The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
I disagree completely. If you assume that they did not want him (and I don't think they did) then the franchise is objectively the wrong move. First he might sign it and you are stuck paying him $12MM when you don't want him. Second, you want him to get the best deal possible so you get a comp pick. We essentially got a 2025 third (if memory serves correctly as to expected comp pick status). Are we getting better than a 3rd rounder from Philly so they can sign him to that big contract? I doubt it.
Now if they did not at least looking at trading him at deadline that is just malpractice. But again you had to get at least a fourth to make if worthwhile. Given what Philly paid him and what their situation was last year, they might have given us a 2nd or something. Hopefully we at least tried.
I believe that Schoen was set on paying a specific number and didn't budge.
The Eagle deal is really 12 mil guaranteed and the rest is incentive and obviously he doesn't get to 15 mil UNLESS HE ACHIEVES THE INCENTIVES IN THE DEAL....we should've wanted that, especially for a guy that was the leader of this franchise since he got here.
That's my opinion. He didn't deserve to be treated like this and there was once a time the Giants didn't treat their homegrown superstars like this.
Barkley is a good young man and a damn good football player and I will root for him to be successful, even as an Eagle.
Just not when he plays against the Giants.
This is not true. He got $26MM fully guaranteed at signing. It is at least a 2 year $13MM per year deal. At minimum.
I believe a team like the Ravens would have traded a 4th for Barkley at the deadline last year.
And I think as Giants fans the better outcome, whatever you think about Barkley longer term, would be for him to be out of the division next year.
For 2024, the worst outcome happened. They got nothing in return and he went to a division rival. That's f'n stupid, and very on brand for John Mara.
I actually think that contract the Eagles signed him to is good for us. But I don't think SB adds much more than an average to good running back at this point in his career. If I had a flat choice between SB at Baltimore and a 2024 4th and SB at Eagles on that contract and a 2024 3rd(if I am right on the comp pick situation) I would take the latter.
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
Mara seems to be very focused on the way he and the front office are perceived by players. That's fine and where possible players should be well. But I think Mara would rather do right by individual players over what is right for the entire team by doing everything he can to win games.
Mara wants desperately to win, but it is not the North Star of how he runs the team.
Mara did not want to look into trading him. In terms of keeping him, it seemed SB was ready to move on though I think JS did make some effort to retain him. Debatable how much.
After 7 weeks, Giants were averaging 11pts/game. After 8, it was 10.5. Team was much more competitive though when he returned from injury. Huge difference with him in RB prod.
Realistic that JS/BD (more BD imv) who wanted to keep SB. There was a lot of heat coming down on the team at that point.
they should have just signed BArk to the 3 years deal after 22
not spent the wasted money on guys like Campbell, Waller and or Singletary (he wouldn't be needed now obviously) and we'd be better off today, unless you think Singletary is a better player than Barkley. I don't.
IT is what it is....Schoen apparently has a thing against spending long term money on a RB but he just spent close to the the same money on Singletary and Campbell and even Waller. Granted the former 2 are gone now and not costing us much of anything. They did cost money last year that could have gone to Barkley.
I remain hopeful that they watched film last year and came to a conclusion that Barkley left a lot of meat on the bone in 2023. One can only hope that was the case. I still think he's going to have a great year in 24 and more blocking up front will simply lead to better success for him. The guy was essentially a 1000 yard runner despite next to everything going wrong last year. HE will get closer to 1400+ this year.
no one WTF happened at the deadline last year. Words mean nothing to me. These guys offer up so much BS just to shut people up--you can't take half of what is "reported" seriously. Just because Schoen said "we aren't trading Barkley" doesn't mean fuck all. Maybe they tried behind back channels and the best offer was a 5th round pick. They wouldn't come out and admit that.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
It's much nicer than saying we were afraid he might sign the tender and then we'd be stuck with him because it's guaranteed at signing.
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
Mara seems to be very focused on the way he and the front office are perceived by players. That's fine and where possible players should be well. But I think Mara would rather do right by individual players over what is right for the entire team by doing everything he can to win games.
Mara wants desperately to win, but it is not the North Star of how he runs the team.
Yes. As others have alluded, Mara WANTS to win. However, he doesn't TRY to win.
Hard Knocks isn't a documentary, it's a puff piece. The Giants are going to slant the conversations they had with Barkley in whichever direction they want. I'd take it all with a grain of salt.
Anyone outside of professional sports, without a noncompete clause in a contract, can work anywhere they want.
I don’t blame Barkley for making top dollar with a team that can contend for a championship. Loyalty is to the team the pays you. And at similar money , I’m sure he’d rather play for a better team.
People seem to forget he turned down the Giants 3/39 offer
I think that was the end for him here. Yes, he got one year on the tag but I thought that was going to be it for him. Turned out it was. Schoen’s offer was a market value deal and maybe better than that. Barkley made that choice. In the long run I think it helps us so as much of a fan of his i was I don’t care he’s gone.
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
I disagree completely. If you assume that they did not want him (and I don't think they did) then the franchise is objectively the wrong move. First he might sign it and you are stuck paying him $12MM when you don't want him. Second, you want him to get the best deal possible so you get a comp pick. We essentially got a 2025 third (if memory serves correctly as to expected comp pick status). Are we getting better than a 3rd rounder from Philly so they can sign him to that big contract? I doubt it.
Now if they did not at least looking at trading him at deadline that is just malpractice. But again you had to get at least a fourth to make if worthwhile. Given what Philly paid him and what their situation was last year, they might have given us a 2nd or something. Hopefully we at least tried.
You are assuming the Giants were not offered something more because doing so would be a terrible look for the team.
No interest in resigning Barkley. I found this for his perspective. I don’t hold anything against Barkley:
jpkmets T20 World CUP SZN
·
May 2
@jpkmets
·
Follow
Replying to @saquon
You bailed. On New York. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
Saquon Barkley
@saquon
·
Follow
Let me educate some of you fans here… I can’t bail or become a traitor if I never got an offer to come back.. so I went to the organization I felt that was the best and after already being here for a month man I’m excited to be a eagle ! Go birds
a team overpaid him with a contract does not mean that teams were willing to give up draft capital for him. Everything else is supposition.
It was reported that teams were making offers. The Giants also said publicly they were not listening to those offers.
So it depends on what offers were made. If teams are low balling to get him for peanuts, I wouldn't move him either. The offense was struggling and the team decimated with injuries. You have an offensive HCs --what appetite would you expect they would have to make a horrible situation worse? Blow it up so that it gets so bad the owner has no choice but to fire everyone?
So yes, if they got a good offer --3rd round or something, sure, they'd have to take it. But are we talking 6th/7th round? I'd never expect them to move him for that. I don't know what the offers were, but at the trade deadline Barkley was just a couple weeks back from ANOTHER injury. It's more than plausible that nothing was coming more than a late round pick.
I thought it was known after Berkley signed with Philly that the Gianta didn't make an offer. Also, Terps point is a good one: the Giants aren't going to let this be presented in any way that would cast them in a negative light. I'm interested to take a peak behind the curtain, but it's going to be a very carefully curated peak. I'm sure it'll be entertaining, but goddamn a winning football team would be a helluva lot more fun to watch.
I thought it was known after Berkley signed with Philly that the Gianta didn't make an offer. Also, Terps point is a good one: the Giants aren't going to let this be presented in any way that would cast them in a negative light. I'm interested to take a peak behind the curtain, but it's going to be a very carefully curated peak. I'm sure it'll be entertaining, but goddamn a winning football team would be a helluva lot more fun to watch.
Yeah this is what I remember reading too. When Barkley got the Eagles offer his team asked the Giants if they wanted to make a counter offer and they declined.
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
j
100% trading him not only provides compensation, but gives the team more say in where SB ends up. Now we get no return and he makes the Eagles better.
That doesn’t mean he gave the Giants a chance to match.
That clip sounds like the Giants told him to find out his value on the open market and bring it back. I’m wondering if he ever did. Maybe no one knows.
a team overpaid him with a contract does not mean that teams were willing to give up draft capital for him. Everything else is supposition.
It was reported that teams were making offers. The Giants also said publicly they were not listening to those offers.
Exactly. This team was done by early October. I’d rather they traded him for a 5th or 6th rounder than get zero in return if they truly had no intention of resigning him.
I don’t generally buy into the whole “Mara controls key decisions” theory, but this Barkley situation doesn’t seem like something Schoen and Daboll would have cooked up without being directed by certain people.
Schoen doesn't value RBs and Safeties in today's market as much as the other positions. We lost two good players because of that philosophy. Barkley and McKinney are gone, not because the Giants didn't like them. They didn't want to go over the price they set for negotiations with them. Other teams valued them more than we did. We now have Singletary and Nubin as a result of this philosophy as their replacements. It allowed them to purchase Burns as an Edge rusher. It remains to be seen which ends up as the better course of action.
Drafting Saquon overall #2 was an error in judgment from a GM
Only philosophy, it is easier to find impact at running back and safety from no-name guys. Flash in the pans, if you will. I'm fully in agreement with him in this sense because I also didn't want them to pay Barkley over $12M and McKinney, while I wanted to keep, got corner one money and he just wasn't making those plays week in and week out to convince anybody he is worth that. Paying Runyan what he's getting is completely acceptable in that sense, and sure Burns got top 5 DE money, but he just recently turned 26 and has potential to be a high end DE. If you can acquire a player like that, you do it. Not pay high end money to a backend S unless he's a HOF caliber type, which is very few lately for safeties.
Schoen doesn't value RBs and Safeties in today's market as much as the other positions. We lost two good players because of that philosophy. Barkley and McKinney are gone, not because the Giants didn't like them. They didn't want to go over the price they set for negotiations with them. Other teams valued them more than we did. We now have Singletary and Nubin as a result of this philosophy as their replacements. It allowed them to purchase Burns as an Edge rusher. It remains to be seen which ends up as the better course of action.
Is McKinney worth 17 million a year ?? nope... and as mush as it pains me to sya this.. Saquon was overrated... great rookie season.. big splash plays.. inconsistent and often injured.. not worth the investment IMO
Giants weren’t matching the offer the Eagles made and they shouldn’t have.
+1. Since his rookie year minus a few flashes here and there afterwards, he hasn't been particularly productive. I don't think they're going to miss Barkley as much as some may think.
Schoen doesn't value RBs and Safeties in today's market as much as the other positions. We lost two good players because of that philosophy. Barkley and McKinney are gone, not because the Giants didn't like them. They didn't want to go over the price they set for negotiations with them. Other teams valued them more than we did. We now have Singletary and Nubin as a result of this philosophy as their replacements. It allowed them to purchase Burns as an Edge rusher. It remains to be seen which ends up as the better course of action.
Is McKinney worth 17 million a year ?? nope... and as mush as it pains me to sya this.. Saquon was overrated... great rookie season.. big splash plays.. inconsistent and often injured.. not worth the investment IMO
Agree on both points. GB can have McKinney and Philly can have Barkley.
a team overpaid him with a contract does not mean that teams were willing to give up draft capital for him. Everything else is supposition.
It was reported that teams were making offers. The Giants also said publicly they were not listening to those offers.
Exactly. This team was done by early October. I’d rather they traded him for a 5th or 6th rounder than get zero in return if they truly had no intention of resigning him.
I don’t generally buy into the whole “Mara controls key decisions” theory, but this Barkley situation doesn’t seem like something Schoen and Daboll would have cooked up without being directed by certain people.
If you look at OTC Compensation pick projections for 2025, you could argue that allowing Barkley to leave in free agency got you a fourth round compensation pick for McKinney that would not have received. We would not receive any comp picks without Barkleys salary in the formula. OTC 2025 compensation projections - ( New Window )
Careful... Someone might call you "Maranoid"!!!
It was poor personnel management on the back end.
If that's coming from the top, then there's a governor on the team.
Not the good kind. The kind that kicks on on a GM vehicle at about 112mph.
And I think as Giants fans the better outcome, whatever you think about Barkley longer term, would be for him to be out of the division next year.
For 2024, the worst outcome happened. They got nothing in return and he went to a division rival. That's f'n stupid, and very on brand for John Mara.
Quote:
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
What offers did they turn down?
Quote:
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
I disagree completely. If you assume that they did not want him (and I don't think they did) then the franchise is objectively the wrong move. First he might sign it and you are stuck paying him $12MM when you don't want him. Second, you want him to get the best deal possible so you get a comp pick. We essentially got a 2025 third (if memory serves correctly as to expected comp pick status). Are we getting better than a 3rd rounder from Philly so they can sign him to that big contract? I doubt it.
Now if they did not at least looking at trading him at deadline that is just malpractice. But again you had to get at least a fourth to make if worthwhile. Given what Philly paid him and what their situation was last year, they might have given us a 2nd or something. Hopefully we at least tried.
The Eagle deal is really 12 mil guaranteed and the rest is incentive and obviously he doesn't get to 15 mil UNLESS HE ACHIEVES THE INCENTIVES IN THE DEAL....we should've wanted that, especially for a guy that was the leader of this franchise since he got here.
That's my opinion. He didn't deserve to be treated like this and there was once a time the Giants didn't treat their homegrown superstars like this.
Barkley is a good young man and a damn good football player and I will root for him to be successful, even as an Eagle.
Just not when he plays against the Giants.
This is not true. He got $26MM fully guaranteed at signing. It is at least a 2 year $13MM per year deal. At minimum.
And I think as Giants fans the better outcome, whatever you think about Barkley longer term, would be for him to be out of the division next year.
For 2024, the worst outcome happened. They got nothing in return and he went to a division rival. That's f'n stupid, and very on brand for John Mara.
I actually think that contract the Eagles signed him to is good for us. But I don't think SB adds much more than an average to good running back at this point in his career. If I had a flat choice between SB at Baltimore and a 2024 4th and SB at Eagles on that contract and a 2024 3rd(if I am right on the comp pick situation) I would take the latter.
Quote:
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
Mara seems to be very focused on the way he and the front office are perceived by players. That's fine and where possible players should be well. But I think Mara would rather do right by individual players over what is right for the entire team by doing everything he can to win games.
Mara wants desperately to win, but it is not the North Star of how he runs the team.
After 7 weeks, Giants were averaging 11pts/game. After 8, it was 10.5. Team was much more competitive though when he returned from injury. Huge difference with him in RB prod.
Realistic that JS/BD (more BD imv) who wanted to keep SB. There was a lot of heat coming down on the team at that point.
IT is what it is....Schoen apparently has a thing against spending long term money on a RB but he just spent close to the the same money on Singletary and Campbell and even Waller. Granted the former 2 are gone now and not costing us much of anything. They did cost money last year that could have gone to Barkley.
I remain hopeful that they watched film last year and came to a conclusion that Barkley left a lot of meat on the bone in 2023. One can only hope that was the case. I still think he's going to have a great year in 24 and more blocking up front will simply lead to better success for him. The guy was essentially a 1000 yard runner despite next to everything going wrong last year. HE will get closer to 1400+ this year.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
Quote:
In comment 16543017 christian said:
Quote:
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
Mara seems to be very focused on the way he and the front office are perceived by players. That's fine and where possible players should be well. But I think Mara would rather do right by individual players over what is right for the entire team by doing everything he can to win games.
Mara wants desperately to win, but it is not the North Star of how he runs the team.
Yes. As others have alluded, Mara WANTS to win. However, he doesn't TRY to win.
So, we get what we get.
That said, who gives a shit about Saquon Barkley?
If anyone knows the answer, I’d appreciate it.
Anyone outside of professional sports, without a noncompete clause in a contract, can work anywhere they want.
I don’t blame Barkley for making top dollar with a team that can contend for a championship. Loyalty is to the team the pays you. And at similar money , I’m sure he’d rather play for a better team.
Forced Giants to tag him instead of Jones
Tired of watching him dance behind the line anyway. And that's when he was healthy.
It was reported that teams were making offers. The Giants also said publicly they were not listening to those offers.
Quote:
In comment 16543017 christian said:
Quote:
The real story, and the one the media shouldn't let Schoen and Mara off the hook on is there was demand for Barkley.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
Exactly.
If Mara didn't interfere, then Schoen and Daboll don't look good here at all.
I disagree completely. If you assume that they did not want him (and I don't think they did) then the franchise is objectively the wrong move. First he might sign it and you are stuck paying him $12MM when you don't want him. Second, you want him to get the best deal possible so you get a comp pick. We essentially got a 2025 third (if memory serves correctly as to expected comp pick status). Are we getting better than a 3rd rounder from Philly so they can sign him to that big contract? I doubt it.
Now if they did not at least looking at trading him at deadline that is just malpractice. But again you had to get at least a fourth to make if worthwhile. Given what Philly paid him and what their situation was last year, they might have given us a 2nd or something. Hopefully we at least tried.
You are assuming the Giants were not offered something more because doing so would be a terrible look for the team.
Barkley wasn't going to happily play on the tender. Team Barkley would have worked with the Giants to organize a trade.
Quote:
a team overpaid him with a contract does not mean that teams were willing to give up draft capital for him. Everything else is supposition.
It was reported that teams were making offers. The Giants also said publicly they were not listening to those offers.
If he had earned a championship here, I could understand such loyalty.
jpkmets T20 World CUP SZN
·
May 2
@jpkmets
·
Follow
Replying to @saquon
You bailed. On New York. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
Saquon Barkley
@saquon
·
Follow
Let me educate some of you fans here… I can’t bail or become a traitor if I never got an offer to come back.. so I went to the organization I felt that was the best and after already being here for a month man I’m excited to be a eagle ! Go birds
Quote:
a team overpaid him with a contract does not mean that teams were willing to give up draft capital for him. Everything else is supposition.
It was reported that teams were making offers. The Giants also said publicly they were not listening to those offers.
So yes, if they got a good offer --3rd round or something, sure, they'd have to take it. But are we talking 6th/7th round? I'd never expect them to move him for that. I don't know what the offers were, but at the trade deadline Barkley was just a couple weeks back from ANOTHER injury. It's more than plausible that nothing was coming more than a late round pick.
They could have signed him twice and didn't.
This is cover for Barkley tearing it up this year.
Asking for a chance when you had two doesn't fly.
Yeah this is what I remember reading too. When Barkley got the Eagles offer his team asked the Giants if they wanted to make a counter offer and they declined.
And because of that demand the Giants should have received compensation for Barkley's departure either last year or this off season.
That the Giants didn't franchise Barkley because it would limit the teams interested in him and leave him fewer choices is one of the most absurd things I've heard and owner imply.
If you need to know one thing about Mara, that's it.
100% trading him not only provides compensation, but gives the team more say in where SB ends up. Now we get no return and he makes the Eagles better.
That clip sounds like the Giants told him to find out his value on the open market and bring it back. I’m wondering if he ever did. Maybe no one knows.
Quote:
a team overpaid him with a contract does not mean that teams were willing to give up draft capital for him. Everything else is supposition.
It was reported that teams were making offers. The Giants also said publicly they were not listening to those offers.
Exactly. This team was done by early October. I’d rather they traded him for a 5th or 6th rounder than get zero in return if they truly had no intention of resigning him.
I don’t generally buy into the whole “Mara controls key decisions” theory, but this Barkley situation doesn’t seem like something Schoen and Daboll would have cooked up without being directed by certain people.
Not trading Saquon last year after it was determined he was not part of your future plans was just bad business.
Is McKinney worth 17 million a year ?? nope... and as mush as it pains me to sya this.. Saquon was overrated... great rookie season.. big splash plays.. inconsistent and often injured.. not worth the investment IMO
For a year now I am reading how Barkley is not worth it, RBs are plug and play, the RB market is down, etc
Now I see that Barkley is so valuable that we needed to get compensation in return.
I am in alignment on the first point. We also cannot assume the Giants did not try to receive compensation. We may have been denied.
+1. Since his rookie year minus a few flashes here and there afterwards, he hasn't been particularly productive. I don't think they're going to miss Barkley as much as some may think.
Quote:
Schoen doesn't value RBs and Safeties in today's market as much as the other positions. We lost two good players because of that philosophy. Barkley and McKinney are gone, not because the Giants didn't like them. They didn't want to go over the price they set for negotiations with them. Other teams valued them more than we did. We now have Singletary and Nubin as a result of this philosophy as their replacements. It allowed them to purchase Burns as an Edge rusher. It remains to be seen which ends up as the better course of action.
Is McKinney worth 17 million a year ?? nope... and as mush as it pains me to sya this.. Saquon was overrated... great rookie season.. big splash plays.. inconsistent and often injured.. not worth the investment IMO
Agree on both points. GB can have McKinney and Philly can have Barkley.
Quote:
In comment 16543364 Chris in Philly said:
Quote:
a team overpaid him with a contract does not mean that teams were willing to give up draft capital for him. Everything else is supposition.
It was reported that teams were making offers. The Giants also said publicly they were not listening to those offers.
Exactly. This team was done by early October. I’d rather they traded him for a 5th or 6th rounder than get zero in return if they truly had no intention of resigning him.
I don’t generally buy into the whole “Mara controls key decisions” theory, but this Barkley situation doesn’t seem like something Schoen and Daboll would have cooked up without being directed by certain people.
If you look at OTC Compensation pick projections for 2025, you could argue that allowing Barkley to leave in free agency got you a fourth round compensation pick for McKinney that would not have received. We would not receive any comp picks without Barkleys salary in the formula.
OTC 2025 compensation projections - ( New Window )