What are the Giants doing with Barkley? Very little news coming out after they tagged him. Initially, many speculated that they would have a deal in place before the start of free agency. Then the RB market tanked beyond anyone's imagination.
What's next? Does SB insist upon getting his 14+MM? Do the Giants go back to the 12-12.5MM they were proposing during the bye? Do they now prefer that he just play on the tag? It's completely understandable if they tell him that the market has changed and that their offer is no longer on the table (after all, if the market went up, SB would insist on a HIGHER contract to reflect these unexpected changes). But would pulling the offer and making him play on the tag be a douche move by the organization? Would he even play on it?
What's the compromise here? Is 12-12.5MM still an option or has it been retracted? I'm guessing that SB is pretty unhappy with the current situation.
Not accepting the tag won’t work for Barkley, especially because the timing is such that the Giants can find his replacement late in free agency or in the draft. At that point, I think the best that Barkley can hope for is that the Giants rescind the tag so they can access the tag money off the cap. Otherwise he just sits it out.
i wouldnt call 10m guaranteed for next year no leverage. by actual cash this season there are only 4 players making 11m or more (cmc, kamara, jones, cook). cmc is at 12m, the other 3 are at 11m even.
if he felt there was risk in losing the tag he could sign it whenever he wants - so presumably he's not worried whether there's a market out there if it gets removed.
id also remind everyone that jones was about 5-10 minutes away from getting tagged at which point barkley would have hit the open market.
if the reported numbers above are right i dont think either side has misplayed anything in this one yet. the giants have made team friendly offers, barkley has explored his options without any public discord, eventually i think both sides agree to a compromise.
They tell this to SB,then tell the Giants,this is our offer to SB....but we only want to give you 1 first rounder.
This scenario is possible...i do not think it has happened, but is doable
Quote:
Bears and SB agree to terms now during this FA period...However,the Bears are not willing to give up 2 firsts.
They tell this to SB,then tell the Giants,this is our offer to SB....but we only want to give you 1 first rounder.
This scenario is possible...i do not think it has happened, but is doable
________________________ Not an official deal submitted to the league office so the Giants just sit back and wait for a better offer from the Bears. Barkley dangles in the breeze.
Unless....the Giants are happy taking that first for SB.
Quote:
In comment 16069336 AG5686 said:
Quote:
Bears and SB agree to terms now during this FA period...However,the Bears are not willing to give up 2 firsts.
They tell this to SB,then tell the Giants,this is our offer to SB....but we only want to give you 1 first rounder.
This scenario is possible...i do not think it has happened, but is doable
________________________ Not an official deal submitted to the league office so the Giants just sit back and wait for a better offer from the Bears. Barkley dangles in the breeze.
Unless....the Giants are happy taking that first for SB.
Much as I like Barkley, for the Bears #9 overall pick, I’d be willing to free up $10M in cap space.
IMHO I think the Giants should walk away an invest that money into the o line
Gettleman drafted him #2 overall and his contract was huge. Some years Barkley made more as a rookie than the franchise # for RBs.
He made $38 million total on his rookie contract, which is more than nearly every other RB's 2nd contract.
Sure he can ask for more, but the idea that he has been "screwed" is silly.
And let's be fair, he actually underperformed his contract in 3 of the past 5 years.
Quote:
In comment 16069348 Ivan15 said:
Quote:
In comment 16069336 AG5686 said:
Quote:
Bears and SB agree to terms now during this FA period...However,the Bears are not willing to give up 2 firsts.
They tell this to SB,then tell the Giants,this is our offer to SB....but we only want to give you 1 first rounder.
This scenario is possible...i do not think it has happened, but is doable
________________________ Not an official deal submitted to the league office so the Giants just sit back and wait for a better offer from the Bears. Barkley dangles in the breeze.
Unless....the Giants are happy taking that first for SB.
Much as I like Barkley, for the Bears #9 overall pick, I’d be willing to free up $10M in cap space.
100% agree
kind of hard to negotiate if you dont know if you are getting tagged or hitting the open market (which is every player's preference).
as far as tag negotiations go this one is in it's infancy. JPP and LW each got tagged twice and ultimately reached extensions. unless im forgetting someone those were the last 2 players tagged by nyg.
The way he affects the defense is very clear whether or not he gets the ball. $10 to $12m is okay money for a decent WR nowadays, and I think Barkley adds more value to an offense than a guy like Lazard who just got that kind of money. If he demands more than that he will not be on this team beyond this season. He has no leverage with the contracts RBs are getting. Either way, I'd be shocked if the Giants don't draft a RB to be his back-up/eventual replacement.
we kind of just saw what his $ buys in FA, slayton + campbell are going to cost more combined than barkley and combined they produced a lot less (with some obvious risks).
for a team lacking big play weapons it seems like a bad idea to trade it's biggest play weapon. if "4th year" is his big demand that's not unreasonable. aaron jones, cmc, henry, kamara, mixon all got a 4th year. cook got a 5th year. miles sanders just got a 4th year. if the rumored nyg offer is correct (3x36m) that's under market considering they just tagged him at an average of the top 5 salaries and that contract would be outside the top 5 at the rb position.
it all depends on the guarantee structure. most likely any deal whether it's 3 or 4 years is practically a 2 year deal.
would you rather keep flexibility on a 1 year tag with him unhappy and go through this all again next year?
or trade a 2nd guaranteed year (his age 27) in return for 1 or 2 extra option years on his age 28 + 29?
this wasnt a good FA year to add weapons (most years arent but this year was even worse than most other years). so far allen lazard is the highest paid player from this FA cycle which is crazy since he's never even had an 800 yard season.
Quote:
For the argument that he had 1100 yards last year ... a big part of that is because he got the majority of snaps and touches. Imo, we still would have got that production out of any other back that was back there. And he's gonna sit out? Lmfao. So, he doesn't accrue a year in the NFL and can get tagged again? Do we not remember what happened to Leveon Bell? That guy destroyed his career arguing over small details. Everyone wants to focus on last year. Imo, Barkley was very up and down and barely broke tackles. If he isn't making guys miss, he goes down too easily when they get a hand on him. And he wasn't making many miss last year. Look at his injury history. I'm not saying Barkley is a bad player. I just don't think he's worth the money he is seeking. It can be better spent elsewhere and this is coming from someone that wanted to draft him at 2 overall.
we kind of just saw what his $ buys in FA, slayton + campbell are going to cost more combined than barkley and combined they produced a lot less (with some obvious risks).
for a team lacking big play weapons it seems like a bad idea to trade it's biggest play weapon. if "4th year" is his big demand that's not unreasonable. aaron jones, cmc, henry, kamara, mixon all got a 4th year. cook got a 5th year. miles sanders just got a 4th year. if the rumored nyg offer is correct (3x36m) that's under market considering they just tagged him at an average of the top 5 salaries and that contract would be outside the top 5 at the rb position.
You are just looking at WR. WRs get paid a lot. What can Barkley's money get you on the OL, DL, CB, LB? You can draft a RB and have the guys on the roster get what Barkley got you last year.
No way would I take a third. I consider him a playmaker, not a RB. I would consider trading for a pick that could reasonably produce a playmaker in return. Top 15-20 at the latest.
You are just looking at WR. WRs get paid a lot. What can Barkley's money get you on the OL, DL, CB, LB? You can draft a RB and have the guys on the roster get what Barkley got you last year.
im looking at players who create big plays and score tds because that's what you need to replace when you lose barkley.
on the OL ben powers got 4 years 52m. seumalo is probably the 2nd best IOL out there so he's still available. nick gates is currently the highest paid C who changed teams.
the top 7 DL/edge got more than 11m per year. 10m could have gotten you sheldon rankins or samson ebukam.
as tempting as it is to think there are a bunch of Isiah Pacheco's out there a huge % of the good rbs are 1st or 2nd round picks. so if you move on from barkley to replace him you are probably spending a day 2 pick on a RB you otherwise don't have to, and spending 30-50% of what you would have paid him on a donta foreman/singletary type veteran.
id rather keep barkley (tag or not), spend the extra day 2 pick on another position, and use day 3 picks to try to find the next pacheco/mitchell/pollard before moving on from barkley.
please elaborate...can what I suggested be done...I think so
The other thing he could do is make a bet on himself, if he has a huge season that surpasses last year, he could be the outlier in free agency. That's a risky bet with a deep RB class in this draft as well as given his injury history...he knows that one freak play could foil that plan.
+1 SB has zero leverage, he'll come to his senses and sign before the draft rather that run the risk of us drafting a RB to replace him. I'd be ok with a trade for a high 2nd rd pick or swap our 2nd for a mid low 1st.
The Frank Clark situation is an illustration from an earlier year. The Seahawks and Clark were saying wonderful things about each other in public and a day later boom he is traded.
The Frank Clark situation is an illustration from an earlier year. The Seahawks and Clark were saying wonderful things about each other in public and a day later boom he is traded.
what were the terms of that deal?
Ezekiel Elliott or
Leonard Fournette or
Kareem Hunt or
Devin Singletary
They are not even close to Barkley and he should take three years if offered.
- he matches his 2018/2022 outcomes he gets tagged again
- he matches 2019/2021/2021 outcomes he gets an even lower prove it deal
If I'm advising Barkley, I'm looking to lock in 22M guaranteed, and not playing my career odds. Even if that contract doesn't look impressive on the top line.