Too bad for Saquon
- Thread starter bdgan
- Start date
I don't feel bad for Saquon at all. He's my favorite player since Poz but he's being ridiculous in this situation. The RB market is what it is. Given his injury history the money he was allegedly offered is more than fair. Plus, he's getting over 10M this season--there doesn't need to be a highest bidder. I know is largely about your inability to accept college football has changed but Saquon's acting like a brat.
He needs to sign something and play for someone: The last time a running back did this it was the end of his career in every way. Sitting out makes you look greedy and petty and he needs to understand that.
Now you have inside info on what’s going on with Barkley’s negotiation…the narcissism is frightening.
What are you talking about? Read the article on CBSSports which includes many Saquon's own words. You have to stop pretending you being naïve makes me narcissistic. It's okay for you not to be a biased homer 24-7.
This is exactly what I’m talking about…you’re the biggest narcissist on this board. I’m not naive just because I disagree with your take and I’m not being a homer. The RB market means shit when you’re talking about the Giants. The RB market has gone down because the game has switched to being about QB’s and WR’s…two things the Giants don’t have. Barkley is their offense, so you pay him because you need him regardless of what the rest of the league is doing. Without him, they won’t win 6 games.
That is my take. He doesn't play? Giants don't break .500. He gets hurt? Giants don't break .500 unless they have 9 wins the day he gets hurt.
If he plays, AND your other signings are good, Giants make the playoffs. Then, who knows. They've gotten hot and won a SB before.
Agree…seems to me teams should do what’s best for them regardless of what the market is doing. If most teams were run oriented and RB’s were getting paid the most, should the Chiefs not pay Mahomes just because other teams don’t really need their QB’s? If you’ve got a player that wins you games, you pay him regardless of what position he plays.
Giants believe they have their QB. He looked it against the Vikes...didn't against Philly. RBs, even elite ones like Barkley, no longer have the same value. You can say anything you want about the rest of the Giants players at the skill position but they're not paying Barkley and now they don't even have the option to. The option is the tag. That's it. Those are the rules and Barkley knew them. If he decides to sit this year the Giants will tag him again next year. The hand sucks but he has to play the one he was dealt. All the RBs need to accept this. It sucks but it won't change.
I’ve watched every Giants games since Barkley has been there, they don’t have their QB. If GM’s are making decisions based on what everyone else is doing, they should be fired. They can make whatever decisions they want, but without Barkley they will be lucky to win 6 games and I doubt it will be that many.
Running backs are not compensated fairly in the NFL. Saquon is hardly acting like a brat. He is employing the only negotiating leverage he has—withholding his services. I don’t think he will be successful and if it doesn’t, he would be foolish not ultimately play under the tag.
How are they not compensated fairly? RBs lack value in today's NFL. That's just a reality
Barkley is a special back but RBs split carries too much in this early era to pay him. Look at the Panthers trading McCaffrey. Dalvin Cook literally can't find a job.
In most cases, RB’s do lack value in the NFL, but not in the Giants case. He’s the only value they have. If he played for a team like the Chiefs or the Bills, I would agree he shouldn’t get what he’s asking….but when you’re pretty much the entire offense, you deserve to be paid accordingly regardless of what other RB’s get paid. If he sits out and the Giants finish in last place (which they will), at least the GM can sit back comfortably knowing he followed the market.
The Giants will finish last without Barkley? LOL. Same Barkley who averaged 54 yards a game the second half of last season? has missed 27% of their games with injury the past 5 years? And his best season was 5 years ago. You think they should cut a few players so they can afford to overpay for him? OK then. Glad you're not their GM. If he sits out, he's being stupid. Speaking of finishing last in the division, that's exactly what the Giants did WITH Barkley 2 of the last 5 years. Including his best season with them.
Last edited:
He’s anything but a brat. He knows what he is doing. Unlike most of his NFL peers, he is prepared for life after football. He has not spent one penny of his NFL money. He lives below the level he could considering his endorsement income. He could retire now and live quite well.
Let’s see what that $200M quarterback can do without the threat of Saquon in the backfield.
That's not true though. The Giants have added weapons around him and they did offer him a fair contract based on all reports. Saquon needs to play under the tag. We have to stop pretending 10.1M is insulting to him.
He isn't getting paid what HE thinks he's worth and in your world he is acting like a brat -mmm OK. I know your shtick is to say the opposite of everyone else.
Then retire if he wants to retire.
What happens if the Giants don't miss a beat without him?
I'm literally critical of all RBs right now. The issue is people like someone and can't be honest. Saquon is one of my favorite players--all time--but he's wrong in this situation. He has to understand the market.
So its Barkley's fault that the Giants sucked before they got him with that 2nd pick and that they have failed to build a winner around him.
Then they look smart. Simple. Further erodes the worth of RBs in the process. Owners and GMs can pop some bubbly.
And then Barkley has zero market. Saquon even considering Bell's path disappointing IMO
Also Barkley is obviously way better than Breida but let's not pretend Breida didn't average over 4 yards a carry last year and prior to that pretty mich everywhere he's been. He can be productive. Again, not comparing him to Barkley but it's not like their backup is a UDFA that has never played.
As with all jobs and professions the labor market sets the going rate. Holding out isn’t going to change the market. Labor is a commodity. Plus it could cost SB $10m. L. Bell tried and it didn’t work.
Who's trying to help the situation? The Giants will tag Barkley for as long as they can if they believe they want him on the team. As they should and are allowed to do. Saquon doesn't have any leverage other than to throw away years of his prime.
Yes, last without Barkley. Why did his numbers drop in the second half of the season? Because all their receivers got hurt, so the defenses keyed entirely on Barkley which allowed Jones to have some success running, which combined with Barkley was the only reason they didn’t lose the rest of their games. They have added some talent since Barkley’s first few years, but it’s only enough to win about 6 games without Barkley….with him they make the playoffs….I guess not paying him and not making the playoffs makes a good GM.
The GM correctly tagged him and offered him between approx 20M in guaranteed money per reports. The GM has yet to do anything wrong regarding Barkley. Not saying he won't eventually but thus far he hasn't. Truthfully you're overvaluing Barkley because you're underestimating Jones...or at least not valuing Jones as the Giants do who is all that matters
It’s not the 10 mil that’s insulting, it’s the not giving him a longer term contract with better guarantees that’s insulting. The “fair” contract you post about is only what we hear from the Giants side of things. According to the Barkley side, there were things in it that weren’t fair. Please point to one thing in Barkley’s entire life that leads anyone to think he’s a greedy money grubber who’s all about himself. I’ll wait.
From everything I’ve read, it was 16M guaranteed, but whatever the details are, something about it wasn’t acceptable to Barkley and I doubt it was the amount. I underestimate Jones because I’ve watched every game he’s played and he’s an average QB at best and without Barkley on the field, he’s below average. Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think the best way to win is to lose your best player.
They offered him a longer contract. He's refusing to accept what is the current market for a RB. What says he's not? Being smart with money doesn't make you not greedy. First contract extension is showing a lot.
You don't overpay someone ever. Especially with guaranteed money at the most replaceable position on the field in this era. This isn't anti-Saquon. This is football today. He was tagged he knows the rules. Pay under it and test free agency next year. Bell was bashed for what he did. Barkley’s the same.
Barkley and his agent have said it’s not about the amount, it’s about the details. Without knowing all the details or what Barkley is thinking, it’s all guess work.
Similar threads
