I doubt SB would sign it. If tagged, I would expect SB to go Fred Taylor and not report until he gets the long term deal he wants. Tagging him guarantees nothing but drama and distraction.
I didn't like the tag last year and I don't like it this year. Should have just paid him the 2-3 year deal in Spring of 23. You'd have 1 more year and then a likely 3rd year which allows for escape. Instead we are at risk of losing our best offensive skill player.
In fact, I'd suggest they haven't learned their lesson if they do tag him.
That and the unwillingness to move above the originally offered deal during the season last year. If Schoen wasn’t willing to give him more then I’m not sure why he would now.
a role here at all as far as Barkley goes. Barkley not getting tagged and no reason to tag McKinney either. We have won NOTHING with both of these guys and cap money spent elsewhere is key when we are trying to retool and revamp on the fly.
Then Schoen needs to have a plan at RB for next season. The RBs on the roster include Gray (wasn’t trusted in pass protection last season), Brightwell (not many carries in 3 seasons here) and Corbin (not much experience). Schoen needs to get a veteran back in here to hold down the fort for next year and draft another RB with a higher upside than Gray IMO.
Then Schoen needs to have a plan at RB for next season. The RBs on the roster include Gray (wasn’t trusted in pass protection last season), Brightwell (not many carries in 3 seasons here) and Corbin (not much experience). Schoen needs to get a veteran back in here to hold down the fort for next year and draft another RB with a higher upside than Gray IMO.
I’d like for Barkley to stay but I don’t see it. He’s going to get more from someone else than we are going to be willing to match, IMO. But they will need to bring in some serious talent at the position because what’s been behind Barkley all these years has been pathetic. A day 2 pick and a legit vet will need to be added most likely.
With RBs possessing complementary skillsets and go from there. Relying on high-usage Barkley and then turtling whenever he had to go to the sidelines was maddening.
passing on extending last year made tag almost impossible to use again
that would have been a total reversal of course on their end and essentially admitting a mistake (while giving themselves very literal leverage in a new potential hold out situation).
the only thing that may have changed that was the cap increase going up like it did but i guess not. it will be very interesting to see how genuine the extension negotiations are and what he ultimately gets.
era so far so I wouldnt expect it. Teams dont generally gives raises to players who had a down year, and the tag would be a 20% raise. They are better off offering him a 2 year take it or leave it at the tag number guarantee but I wouldnt even do that.
At 27 the evidence is there that Barkley isnt the same guy. The last 10 games of the 22 season were not good and then this past season we saw more of the same as the last 10 games of 22. 3.9 yards per carry is just pitiful.
This is a situation where both sides probably benefit from a parting of ways. Paying a RB last year over $10 mil was a bad bet and Schoen lost, doubling down is not the right move. The only way to have Barkley back is a similar deal to what Sanders got at about $6.5 a year and I doubt Barkley would do that.
What happens with Barkley may be telling of their draft plans, too.
making inadequate roster building decisions, including a RB Committee. Since Saquon was drafted, only Gary Brightwell who was drafted to be a special teamer and Eric Gray who was barely given a chance last year have been added via the draft. And it's not like the free agent RBs have been good choices.
Just like the folly of drafting Daniel Jones and never adding another QB since, the Giants have done almost the same ignoring the RB unit since Saquon joined.
Both need to go and let's hopefully soon forget their time here. Because it was forgettable.
RE: What happens with Barkley may be telling of their draft plans, too.
era so far so I wouldnt expect it. Teams dont generally gives raises to players who had a down year, and the tag would be a 20% raise. They are better off offering him a 2 year take it or leave it at the tag number guarantee but I wouldnt even do that.
At 27 the evidence is there that Barkley isnt the same guy. The last 10 games of the 22 season were not good and then this past season we saw more of the game same as the last 10 games of 22. 3.9 yards per carry is just pitiful.
This is a situation where both sides probably benefit from a parting of ways. Paying a RB last year over $10 mil was a bad bet and Schoen lost, doubling down is not the right move. The only way to have Barkley back is a similar deal to what Sanders got at about $6.5 a year and I doubt Barkley would do that.
Although I don’t think we should resign him….I think the 3.9 YPC was more of a reflection of the line rather than him
I didn't like the tag last year and I don't like it this year. Should have just paid him the 2-3 year deal in Spring of 23. You'd have 1 more year and then a likely 3rd year which allows for escape. Instead we are at risk of losing our best offensive skill player.
They tried.
Mr. Team Player got offended at being comped to Nick Chubb and Derrick Henry.
I didn't like the tag last year and I don't like it this year. Should have just paid him the 2-3 year deal in Spring of 23. You'd have 1 more year and then a likely 3rd year which allows for escape. Instead we are at risk of losing our best offensive skill player.
They tried.
Mr. Team Player got offended at being comped to Nick Chubb and Derrick Henry.
his reported counter to the giants was for less $ gtd than Henry got in 2020 (and henry got a $2m raise on that deal in 2022). it was also for a net of less "new" guaranteed money than chubb got since chubb wasnt franchise tagged with a guaranteed $10m when he got extended.
if barkley gets more than 12m gtd in this cycle he is ahead of his own counter offer to the giants.
I didn't like the tag last year and I don't like it this year. Should have just paid him the 2-3 year deal in Spring of 23. You'd have 1 more year and then a likely 3rd year which allows for escape. Instead we are at risk of losing our best offensive skill player.
They tried.
Mr. Team Player got offended at being comped to Nick Chubb and Derrick Henry.
His reported counter to the Giants was for less $ gtd than Henry got in 2020 (and Henry got a $2m raise on that deal in 2022). It was also for a net of less "new" guaranteed money than Chubb got since Chubb wasn't franchise tagged with a guaranteed $10m when he got extended.
If Barkley gets more than $12m gtd in this cycle he is ahead of his own counter offer to the Giants.
I'm confused by the significance of "new" guaranteed money, since the context of the negotiation is such that a multiyear deal would have precluded/replaced the tag. Being "new" money on top of the tag value was irrelevant in 2023. It might matter now that Barkley has already banked one tag year, but a year ago it would not have been relevant in terms of validating comps.
I'm also confused by your note about this cycle in response to my post - I was clearly referring to last year's negotiations. Is your point just that Barkley will ultimately make more money by having been tagged last year and now signing a new contract this offseason? If so, I'm not disputing that.
the tag guaranteed him $10m last year. that was money in his pocket during the negotiations, and is now money in his pockets literally even though neither side agreed to an extension. he asked for somewhere between 12-13m more than what was already guaranteed to him by the tag.
when nick chubb extended he was on the final year of his rookie deal with a scheduled salary near league minimum and got 17m fully guaranteed he wouldnt have had otherwise.
RE: What happens with Barkley may be telling of their draft plans, too.
The tag guaranteed him $10m last year. That was money in his pocket during the negotiations, and is now money in his pockets literally even though neither side agreed to an extension. He asked for somewhere between $12-13m more than what was already guaranteed to him by the tag.
When Nick Chubb extended he was on the final year of his rookie deal with a scheduled salary near league minimum and got $17m fully guaranteed he wouldn't have had otherwise.
Ok, but we have a pretty good idea about the Giants last two offers in 2023, and the Chubb comp had already been adjusted for context and inflation, hadn't it?
The Giants weren't offering Chubb's contract to Barkley, IIRC; they were framing the negotiation with Chubb's contract as one of the reference points to reset the conversation in a way that basically shifted the comp baseline away from CMC and more toward the top of the run-first RBs, but not up to the do-it-all CMC level.
been the right decision. But it would have been exponentially better than the misguided path of giving Daniel Jones that silly contract, "A-Graded" no less, versus a simple tag followed by a quick release before the 2024 season.
But let's keep the band together as long as possible. Tag Barkley or just give him those extra cap dollars the NFL just allocated. Why would this franchise ever do some serious soul-searching (that's a lot of alliteration) and come to see that last Lombardi trophy continues to blind them each and every year since.
Not a great era, but I don’t blame Barkley for that. He didn’t pick Jones and crappy lineman for several years. I wish him well and hope he goes to a team he can win with.
The tag guaranteed him $10m last year. That was money in his pocket during the negotiations, and is now money in his pockets literally even though neither side agreed to an extension. He asked for somewhere between $12-13m more than what was already guaranteed to him by the tag.
When Nick Chubb extended he was on the final year of his rookie deal with a scheduled salary near league minimum and got $17m fully guaranteed he wouldn't have had otherwise.
Ok, but we have a pretty good idea about the Giants last two offers in 2023, and the Chubb comp had already been adjusted for context and inflation, hadn't it?
The Giants weren't offering Chubb's contract to Barkley, IIRC; they were framing the negotiation with Chubb's contract as one of the reference points to reset the conversation in a way that basically shifted the comp baseline away from CMC and more toward the top of the run-first RBs, but not up to the do-it-all CMC level.
most players starting points for negotiations are different.
chubb got 3x36m, 17m fully gtd, 20m practically gtd - 1 year ahead of FA
cmc got 4x64, 30m fully gtd, 38m practically gtd - again farther from FA
henry got 4x50m, 25.5m fully gtd, and after just playing it to completion (rare) he ended up getting paid an extra 2m from the raise (even rarer)
with 10m already banked on the tag bc he was at FA barkley's ask was:
+12-13m gtd
3x39-40m total contract
does barkley's supposed ask look more like chubb or cmc/henry?
and the giants 2 offers he passed on were actually both arguably lesser deals than chubbs when you factor out the tag. 1 of them only had +9m of new gtd $ over the tag at an AAV 1m higher than chubb, the other was +12m gtd $ but a lower AAV than chubb by 1m.
have moved him last year. It was reported there were offers.
I agree. I think they got fooled into thinking they were in their way because they made the playoffs. Personally I like the two back or multi back system like the Patriots and others use. If one gets hurt your tank isn't empty.
People say that Barkley may have lost a step. That he is always injured. He used to have these explosive long runs and never dropped the football. He dances to much in the backfield.
Is it also possible that ever since Daboll showed up, he became a more patient runner and had fewer runs for a loss, stopped dancing, blocked a little better, learned that not every time you touch the ball you need to score?
Young Barkley was always trying to hit a home run. Some times he scored, other times he was tackled for 5-7 yard loss. I think he has been coached to be more patient as a runner, and focus on gaining yards, tough yards over always bouncing outside and causing holding plays and TFL’s.
There is a lot of supply, and it appears teams are not going to use the tender on the big name UFAs. I wouldn't feel comfortable making a guess as to any contract values in this environment.
There is a lot of supply, and it appears teams are not going to use the tender on the big name UFAs. I wouldn't feel comfortable making a guess as to any contract values in this environment.
We could comfortably replace Team Barkley for much less.
Gus Edwards is projected at $3.5M+. Devin Singletary at $5M+.
There is a lot of supply, and it appears teams are not going to use the tender on the big name UFAs. I wouldn't feel comfortable making a guess as to any contract values in this environment.
which non-tags do you mean? the 2 ive seen i think are $ decisions (jacobs would cost 14m+, evans would cost 28m+ and they have no qb under contract). barkley non-tag i think is mostly about the hostile situation it would create.
the players who teams want to keep/extend go down to the last minute and that group is going to get most of the tags (burns, dugger, pittman, winfield, wilkins, sneed, madubuike, jones, allen, johnson, maybe huff/greenard too).
higgins getting tagged this early is the bengals basically admitting they arent trying to extend him (and presumably open to trade offers).
It was an option to keep him with no commitment pass the 2024 season. But he had a less than stellar 2023, so it was unlikely.
let the market speak.
That and the unwillingness to move above the originally offered deal during the season last year. If Schoen wasn’t willing to give him more then I’m not sure why he would now.
If he leaves, that's a big tell to me that they are going to be looking to grab a QB.
As long as it's not the FT, the TT is much more suitable for X.
I am very curious to how the open market views both Barkley and X...
You know JM wants to, including several others here.
I’d like for Barkley to stay but I don’t see it. He’s going to get more from someone else than we are going to be willing to match, IMO. But they will need to bring in some serious talent at the position because what’s been behind Barkley all these years has been pathetic. A day 2 pick and a legit vet will need to be added most likely.
the only thing that may have changed that was the cap increase going up like it did but i guess not. it will be very interesting to see how genuine the extension negotiations are and what he ultimately gets.
Thoughts?
At 27 the evidence is there that Barkley isnt the same guy. The last 10 games of the 22 season were not good and then this past season we saw more of the same as the last 10 games of 22. 3.9 yards per carry is just pitiful.
This is a situation where both sides probably benefit from a parting of ways. Paying a RB last year over $10 mil was a bad bet and Schoen lost, doubling down is not the right move. The only way to have Barkley back is a similar deal to what Sanders got at about $6.5 a year and I doubt Barkley would do that.
He's a veteran that knows the offense cold, knows the protection schemes and can take a lot of heat off the QB with the attention he draws.
If they are bringing in a rookie QB, you want Barkley in that "side saddle".
Just like the folly of drafting Daniel Jones and never adding another QB since, the Giants have done almost the same ignoring the RB unit since Saquon joined.
Both need to go and let's hopefully soon forget their time here. Because it was forgettable.
He's a veteran that knows the offense cold, knows the protection schemes and can take a lot of heat off the QB with the attention he draws.
If they are bringing in a rookie QB, you want Barkley in that "side saddle".
This team has put itself in quite a pickle.
At 27 the evidence is there that Barkley isnt the same guy. The last 10 games of the 22 season were not good and then this past season we saw more of the game same as the last 10 games of 22. 3.9 yards per carry is just pitiful.
This is a situation where both sides probably benefit from a parting of ways. Paying a RB last year over $10 mil was a bad bet and Schoen lost, doubling down is not the right move. The only way to have Barkley back is a similar deal to what Sanders got at about $6.5 a year and I doubt Barkley would do that.
Although I don’t think we should resign him….I think the 3.9 YPC was more of a reflection of the line rather than him
They tried.
Mr. Team Player got offended at being comped to Nick Chubb and Derrick Henry.
Quote:
I didn't like the tag last year and I don't like it this year. Should have just paid him the 2-3 year deal in Spring of 23. You'd have 1 more year and then a likely 3rd year which allows for escape. Instead we are at risk of losing our best offensive skill player.
They tried.
Mr. Team Player got offended at being comped to Nick Chubb and Derrick Henry.
his reported counter to the giants was for less $ gtd than Henry got in 2020 (and henry got a $2m raise on that deal in 2022). it was also for a net of less "new" guaranteed money than chubb got since chubb wasnt franchise tagged with a guaranteed $10m when he got extended.
if barkley gets more than 12m gtd in this cycle he is ahead of his own counter offer to the giants.
Quote:
In comment 16408533 djm said:
Quote:
I didn't like the tag last year and I don't like it this year. Should have just paid him the 2-3 year deal in Spring of 23. You'd have 1 more year and then a likely 3rd year which allows for escape. Instead we are at risk of losing our best offensive skill player.
They tried.
Mr. Team Player got offended at being comped to Nick Chubb and Derrick Henry.
His reported counter to the Giants was for less $ gtd than Henry got in 2020 (and Henry got a $2m raise on that deal in 2022). It was also for a net of less "new" guaranteed money than Chubb got since Chubb wasn't franchise tagged with a guaranteed $10m when he got extended.
If Barkley gets more than $12m gtd in this cycle he is ahead of his own counter offer to the Giants.
I'm confused by the significance of "new" guaranteed money, since the context of the negotiation is such that a multiyear deal would have precluded/replaced the tag. Being "new" money on top of the tag value was irrelevant in 2023. It might matter now that Barkley has already banked one tag year, but a year ago it would not have been relevant in terms of validating comps.
I'm also confused by your note about this cycle in response to my post - I was clearly referring to last year's negotiations. Is your point just that Barkley will ultimately make more money by having been tagged last year and now signing a new contract this offseason? If so, I'm not disputing that.
when nick chubb extended he was on the final year of his rookie deal with a scheduled salary near league minimum and got 17m fully guaranteed he wouldnt have had otherwise.
He's a veteran that knows the offense cold, knows the protection schemes and can take a lot of heat off the QB with the attention he draws.
If they are bringing in a rookie QB, you want Barkley in that "side saddle".
I've had this thought too. There could be some added value there with a rookie QB having an established RB in his first couple of years.
I still think Barkley will get more in the open market with his name alone than with what the Giants will be willing to offer him.
Quote:
They view Barkley as a great piece to pair with a rookie QB.
He's a veteran that knows the offense cold, knows the protection schemes and can take a lot of heat off the QB with the attention he draws.
If they are bringing in a rookie QB, you want Barkley in that "side saddle".
I've had this thought too. There could be some added value there with a rookie QB having an established RB in his first couple of years.
I still think Barkley will get more in the open market with his name alone than with what the Giants will be willing to offer him.
I'd subscribe more to the theory of..what place does a vet RB have here if you're transitioning to a young QB.
When Nick Chubb extended he was on the final year of his rookie deal with a scheduled salary near league minimum and got $17m fully guaranteed he wouldn't have had otherwise.
Ok, but we have a pretty good idea about the Giants last two offers in 2023, and the Chubb comp had already been adjusted for context and inflation, hadn't it?
The Giants weren't offering Chubb's contract to Barkley, IIRC; they were framing the negotiation with Chubb's contract as one of the reference points to reset the conversation in a way that basically shifted the comp baseline away from CMC and more toward the top of the run-first RBs, but not up to the do-it-all CMC level.
If Schoen wasn't willing to give Barkley guaranteed money in year 8 last time, I'd question his plan if he's now willing to do so.
But let's keep the band together as long as possible. Tag Barkley or just give him those extra cap dollars the NFL just allocated. Why would this franchise ever do some serious soul-searching (that's a lot of alliteration) and come to see that last Lombardi trophy continues to blind them each and every year since.
Quote:
The tag guaranteed him $10m last year. That was money in his pocket during the negotiations, and is now money in his pockets literally even though neither side agreed to an extension. He asked for somewhere between $12-13m more than what was already guaranteed to him by the tag.
When Nick Chubb extended he was on the final year of his rookie deal with a scheduled salary near league minimum and got $17m fully guaranteed he wouldn't have had otherwise.
Ok, but we have a pretty good idea about the Giants last two offers in 2023, and the Chubb comp had already been adjusted for context and inflation, hadn't it?
The Giants weren't offering Chubb's contract to Barkley, IIRC; they were framing the negotiation with Chubb's contract as one of the reference points to reset the conversation in a way that basically shifted the comp baseline away from CMC and more toward the top of the run-first RBs, but not up to the do-it-all CMC level.
most players starting points for negotiations are different.
chubb got 3x36m, 17m fully gtd, 20m practically gtd - 1 year ahead of FA
cmc got 4x64, 30m fully gtd, 38m practically gtd - again farther from FA
henry got 4x50m, 25.5m fully gtd, and after just playing it to completion (rare) he ended up getting paid an extra 2m from the raise (even rarer)
with 10m already banked on the tag bc he was at FA barkley's ask was:
+12-13m gtd
3x39-40m total contract
does barkley's supposed ask look more like chubb or cmc/henry?
and the giants 2 offers he passed on were actually both arguably lesser deals than chubbs when you factor out the tag. 1 of them only had +9m of new gtd $ over the tag at an AAV 1m higher than chubb, the other was +12m gtd $ but a lower AAV than chubb by 1m.
barkley got hurt and missed time again
and he is still projected to easily secure more money from whoever signs him having passed on the giant offers.
spielberger had his projection at 2x22m with 15m gtd before the new cap was announced higher than expected.
Is it also possible that ever since Daboll showed up, he became a more patient runner and had fewer runs for a loss, stopped dancing, blocked a little better, learned that not every time you touch the ball you need to score?
Young Barkley was always trying to hit a home run. Some times he scored, other times he was tackled for 5-7 yard loss. I think he has been coached to be more patient as a runner, and focus on gaining yards, tough yards over always bouncing outside and causing holding plays and TFL’s.
Just my observation.
We could comfortably replace Team Barkley for much less.
Gus Edwards is projected at $3.5M+. Devin Singletary at $5M+.
I would take those two as RBBC for year...
He seems like a good dude, but I won't be losing sleep if he lands elsewhere. Hell, he could end up as an Eagle or Cowboy & I'd still be 'Whatever.'
which non-tags do you mean? the 2 ive seen i think are $ decisions (jacobs would cost 14m+, evans would cost 28m+ and they have no qb under contract). barkley non-tag i think is mostly about the hostile situation it would create.
the players who teams want to keep/extend go down to the last minute and that group is going to get most of the tags (burns, dugger, pittman, winfield, wilkins, sneed, madubuike, jones, allen, johnson, maybe huff/greenard too).
higgins getting tagged this early is the bengals basically admitting they arent trying to extend him (and presumably open to trade offers).