen stunk at getting him the ball (coupled with the old Offense which was terribly contracted) so they just wasted signing him. I don't think he fell off a cliff, its just mis management at its finest. His contract also isn't backbreaking like many would lead you to believe RB contracts are. Generally speaking the guaranteed money is a lot lower than most other positions (check them vs WR's for a good laugh) so cutting them is much easier if need be.

Again, look at Elliotts contract. Its unbelievably flexible for Dallas to get out of.


Just to clarify, my point isn't that RB contracts are prohibitive.

My point is that many of the higher paid (granted this a relative figure to other positions) RBs haven't produced after getting a big pay raise.

I don't have any misgivings about extending Barkley. I just don't expect him to buck the trend of recent RBs who tail off.

I also hope the Giants copy the Cowboys and construct a deal they can exit if Barkley's production declines in the same way as the players I mentioned.
barkely was touted as a generational talent  
Platos : 2/13/2020 3:49 pm : link
like emmitt smith and barry sanders.

if he's either of those guys and stays healthy why wouldn't you want him after the rookie contract? money be damned.
RE: barkely was touted as a generational talent  
Default : 2/13/2020 3:58 pm : link
In comment 14810660 Platos said:
Quote:
like emmitt smith and barry sanders.

if he's either of those guys and stays healthy why wouldn't you want him after the rookie contract? money be damned.


Because he isnít. And as great as Barry Sanders was, and Barkley is not Barry Sanders, Sanders won how many playoff games?
But I guess in Giants land jersey sales and how nice a guy is, is more important than winning.
Jesus Christ  
UConn4523 : 2/13/2020 4:23 pm : link
with the Barry Sanders playoff wins - do you think before you type? Can you post Emmitt Smiths playoff wins? Iím guessing you wonít...
RE: Jesus Christ  
Default : 2/13/2020 4:40 pm : link
In comment 14810693 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
with the Barry Sanders playoff wins - do you think before you type? Can you post Emmitt Smiths playoff wins? Iím guessing you wonít...


I wonít because despite what the stats say Emmitt Smith isnít in the same league as Barry Sanders...
RE: Jesus Christ  
Default : 2/13/2020 4:40 pm : link
In comment 14810693 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
with the Barry Sanders playoff wins - do you think before you type? Can you post Emmitt Smiths playoff wins? Iím guessing you wonít...


I wonít because despite what the stats say Emmitt Smith isnít in the same league as Barry Sanders...
Sweet out there buddy  
UConn4523 : 2/13/2020 5:42 pm : link
knew you didnít have it in you.
Iíll give you the real answer  
UConn4523 : 2/13/2020 5:42 pm : link
if the Lions drafted Joe Montana they would have fucked that up too.
RE: Iíll give you the real answer  
aGiantGuy : 2/13/2020 5:48 pm : link
In comment 14810758 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
if the Lions drafted Joe Montana they would have fucked that up too.


Ha!
He's a special player and citizen  
JonC : 2/13/2020 6:05 pm : link
I believe he'll develop into a consistent top flight offensive weapon. As such, I have no problem paying him, especially as a beloved Giant.

I have a huge problem paying open market dollars to Leonard Williams, Nate Solder, Marcus Golden, or Golden Tate, to name a few.

Spend smart, don't shop hungry and there will be plenty of cap space. No reason the aforementioned caliber of players should be able to hold NYG over the barrel.
...  
christian : 2/13/2020 7:51 pm : link
I think the max reasonable window for big time production from a running back is 4-5 years. And then you nearly always see it slip.

The Tiki Barber, Adrian Peterson, Emmit Smith types are major outliers.

I don't mind investing a lot in Barkley in years 4 and 5, and in exchange for that securing control in years 6 and 7 with the ability to get out cheaply.
Give him the 5 year deal now  
Prude : 2/14/2020 12:14 pm : link
This offseason. Extend him for 5 years sothat he is locked up until he is 29 or 30 years old. Give yourself and easy out for the last year or two of the contract. He is already getting paid like a top rb because of his draft position. He is still going to command big money at the end of his 4(or 5) year rookie contract, despite the fact that his production is likely to drop dramatically around age 30. Give him 80-90m now, lock him up for his prime years and then let some other team pay for his contracts after 30 years old.
RE: RE: barkely was touted as a generational talent  
Now Mike in MD : 2/14/2020 12:44 pm : link
In comment 14810668 Default said:
Quote:
In comment 14810660 Platos said:


Quote:


like emmitt smith and barry sanders.

if he's either of those guys and stays healthy why wouldn't you want him after the rookie contract? money be damned.



Because he isnít. And as great as Barry Sanders was, and Barkley is not Barry Sanders, Sanders won how many playoff games?
But I guess in Giants land jersey sales and how nice a guy is, is more important than winning.


How in the world can say what Barkley will be relative to sanders after two years? It's impossible.

And this constant harping on Saners' career record is just stupid. He made his team much better than it would have been without him. There's no debate on this. But ultimately football is a team sport, and no single player can completely overcome significant shortcomings of his surrounding cast. Archie Manning has a career record of 35-101. So what?
Detroits record with Barry Sanders was much better than  
PatersonPlank : 2/14/2020 12:48 pm : link
before him, or since. Sure they had trouble in the playoffs primarily because he was carrying them, and in the playoffs you play the top teams. However its stupid and uneducated to denigrate his influence on Detroit.
It means Archie provided poor  
UConn4523 : 2/14/2020 12:50 pm : link
positional value. QBs werenít worth big money back then!
RE: Give him the 5 year deal now  
Milton : 2/15/2020 2:16 am : link
In comment 14811188 Prude said:
Quote:
This offseason.
The CBA prevents it. For drafted players, rookie contracts can only be extended after three years (undrafted players can be extended after only two).
p.s.--This is why I believe that extending players after three years who have outperformed their rookie contracts is the right thing to do. The players sacrificed the right to demand extensions after only a year or two so the flipside should be the owners willingness to give extensions after three (assuming reasonable demands and stellar performance).
RE: Detroits record with Barry Sanders was much better than  
Milton : 2/15/2020 2:23 am : link
In comment 14811212 PatersonPlank said:
Quote:
before him, or since. Sure they had trouble in the playoffs primarily because he was carrying them, and in the playoffs you play the top teams. However its stupid and uneducated to denigrate his influence on Detroit.
Barry Sanders was great with the ball in his hands, but he couldn't block or pass-catch and was taken off the field inside the opponent's ten yard line for that reason. He created as many problems for his offensive coordinator as he did for opposing team's defensive coordinators. He is a poor comparison to Barkley.
RE: Iíll give you the real answer  
ron mexico : 2/15/2020 6:42 am : link
In comment 14810758 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
if the Lions drafted Joe Montana they would have fucked that up too.


Haha. I was thinking the same thing.

The problem isnít Saquon, itís the guy and the front office who drafted him two overall
Saquon Barkleyís Future  
johnboyw : 2/15/2020 6:53 am : link
I donít think itís so much a question of do the Giants want to resign him because Iím sure they do. I think itís more a question of whether Barkley will wants to stay with them.
If Gettleman and company donít put out an OL that can open holes for him and allow him to carry the offense like he is capable of THIS YEAR, he may decide that this is not the place for him and move on to a team that is more committed to capitalizing on his significant skill set.
The Barkley pick  
Josh in the City : 2/15/2020 7:25 am : link
was as bad as it gets when it was made. You donít pick a RB at two overall unless thatís the missing piece to your SB team (but then you wouldnít be picking there in the first place). I said it at the time and I stand by it now. Signing him to a monster extension would just exacerbate the issue instead of allocating those resources to where theyíre really needed (building the trenches). People here can still defend the pick but theyíd still be downright wrong. And btw, same goes for signing Leonard Williams to a $15 mm/yr contract just to justify that absurdly foolish trade.
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner