This is the offseason where Barkley would expect to get paid. Zeke, McCaffrey and Kamara all signed their second contracts after their third season. The Giants can kick the can down the road by picking up his fifth year option, with the argument that they need to see how he recovers, but then you risk a real nasty situation next year if he plays well in 2021.
I think a lot of this depends on who is making the decision. Gettleman is not going to walk away from a guy he drafted second overall. Judge might. A new GM might. Hard to say unless we see a change made, I think that’s unlikely unless they go 2-4 or worse the rest of the way. Even 2-4 might be enough.
I would personally look to move him, curious about the rest of the board. So far we know he’s very talented but really only one spectacular year. 2019 was a disappointment, 2020 a total washout.
It’s a difficult decision but also one of the most important decisions this franchise will face in the near future.
Quote:
and he wouldn’t be Derrick Henry of today rushing on those 2018/2019 Giants teams. If you think otherwise you just aren’t being genuine.
I wish things were different, I wish we got our act together sooner so we could have benefitted more from having a guy like Barkley - hopefully we will get that next season. Sometimes timing is everything.
Henry would work anywhere, just to varying degrees. He's more north-south and punishing than Barkley. Much better between the tackles.
Barkley is more dynamic and a better receiver, but I doubt the linebackers and safeties are worried about massages and ice-packs after facing Barkley.
Henry needs an offensive line to be great. Saquon was rushed for over 4 ypc behind garbage. Wait until we consistently get him out in space like Henry. They’ll need ice packs for all the sprained ankles out there. Maybe not next year, but after seeing what Cupp looks like any doubt he makes a full recovery year 2? That surgeon seems to been touched by the hand of god himself.
Quote:
and he wouldn’t be Derrick Henry of today rushing on those 2018/2019 Giants teams. If you think otherwise you just aren’t being genuine.
I wish things were different, I wish we got our act together sooner so we could have benefitted more from having a guy like Barkley - hopefully we will get that next season. Sometimes timing is everything.
Henry would work anywhere, just to varying degrees. He's more north-south and punishing than Barkley. Much better between the tackles.
Barkley is more dynamic and a better receiver, but I doubt the linebackers and safeties are worried about massages and ice-packs after facing Barkley.
True, just worried about embarrassing themselves grabbing at air as they fall to the ground.
Quote:
and he wouldn’t be Derrick Henry of today rushing on those 2018/2019 Giants teams. If you think otherwise you just aren’t being genuine.
I wish things were different, I wish we got our act together sooner so we could have benefitted more from having a guy like Barkley - hopefully we will get that next season. Sometimes timing is everything.
Henry would work anywhere, just to varying degrees. He's more north-south and punishing than Barkley. Much better between the tackles.
Barkley is more dynamic and a better receiver, but I doubt the linebackers and safeties are worried about massages and ice-packs after facing Barkley.
It’s crazy what picking Barkley has done to people. I hope one day you find peace.
Quote:
In comment 15056360 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
and he wouldn’t be Derrick Henry of today rushing on those 2018/2019 Giants teams. If you think otherwise you just aren’t being genuine.
I wish things were different, I wish we got our act together sooner so we could have benefitted more from having a guy like Barkley - hopefully we will get that next season. Sometimes timing is everything.
Henry would work anywhere, just to varying degrees. He's more north-south and punishing than Barkley. Much better between the tackles.
Barkley is more dynamic and a better receiver, but I doubt the linebackers and safeties are worried about massages and ice-packs after facing Barkley.
It’s crazy what picking Barkley has done to people. I hope one day you find peace.
🤣😂
Its sort of wierd.
If Barkley comes back as the same player he was, great. If not, the Giants let him go, spend the money elsewhere and know that they can generate a very effective running game without him.
This isn't an issue at all. It's on Barkley to get back to his 2018 level. If he doesn't, the Giants will be fine without him as they've proven as offense over the past month or so.
It’s crazy what picking Barkley has done to people. I hope one day you find peace.
Not sure what you are getting at here.
I didn't say Barkley was a disaster or horrible. I merely suggested Henry's running style conveys better.
Continue to enjoy your ride in the mainstream...
Plus, Daquon is damaged goods.....if we could trade him for a one pick I’d be ecstatic, and for a 2nd I’d be happy.
To be fair people have said crazy things the other way on Barkley: that he's a certain HOFer, that he's comparable to greats like Barry Sanders and Marshall Faulk, and so on. Shit, in this thread someone said he's the best RB on the planet when healthy...even though he's never even been the best RB in his division.
Picking Barkley has done a lot to a lot of people...not just those pissed at the pick.
Three years into a career where the overwhelming odds indicate 5-6 years is the extent of really high end play, the outcome is about as bad is it could be. Two years of impressive individual performance that led to a mediocre ground game, and a torn ACL.
That said, Barkley is slated to make $20M+ over his 4th and 5th years. The Giants would be wise to still extend him after this year — give him that ~20M guaranteed at signing and trigger another big guarantee if he exceeds 1200 yards rushing in 21.
You talk all the time about bad coaching and poor talent, but somehow in this discussion you aren’t recognizing those as reasons why Barkley was effectively held back while other RBs had far more to work with. Just doesn’t seem like we are having a genuine conversation here.
You talk all the time about bad coaching and poor talent, but somehow in this discussion you aren’t recognizing those as reasons why Barkley was effectively held back while other RBs had far more to work with. Just doesn’t seem like we are having a genuine conversation here.
We are having a genuine conversation. The problem is you're basing your argument on a made up scenario: if Barkley were in Dallas and Zeke were here, it would be different.
Well it isn't. That's a fantasy, not an argument. Impossible to prove or disprove. It's a commonly used tool on BBI to rationalize the poor choices the Giants have made.
In real life, Barkley hasn't been better than Elliott. In real life, Barkley hasn't worked out as a draft pick. In real life, Barkley hasn't been a great NFL player. If he were, there would be no need for the fantasy scenario that you're using like evidence, but actually isn't.
Quote:
Barkley was the best RB in the division. You don’t do what he did as a rookie with a line as bad as he had (and a statue at QB) and come away with the individual success he did. I assume you are putting EE in front of him and while I do like the player I 100% think he gets stonewalled a lot for the Giants, while Barkley would flourish on those Dallas teams.
You talk all the time about bad coaching and poor talent, but somehow in this discussion you aren’t recognizing those as reasons why Barkley was effectively held back while other RBs had far more to work with. Just doesn’t seem like we are having a genuine conversation here.
We are having a genuine conversation. The problem is you're basing your argument on a made up scenario: if Barkley were in Dallas and Zeke were here, it would be different.
Well it isn't. That's a fantasy, not an argument. Impossible to prove or disprove. It's a commonly used tool on BBI to rationalize the poor choices the Giants have made.
In real life, Barkley hasn't been better than Elliott. In real life, Barkley hasn't worked out as a draft pick. In real life, Barkley hasn't been a great NFL player. If he were, there would be no need for the fantasy scenario that you're using like evidence, but actually isn't.
You are right, Barkley is not better than Zeke - mainly because Zeke is behind (or was for 3 years) a great line. Barkley has the better talent - faster and much better receiver. Zeke doing a great job fumbling this year. But UConn is not wrong about Barkley behind Dallas' line.
You are right Barkley (except for his rookie season) is not a "great" NFL player - he has had too many big injuries.
Yet, we all know, that if you put Barkley behind this line right now, even as it evolves, the Giants do not have the #31 offense in the NFL. Each week we see Gallman break through on what looks to be a huge hole only to be tripped by a shoe string grab. Nothing is certain, but it is not a reach to think that several of those trip ups would have been TDs if Barkley had the ball.
You are right, conjecture does not account for wins. However, without conjecture how could you draft any player - in essence you are selecting players on what they may be able to do in the league. Without conjecture teams could not form a plan for the future of the team. In Barkley's case, it is no longer conjecture. We know he is a weapon when he is on the field. He is that player that teams need to scheme for. Of course, "one the field" is an important point.
So arguing that selecting him was wrong is a moot point. The Giants did draft him. He was the best player in the draft. Would Bradley Chubb or Quentin Nelson been better choices - hmmm, maybe so. But the Giants did not do that. What should be thought about is what Barkley will do with this set of coaches and how they will coach him. I look at Kamara and Cook and how they are used and I see how Barkley could/should be used.
Defenses will play the Giants much differently to ensure Barkley does not make an impact or mitigate it at least. They will force other players to step up or have Garrett adjust the offensive play-calling. Or they will pressure the OL differently. I think we witnessed that in the Steelers game.
Is it unrealistic that Barkley will do better (than the Steeler game) with the OL performing better now, no. But it may very well be unrealistic to think he would be breaking every "shoe-string" for a big touchdown run.
Defenses will play the Giants much differently to ensure Barkley does not make an impact or mitigate it at least. They will force other players to step up or have Garrett adjust the offensive play-calling. Or they will pressure the OL differently. I think we witnessed that in the Steelers game.
Is it unrealistic that Barkley will do better (than the Steeler game) with the OL performing better now, no. But it may very well be unrealistic to think he would be breaking every "shoe-string" for a big touchdown run.
Who said every shoe string tackle? It is very realistic that he would have broken some and maybe even not have been touched since he is quicker and faster than Gallman and Morris.
As far as scheming like the Steelers did in game 1 - guarantee that the result had they played the Steelers now would be different. The line now, compared to opening day is night and day. It is doubtful that the blocking would be as bad. I am not saying they beat the Steelers(they had a chance even with the bad running game on week one) but that the Steelers would not be in the backfield before every hand off.
And of course opposing defenses play differently with Barkley in the game. That leaves a lot of open space behind the LBs and Safeties that Jones can throw to - again - better offensive line play allows for receivers to get downfield. If they want to put 8 or 9 in the box, slants across the middle could go a long way.
Your dissection of how “BBI argues” is cute - it’s called sports where scenarios are discussed and what if’s are talked about all the time. If I can’t think Barkley would be great behind that Dallas oline then I guess I’ll just go fuck myself, stupid me.
You and who else? He was the best player in the draft by a long piece.
Are there players playing better at this point since after his 1st year is the real question. And there are at this point.
After his first season, he was the best player chosen that year. Since then you could say Josh Allen or Nick Chubb have definitely preformed better - well hell due to injuries there are numerous.
2. If a franchise likes a player enough to draft him #2 overall, I find it extremely unlikely that same franchise would then opt not to pay that same player for a second contract. If you’re unwilling to pay the position/player for a 2nd contract, why draft him #2 to begin with?
3. RB’s have been getting paid recently, including Christian McCaffrey whose new owner appears to put a strong value on analytics. So l, while the RB value argument is valid, it isn’t stopping them from getting paid.
4. From all accounts Barkley is a great guy and teammate, his value among his teammates and coaches appears to be high.
5. He’s good for business - he’s a flashy player who will continue to sell jerseys.
I like Saquon, I’m looking forward to watching him play next season for a team that hopefully is competing for the division. I fully believe if Saquon is productive next year, he’ll get an extension here. If not and continues to get hurt, that is another story.
Ultimately, the decision doesn’t need to be made yet. Hopefully he has a strong season next year.
Quote:
He was not.
You and who else? He was the best player in the draft by a long piece.
Are there players playing better at this point since after his 1st year is the real question. And there are at this point.
After his first season, he was the best player chosen that year. Since then you could say Josh Allen or Nick Chubb have definitely preformed better - well hell due to injuries there are numerous.
Barkley was the safest pick if you believe that RBs have significant value as first round picks.
Many NYG fans, and this started to really manifest when OBJ arrived, are enamored with style. And Barkley certainly checks that box. Unfortunately, there style points are not blended into the final score of a game. It's just how many times you cross the goal line and kick the ball through the uprights.
But going into next year, Barkley will be a 4th year player, coming off a torn ACL (if you want to get really concerned read up on the connection between ACL, meniscus, and ankle injuries on arthritis).
In 3 seasons Barkley will have never suited up for a .500 or above team, will have never played a meaningful game in November, and never won a meaningful game.
The odds get really low a running back is a cornerstone player after 6 or so years in the league. Barkley could very well (likely is) halfway through his prime. So let’s not act like this went well.
But going into next year, Barkley will be a 4th year player, coming off a torn ACL (if you want to get really concerned read up on the connection between ACL, meniscus, and ankle injuries on arthritis).
In 3 seasons Barkley will have never suited up for a .500 or above team, will have never played a meaningful game in November, and never won a meaningful game.
The odds get really low a running back is a cornerstone player after 6 or so years in the league. Barkley could very well (likely is) halfway through his prime. So let’s not act like this went well.
"In 3 seasons Barkley will have never suited up for a .500 or above team, will have never played a meaningful game in November, and never won a meaningful game."
This isn't his fault, and yet people keep using this as a point. There are 21 other players out there plus special teams. He was the Rookie of the Year and a Pro Bowl player. He was doing his part.
Fans expectations are dumb. Football is the ultimate team sport. The NY Giants failures aren’t Saquon’s failures. In fact the biggest failure of this franchise is hiring Shurmur and his awful Rolodex. Total reactionary move with what happened with McAdoo. Can’t say I knew much about Judge before that first press conference other than he had some good specials in NE and coached under Saban and BB. For that reason alone I was excited because 1 - been banging the drum for the NFL hiring more special teams guys to that position. So many head coaches fail because they get buried onto “their” side of the football. That works for guys like Reid and Shanahsn due to their genius, but it’s a losing formula for many 2 - it showed me our historically traditional franchise was finally trying some outside the box solutions. 3 - in his travels his Rolodex is full of some properly trained coaches. No more Hal hunters coaching the OL.
Of course like many, after many fans I was sold, pretty clear there was something special about the guy and an absolute leader of men.
Sean brought up Christian Mccaffrey's contract above... Carolina is averaging a little over 23 PPG this year with McCaffrey missing much of the season. McCaffrey had a massive statistical year last year; a historic RB season. Know how many points they scored? 21 PPG.
Paying a big RB contract is throwing money away. There are too many examples to list at this point.
Keep Barkley around in 2021, hope he plays well and stays healthy, then trade him. That's how you maximize the value of the asset.
Barkley is not just a running back - he is a top notch receiver. As a receiver he made a lot of hay out there. And the things he does out in the open field after catching the ball - well there are not many players out there that can do what he can. He is a very elusive runner in the open field with the ball. It is disingenuous to discuss Barkley's merits without discussing this impact in his repertoire.
So if you are criticizing picking a running back so high in the first round - that doesn't really cut at Barkley's real value.
I also think is disingenuous to blame the Giants lack of success on Barkley -- where does the sloppy play come in in that calculation, the badly timed penalties, the turnovers that were occurring from Eli to Jones due to them being under constant pressure. Why is all that being ignored in your arguments?
Barkley went down in game number two - the Giants proceeded to lose 5 of the next 6 games without him -- all this with the same personnel that is on the team now, and that managed to turn things around. Have you somehow determined that the Giants wouldn't have been able to turn things around with Barkley still in the line up?
I have issues with your constant negativity, and your gross mischaracterizations.
Sean brought up Christian Mccaffrey's contract above... Carolina is averaging a little over 23 PPG this year with McCaffrey missing much of the season. McCaffrey had a massive statistical year last year; a historic RB season. Know how many points they scored? 21 PPG.
Paying a big RB contract is throwing money away. There are too many examples to list at this point.
Keep Barkley around in 2021, hope he plays well and stays healthy, then trade him. That's how you maximize the value of the asset.
Their QB play was awful last year. Allen is so unbelievably limited it was the total wrong fit for that team. Put a guy with a decent arm in there and they score a lot more points.
Who’s saying it was his fault? He’s a fantastic player.
Doesn’t change he plays a position with the highest statistical injury rate, the shortest career length, and because of his draft slot a pretty high salary for his position. None of this should be a surprise.
If the crystal ball on draft night said the first three years of Barkley would land the Giants in the bottom half of rushing in the NFL all 3 years and a torn ACL, no one would sign up for that.
The only point I’m making is it hasn’t gone well, and it’s not shocking.
Barkley is not just a running back - he is a top notch receiver. As a receiver he made a lot of hay out there. And the things he does out in the open field after catching the ball - well there are not many players out there that can do what he can. He is a very elusive runner in the open field with the ball. It is disingenuous to discuss Barkley's merits without discussing this impact in his repertoire.
So if you are criticizing picking a running back so high in the first round - that doesn't really cut at Barkley's real value.
I also think is disingenuous to blame the Giants lack of success on Barkley -- where does the sloppy play come in in that calculation, the badly timed penalties, the turnovers that were occurring from Eli to Jones due to them being under constant pressure. Why is all that being ignored in your arguments?
Barkley went down in game number two - the Giants proceeded to lose 5 of the next 6 games without him -- all this with the same personnel that is on the team now, and that managed to turn things around. Have you somehow determined that the Giants wouldn't have been able to turn things around with Barkley still in the line up?
I have issues with your constant negativity, and your gross mischaracterizations.
This is exactly my point.
I’m pretty anti paying traditional RB big money as well. Not sure Id pay guys like Zeke and Henry.
Guys like Kamara, CMC, and Barkley are totally different. It’s taken the game a minute to catch up to what the modern NFL wants out of the backfield which is a much more dynamic type player. These guys just aren’t “running backs”. Of course Barkley needs to prove he can stay healthy over the next two years, but if he checks that box, pay him.
He was the most talented player in the draft. He was and is perfect off the field. PErfect on it. He got hurt. That's football.
If he comes back and shows he can play the Giants will keep him because he's a winning talent. They will figure out which guys to keep and which guys not to keep because for every 10 good players the Giants develop, they will keep 9 of them once FA comes around. The cap is a talking point. It's something to respect, not something to obsess over. Winning teams figure out how to fit guys in under the cap. The Giants will too. Just like they did in the 2000s when they peaked under Coughlin.
The Giants didnt suck these last 8 years because of Vernon's contract or Snack's contract or BEckham's dead cap hit. They sucked because they only hit on 1 draft pick every year, at best.
Quote:
This isn't his fault, and yet people keep using this as a point. There are 21 other players out there plus special teams. He was the Rookie of the Year and a Pro Bowl player. He was doing his part.
Who’s saying it was his fault? He’s a fantastic player.
Doesn’t change he plays a position with the highest statistical injury rate, the shortest career length, and because of his draft slot a pretty high salary for his position. None of this should be a surprise.
If the crystal ball on draft night said the first three years of Barkley would land the Giants in the bottom half of rushing in the NFL all 3 years and a torn ACL, no one would sign up for that.
The only point I’m making is it hasn’t gone well, and it’s not shocking.
The career length is based on poor statistical data that doesn’t properly paint the picture of the usage of the guys, both stylistically and usage rate, that elite RBs get now.
Barkley is not just a running back - he is a top notch receiver. As a receiver he made a lot of hay out there. And the things he does out in the open field after catching the ball - well there are not many players out there that can do what he can. He is a very elusive runner in the open field with the ball. It is disingenuous to discuss Barkley's merits without discussing this impact in his repertoire.
So if you are criticizing picking a running back so high in the first round - that doesn't really cut at Barkley's real value.
I also think is disingenuous to blame the Giants lack of success on Barkley -- where does the sloppy play come in in that calculation, the badly timed penalties, the turnovers that were occurring from Eli to Jones due to them being under constant pressure. Why is all that being ignored in your arguments?
Barkley went down in game number two - the Giants proceeded to lose 5 of the next 6 games without him -- all this with the same personnel that is on the team now, and that managed to turn things around. Have you somehow determined that the Giants wouldn't have been able to turn things around with Barkley still in the line up?
I have issues with your constant negativity, and your gross mischaracterizations.
I just said above that this isn't about blaming Barkley.
I have issues with people mischaracterizing my arguments, and with the oceans of rationalizations that comprise some of the arguments people make to justify some of the disastrous moves (like drafting Barkley) this organization has made.
There are reasons this team has been a disaster. Some of us want to understand those reasons, and others would rather snuggle up to their Barkley jerseys and pretend it hasn't happened.
Whatever works for you.
If this OL is for real and we can run RBs of the Wayne Gallman ilk out there and effectively run the ball, that money should go to filling other holes on the team.
OK. Then let’s see the statistical data on the subset of players you want included. In fact, give me 5 players you compare him to and I’ll run it for you.
I just said above that this isn't about blaming Barkley.
I have issues with people mischaracterizing my arguments, and with the oceans of rationalizations that comprise some of the arguments people make to justify some of the disastrous moves (like drafting Barkley) this organization has made.
There are reasons this team has been a disaster. Some of us want to understand those reasons, and others would rather snuggle up to their Barkley jerseys and pretend it hasn't happened.
Whatever works for you.
The fact is that the jury is still out on whether Barkley was a good pick or not. But I'm glad for you that you can twist around the fact and logic of anything about his pick to suit a negative rip it down philosophy. It's a philosophy that you've snuggled up to for nearly two decades now that I'm aware of. The faces my change, but this is an agenda you gladly snuggle up to no matter whose face is behind the rostrum; cherry-picking anything that supports your venom. It's also routine for you to accuse any dissent of snuggling up to whatever the feeds your venom of the day. Back attacher Terpsie
Now, some will jump in and say "...it's the improved OL! And if Barkley runs behind a better OL, look out!"
But that's the wrong way to dissect it. The right conclusion is that having a competent OL means you don't need a high end RB to win. You just need to go to your local RB store and grab a few good ones. And enjoy the opportunity to spend your cap dollars on more critical positions/needs.
This is just Football 101...2020.
Quote:
The career length is based on poor statistical data that doesn’t properly paint the picture of the usage of the guys, both stylistically and usage rate, that elite RBs get now.
OK. Then let’s see the statistical data on the subset of players you want included. In fact, give me 5 players you compare him to and I’ll run it for you.
This is a recent phenomenon as far as talent and usage goes. Like I said what the NFL is looking for has taken time for the college game to catch up. Kamara, CMC, and Barkley are pretty new to the game.
I can only think of one player that fits this qualification and it's Marshall Faulk. He had his best years from 26-28. The cliff hit at 30, but who cares? Lots of players fail at 30. Does anyone make the argument you shouldn't draft corners at number 2? Really has nothing to do with his second contract either.
Now, some will jump in and say "...it's the improved OL! And if Barkley runs behind a better OL, look out!"
But that's the wrong way to dissect it. The right conclusion is that having a competent OL means you don't need a high end RB to win. You just need to go to your local RB store and grab a few good ones. And enjoy the opportunity to spend your cap dollars on more critical positions/needs.
This is just Football 101...2020.
This is such bullshit. Big plays are big plays regardless of where they are coming from. Saquon would probably rushing for 5.5 ypc based on what the numbers have said vs these other guys. He's already shown he's a full yard and a half better than Gallman. When you are rushing for over 5ypc you are certainly a very good football team.
You don't need anything to win outside of a QB. Outside of that, you pay players based on their health and how good they are compared to the rest of their position. These positional dollars are already factored in. In fact Tepper, Captain Analytics, just paid McCaffrey because I think he believes there is an edge there right now because of what that type of RB brings compared to the positional value dollars right now. On the flip side of that, I'd make the argument that right now edge rushers are pretty overpaid to what they bring to the table as well as it seems corners are underpaid.
Now, some will jump in and say "...it's the improved OL! And if Barkley runs behind a better OL, look out!"
But that's the wrong way to dissect it. The right conclusion is that having a competent OL means you don't need a high end RB to win. You just need to go to your local RB store and grab a few good ones. And enjoy the opportunity to spend your cap dollars on more critical positions/needs.
This is just Football 101...2020.
There are a few things I will agree with here. One is that having an improving offensive line certainly does seem to improve the offense. The other is that I have enjoyed the development of the power running game with Freeman, Morris and Gallman.
It's also probably true that with Barkley on the team we wouldn't have brought Freemen and Morris to the the table.
But placing myself in the shoes I was in on draft day. For me the choice was Barkley or Chubb. In hindsight Ward would also have been a good pick. I still would have preferred Chubb and wanted to go defense that year. I did not like the QB choices in that draft. I also felt that Barkley was an unusually talented multi pronged weapon and a very intriguing prospect - but gun to my head -- I would have picked Chubb.
We’re running the ball now! Who needs a good rb?!
Now, some will jump in and say "...it's the improved OL! And if Barkley runs behind a better OL, look out!"
But that's the wrong way to dissect it. The right conclusion is that having a competent OL means you don't need a high end RB to win. You just need to go to your local RB store and grab a few good ones. And enjoy the opportunity to spend your cap dollars on more critical positions/needs.
This is just Football 101...2020.
But we already have Barkley. Some people want to continually look back and say DG is an idiot, and picking a RB at #2 is one example why. Ok fine, we can debate this. But lets not extend it to Barkley's play. The two are separate. Barkley has played really good on a crappy team. He's done everything as advertised. Was a RB the right pick, I'm not sure, but its not Barkley's fault and he has done what was expected.
I can only think of one player that fits this qualification and it's Marshall Faulk. He had his best years from 26-28. The cliff hit at 30, but who cares? Lots of players fail at 30. Does anyone make the argument you shouldn't draft corners at number 2? Really has nothing to do with his second contract either.
So there’s no evidence these types of players will have longer or more productive careers (than the averages) and you’re just predicting? We can agree to disagree on that point.
I think Barkley is halfway through the elite years of his career, and these three years haven’t been very successful.
I do however think the Giants should redo his contract and do it this offseason. I think the Giants have extraordinary leverage and should use it to retain him for years 5, 6, and 7 of his career at a fair price.
And that's the real key in the NFL. Being ahead of the curve, something that the Hoodie and Ernie Adams, understand. Every team in the NFL points to whatever the successful team is at the moment, say let's emulate that, and forces up the prices of all the players to fit this style. Seahawks built a pretty good defense by identifying some trends defensively and going the other way.
I was actually thinking about this the other day, I'd make the argument you shouldn't draft WR's in the top 10 anymore based on the availability and depth of the guys coming into the NFL now. Because these guys don't get destroyed anymore, you are seeing a ton of these guys choose football over basketball. I remember growing up, almost to a man, all these great WR's first love was basketball. You are actually seeing guys that are spurning basketball for football now, increasing the talent pool to levels we haven't seen before.
But also agree, we have Barkley the asset so no going back. Hopefully when he returns and shows he still has game the Giants can move him for good value and still put together a good running game as the OL continues to improve.
Or they can keep Barkley and promise never to do something like that again. :-)
Quote:
This is a recent phenomenon as far as talent and usage goes. Like I said what the NFL is looking for has taken time for the college game to catch up. Kamara, CMC, and Barkley are pretty new to the game.
I can only think of one player that fits this qualification and it's Marshall Faulk. He had his best years from 26-28. The cliff hit at 30, but who cares? Lots of players fail at 30. Does anyone make the argument you shouldn't draft corners at number 2? Really has nothing to do with his second contract either.
So there’s no evidence these types of players will have longer or more productive careers (than the averages) and you’re just predicting? We can agree to disagree on that point.
I think Barkley is halfway through the elite years of his career, and these three years haven’t been very successful.
I do however think the Giants should redo his contract and do it this offseason. I think the Giants have extraordinary leverage and should use it to retain him for years 5, 6, and 7 of his career at a fair price.
I can respect thinking the other way because it's really just a projection, but a guy like Frank Gore playing at a pretty good level at 37 to me, after tearing his ACL twice I think is a good indicator. About 250 carriers with another 50 or so touches in the pass game, that's pretty much standard RB usage now for your primary RB.
Disagree that is halfway through his prime, but like I said mostly just projection based on a couple guys so I can understand your viewpoint.
What I do agree with, is this would be the perfect time to extend him. And I think to get him to the table, we make the extension 4 years post his fifth year option. Never going to happen of course, but I really think this is the wise move. This surgeon has an unbelievable track record, and the common understanding in the medical community is that they are physically the same 1 year after injury if the surgery and rehab go well, which is much more likely than not at this point, especially with the guy who they got to do it. It's the mental part that takes time to get back, which is understandable. Crazy how far we've come here in the past 15 years. 10 years ago it was considered no longer a career killer and now it's not even considered to take anything away from the player as long as all goes well.
But we already have Barkley. Some people want to continually look back and say DG is an idiot, and picking a RB at #2 is one example why. Ok fine, we can debate this. But lets not extend it to Barkley's play. The two are separate. Barkley has played really good on a crappy team. He's done everything as advertised. Was a RB the right pick, I'm not sure, but its not Barkley's fault and he has done what was expected.
Yes, we have Barkley, but we are managing to win without his services. Which I only underscore to enhance the point that you don't need the premium back to create wins if the OL is better.
So if Barkley comes back and does well, great. In fact, let's hope he kills it. And sets records along the way. But once that dust settles, the smart play is to trade him at the end of the 2021 season.
Try to get something reasonable in return and avoid the trap of paying for services rendered. Because the odds are still going to be against you that Barkley is a RB who gets better with age. And the more likely outcome is he starts to hit the other side of the production curve right around the corner...