BobbyLayne
Footballguy
He was quoting from my Running Backs Don’t Matter post
I’ll allow it
(yeah he could have edited the first post)
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
RB Saquon Barkley, PHI (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Faust
- Start date
He was quoting from my Running Backs Don’t Matter post
I’ll allow it
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Totally agree with your broader point. And the chart was presented bizarrely — that’s not on you. (Although I think many people would guess that Percy Harvin never led Seattle in rushing for a whole season)
As relates to RB value, I still assert that RBs are artificially underpaid on their first contract due to the nfl draft, and unlike other positions, their longevity is such that they are severely, disproportionately punished monetarily.
The Big Donkey
Footballguy
He will sit out until september. If he doesn't want to play for $10mm so be it.
Dez
Footballguy
Would seem dumb to do. Bell's career came to a halt after sitting out a year. He got a bag but his career died as did his chances at the HOF.
jtd13
Footballguy
The Giants simultaneously saying they want to keep it in house when a bunch of reports skewing it against Saquon are getting leaked. it's common knowledge the reported (and usually very much lacking context) offers the player declines are leaked by the team, and it's peak hypocrisy. It happens a lot in these negotiations. And somehow fans and beat writers always seem to take the bait from the team hook, line, and sinker, and start bashing the player and gobbling up the team narrative (see Faust's last shared article).
I hope he gets paid or gets out of there, but I doubt he skips significant game time. Threatening it is one of his only bargaining chips.
I hope he gets paid or gets out of there, but I doubt he skips significant game time. Threatening it is one of his only bargaining chips.
Below K but ahead of punter
-OZ-
Footballguy
As a titans fan I’d love to argue because our two best players are a running back and punter. But yeah. That’s generally correct. (But I still think Derrick deserves more $$$)
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
So…you’re not here much in the off-season? That usually only happens on days that end in y.
My favorite is two guys playing badminton for 20 posts without an iota of new insight or information.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
The Frankman
Footballguy
It's amazing how much the Giants bungled the Daniel Jones contract by a) bidding against themselves b) costing them the flexibility to sign other FAs. Who knew massively overpaying your QB who can't win a game by himself if you spotted him a TD would backfire when it came time to pay your elite RB?
The thing that makes it worse is Saquon as the leader of the team supported Jones even when he wasn't playing well and openly lobbied for him to get PAID. He wasn't a company man or he stayed silent (he probably should have) about the issue. But now when it's time to pay Barkley, Jones has barely said two words about the situation.
The thing that makes it worse is Saquon as the leader of the team supported Jones even when he wasn't playing well and openly lobbied for him to get PAID. He wasn't a company man or he stayed silent (he probably should have) about the issue. But now when it's time to pay Barkley, Jones has barely said two words about the situation.
jtd13
Footballguy
The Daniel Jones situation really seemed like exactly when you use a franchise tag on a QB. They basically gave him 2/$82m with an out after 2 years. The tag was $32m or something like that.
I guess it only makes sense if they never really intended on paying Barkley and just hoped he'd play on the tag. Which he probably will.
According to the NY Post, the Giants later offer includes $19.5mm in guarantees, which isn't enough for Barkley.
nypost.com
Giants’ $19.5 million guaranteed offer not enough for Saquon Barkley
The two sides remain locked in a stalemate as Monday’s deadline for a long-term extension nears.
nypost.com
Dez
Footballguy
zamboni
Footballguy
His main leverage is his importance to the offensive flow overall, and I'm sure the Giants know it. There are other guys that can the ball, but his presence as a running/receiving threat makes life easier for Daniel Jones. This team is on the upswing and I doubt they just want a warm body back there behind Jones.
Hope I'm not wrong, but I think they settle over the weekend - Barkley won't get quite what he wants, but enough security. Upthread I thought 3 years/$36 million with about $20 million guaranteed, and still think that might be the ballpark.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I thought I saw on PFT that Saquab wanted CMC money ($16M a year x 4 with $38M guaranteed) and NYG had offered him $13M a year x 2 guaranteed. But that offer was pulled once he got tagged. Apparently not a lot has changed in terms of offers or demands since. Barkley holding out and skipping early season games is a potential outcome, a scenario where he only would play enough games to accrue a season and have this year count as a franchise year was something that was discussed in the article.
zamboni
Footballguy
True, he could do that, but have to think that he knows he'd be jeopardizing his future value for a position whose value keeps diminishing. But what do we know?
Boston
Footballguy
Exactly...he is 26 and if he does that and doesn't play great or gets injured his big earning window is shut...he is at a tough point in his career as far as this situation is concerned...I get that he wants to maximize the $ but he has a lot of room for error...I just don't picture anyone stepping-up with a monster deal next offseason.
Last edited:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Not to mention giving up a few big paychecks - money he'll likely never really get back.
efactor
Footballguy
Yeah. Missing a couple game checks isn't something he should (and probably isn't) take lightly. I think they will work it out before camp. Giants need him and bringing in a FA RB at this point won't come close to what Barkley brings to the table as an all around back. Pay that man his money.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I've posted in other threads that the current system doesn't help the cause for first round RBs. 4 year contract + 5th year option + 2 franchise tags = 7 years of team control for not a lot of money, not much bonus money, not much job security, and by the time they make it through those years, they are considered well past their prime. They would start getting decent pay on the tags, but even that isn't anything long term. Top tier first round RBs may never get a chance to cash in.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Except they only have until 7/17 to work it out. The deadline is Monday.
pinkstapler
Footballguy
I don't see how they could think it would be. As the article points out, the tag this year and next would be $22 million total. Why would he accept less than that? I don't think he'll hold out into the season; but at the same time I don't see why he should make it comfortable for the Giants either.According to the NY Post, the Giants later offer includes $19.5mm in guarantees, which isn't enough for Barkley.
Giants’ $19.5 million guaranteed offer not enough for Saquon Barkley
The two sides remain locked in a stalemate as Monday’s deadline for a long-term extension nears.
zamboni
Footballguy
Correct - if I understand correctly, he has to play under the tag if he isn't signed by Monday and the two sides can't make a deal for 2023 after that.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I think most RBs now would gladly take the 2nd franchise tag - that's likely more than they'd get guaranteed anyway.
pinkstapler
Footballguy
Hard agree on all accounts. Looking a bit deeper on the issue as a whole I've come to think that, ironically, the players pretty much did this to themselves. The vets pretty much said screw the young guys when the pushed for and got the new rookie wage scale after the 2011 lockout. And of course the owners were on board since it also benefited them. But the vets at the time were either super short sighted or didn't GAF (or both). Because the system which they now created is one in which a cost controlled rookie is almost always the better option for a team. Superstars were getting paid before and continued to get paid after. Realistically the top 10-15% of players at their respective positions are now just being paid proportionally more than they already were as a benefit of the rookie wage scale savings. However prior to this adjustment, the other 85% of vets could still have a solid chance at getting a contract during the twilight of their careers because the cost of it was equitable to drafting a new rookie, especially when considering the intangibles. Sure it was still a bit more than the rookie, but teams could rationalize keeping a guy who's been in and knows the system, is a good locker room presence, can be a mentor on the field etc. etc. Now the price difference is so stark it makes those other factors negligible. More or less became a microcosm of our own labor market. All the change did was help the rich get richer, and incentivize business/team owners to overlook the benefits of employee retention in favor of bottom line savings of hiring cheap. "But the onboarding and training costs!" They don't care lol. It's a pittance compared to the costs of retention. And the majority of those other negative impacts don't hit the owners. It his the other workers and mid level management; in this case the team members and the coaches. So what if they have to work harder? Not trying to make a "this is good/bad" political statement here; but it truly appears to be the objective reality of the situation. It's impacting RBs the hardest right now, but I think trends are also showing the average lifespan of an NFL career for the average player (which was already short) is only growing shorter. In my best DJ Khalid voice "Congratulations, you played yourself."
pinkstapler
Footballguy
I'd probably cut the gladly out lol, but very much yes to the rest.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
relatively speaking
Yenrub
Footballguy
I’m with Rich! While I understand that “cap” means “lie” I don’t understand why that it is. I usually don’t have a problem understanding how we got slang terms but this one makes no sense to me.
Anyway this Giants thing with Saquon is interesting to me not only because I’m a fan but when I look at the Giants I see that they are not paying any skill position players on offense. None of their “skill” players are making double digit millions.
I know Andrew Thomas on the OL is about to get paid and DJ got his money but they aren’t paying anyone else.
efactor
Footballguy
That's 3 days. Get it done! I'll assume everyone is available to work the weekend
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
It's just a sucky situation. Saquon is likely worth the money he's asking for this year. Maybe next year as well. But almost certainly not after that when he's 28 and will likely lose a few steps.
Putting themselves in each other's shoes, you can understand why Saquon wants to maximize his one and only chance for a big contract. Likewise, you can also understand why the Giants don't want to lock themselves into a longer high priced deal at a position where that rarely works out well for guys this age. And it's not like the Giants are Super Bowl favorites that can sell out the future for this year or anything.
Like @Anarchy99 said, it's just a sucky situation. And the really scary part is that Saquon was a reasonably young rookie and still is going to have trouble getting a good 2nd deal. Imagine if a guy like Najee Harris were a 1st round pick and ended up being a stud. He'll be 28 by the time he finishes up his 5th year and even if he were the greatest RB in NFL history he'd end up going his whole career without ever getting a big contract.
Putting themselves in each other's shoes, you can understand why Saquon wants to maximize his one and only chance for a big contract. Likewise, you can also understand why the Giants don't want to lock themselves into a longer high priced deal at a position where that rarely works out well for guys this age. And it's not like the Giants are Super Bowl favorites that can sell out the future for this year or anything.
Like @Anarchy99 said, it's just a sucky situation. And the really scary part is that Saquon was a reasonably young rookie and still is going to have trouble getting a good 2nd deal. Imagine if a guy like Najee Harris were a 1st round pick and ended up being a stud. He'll be 28 by the time he finishes up his 5th year and even if he were the greatest RB in NFL history he'd end up going his whole career without ever getting a big contract.
zamboni
Footballguy
Yes, hopefully not just Loverboy.That's 3 days. Get it done! I'll assume everyone is available to work the weekend
zamboni
Footballguy
I'm sure the Giants would disagree having made the playoffs last year, having a great draft, and not exactly a dominant NFC.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Well sure, I'm sure they have some optimism and are going for it to some extent, but it's not like they're sitting on Tom Brady with 2 years left on his deal knowing it's now or never and they've got a great shot at it.
Giants SB odds on gambling sites are surprisingly terrible. Tied for 3rd to last with the Falcons/Panthers at 66:1.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose. I see the Giants as a team that allowed more points than they scored last year, could easily have won 7 or 8 games, and ended the regular season 2-4-1. Yes, they beat the Vikings . . . who had a season for the ages themselves in terms of their record in one score games (ie, they had a very fortunate record). Even though the NFC isn't exactly loaded, I could easily see the Giants with a losing record.
As far as Barkley goes, the league-wide stance on running backs isn't that far off. They are a pretty disposable asset these days, and teams can usually find a cheap of young option with fresh legs that can be a suitable alternative. By that I mean, why should the Giants pay Barkley $16M to produce 1500 or 1600 YFS when they could pay two players $1.5M a piece to combine for 1300-1400 YFS? From a team building / cap management perspective, that probably makes more sense than breaking the bank for Barkley. Those guys won't be as good as Saquon, but they wouldn't cost anywhere near as much. That's the cold, harsh reality of what teams are choosing to do.
As far as elite first round RB go, being under team control for 7 years could chew up their best years and come with an onerous workload that would leave them in a pickle to get a high dollar second contract. Better backs coming out of college should not be paid LESS than less productive backs coming out of college across their NFL careers. That just doesn't make sense. As to the point that guys would happily accept the second year franchise tag, that's ignoring all the other years where they likely got run into the ground for below market pay.
Yeah, I also get that a non-first round pick could have a similar path (a 4-year contract and 2 franchise tags) and the only difference would be the 5th year option, but that one-year difference could cost the first round pick a few million dollars. In this day and age, we aren't going to see RBs play 10-, 12-, 15- years like players in other positions. Their shelf life is a lot less and their pay scale is very low. It probably the worst position to play in the NFL when you combine all those factors.
zamboni
Footballguy
Fair - Vegas doesn't have much optimism on them, but I'm sure Daboll and his bosses aren't concerned what Vegas thinks. In any case, I'm sure that little to do with how they are positioning themselves in the Barkley discussions.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
The two potentially best NFC teams this year (Philly and Dallas) are in their division though - although your point still stands.
zamboni
Footballguy
True - just saying they don’t have to go through KC/Cincinnati/Buffalo and maybe even the upstart Jags.
The Frankman
Footballguy
Tell me the two players they can sign right now that can 80% replace Saquon @Anarchy99 , because you're forgetting the biggest albatross in this situation: Saquon has shown he's good enough to carry the offense while lugging around Daniel Jones. Whomever the Giants sign has to be good enough as a inside runner and pass catcher to do that, and those other RBs outside of Saquon currently are not on the Giants roster.
If the Giants trot out Matt Brieda and Gary Brightwell next year unless the offense changes to stop holding Daniel Jones' hand and he somehow learns how to win games by himself, the Giants are going 5-12, maybe 6-11 with good behavior. That's the other reason you pay Saquon 14/14.5 million, because the structure of the O Brian Daboll runs, he is what makes it go and the Giants don't have an in-house effective replacement, nor is their one in FA readily available.
If the Giants trot out Matt Brieda and Gary Brightwell next year unless the offense changes to stop holding Daniel Jones' hand and he somehow learns how to win games by himself, the Giants are going 5-12, maybe 6-11 with good behavior. That's the other reason you pay Saquon 14/14.5 million, because the structure of the O Brian Daboll runs, he is what makes it go and the Giants don't have an in-house effective replacement, nor is their one in FA readily available.
greenmountaingoat
Footballguy
I think Cook still has some explosive runs left in him. He’s the obvious dude with tread left on the tires.
I think zeke would be an above average short yardage plus pass pro guy.
Not sure how much less those two cost but it answers the question imo.
I didn’t watch much Lenny, Hunt, Henderson etc to get much of a sense for what they have left as passing game rbs. Lenny and Hunt lost a step, not sure what the deal is with Henderson.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
This is the reality of today's NFL.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Here's part of the problem with what you are asking. You want an immediate fix for a situation that has been a very long time in developing and playing out. The Giants should have had a contingency plan and other options available to them to avoid putting themselves in the situation they are in now. For example, someone knows they will need a new car soon, but they wait until the one they have breaks down and the only one available is a Ferrari . . . with better planning, they could have avoided that siutation.
There are other players available RIGHT NOW that could absorb a lot of the workload and production that Saquan did, especially if NY signed two of them: Cook, Hunt, Zeke, Fournette, Drake, Gordon, Henderson, Mack, etc. No, they wouldn't do everything that Barkley does, but the point is they could get some decent production from two guys for less money. Better still, load their contracts with incentives, and that makes them cheap and low risk. Those are RIGHT NOW options. But there are bound to be other BEFORE THE SEASON STARTS options . . . guys that will get cut, guys that could be available for trade before they get cut, young guys that end up on the practice squad somewhere, etc.
The year Barkley got hurt, the Giants collective RB corps of retreads once he went down cobbled together 1560 YFS and 12 TD. Collectively, they put up numbers in vicinity. Individually, they weren't as good, they weren't as dynamic, and they were not really a threat to take any play the distance. But they were serviceable. They still ranked 13th in the league in YPC.
You brought up Daboll. His offenses over the years included:
- A banged up and injured Jamal Lewis that was past his prime
- A season out of nowhere from Peyton Hillis
- A solid overall season from Reggie Bush
- An exceptional season from Jamaal Charles
- Four seasons in BUF where two guys shared the load (McCoy and Ivory, Singletary and Gore, Singletary and Moss x 2)
Daboll has managed backfields with stars, with no names, with old guys, with young guys, with RBBC, and just about any combination out there. I am sure he could work around having two lesser backs and having more money to apply to other positions. But that last part really doesn't come into play much at this stage . . . rosters for all teams are mostly set, there aren't really many difference makers available (except, oddly enough, at RB). In the current RB market, Barkley is demanding what it would cost to roster two Top 10 backs . . . or three very good backs. Yeah, I get it, heading into August you can't usually just head over to the RB store and buy guys like that, but this you there are actually several guys where you could do that.
Soulfly3
Footballguy
Do you sign 3 600yd WRs to replace Jefferson or Chase?
