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
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 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.