Giants sign Daniel Jones (4 years/$160 million)

[cnuball21]

Daniel Jones being better than Dak? No one should ever agree or give any interest to these posters. The asinine statements must stop.

It is understandable that you don't like Dak, but if Jones were on this team, the same posters would be irate with his play.

Let me try, currently, Zeke is just as good or better than Henry.

It’s hilarious…grass is always greener.

 

[FanofJerry]

Well...what excuse do the Gaslighters moonlighting as Arm-Chair GM's have to say about this?

That NFL Execs are ignorant?

I suspect that actual Front Offices have to factor in the weight of quite a few more things that couch GM's refuse to include(for convenience) when constructing QB contracts. Actually...I think anti-pay QB crowd just want to gaslight.

 

[Flamma]

the rookie deals have a 5th year option. Teams can flip that switch if they want. Apparently the Eagles might do his deal sooner rather than later but its stalling because of what the agent is asking for. Howie Roseman will never pay that much.

Rookie first round picks have 5th year options. That's it.

 

[Rayman70]

Rookie first round picks have 5th year options. That's it.

thats what I just said.

 

[quickccc]

wow, They pulled it off.

i didn't think a deal for Daniel would be done in time, and they would have to tag Jones, and let Barkley walk as a FA.

Thus ends my worry for Barkley to the Eagles. ..

 

[CowboyoWales]

Huh?

We were in trade discussions with Cooks last year and tried to sign OBJ last year after realizing the front office messed up with the WR room.

I’m saying DJ is not that good. Which is why WRs he’s played with have been better elsewhere.

Which could also be levelled at our WR's after playing with Dak ie Coop.
The problem with your point about the WR room is that in certain games (Eagles and Buccs) it was OK....the issue may be Dak. That's the reason why it's sensible to identify the reason for the failure (MM's and his play calling are on the block).
There doesn't appear a consensus, looking at the tweets and reports on here, between: Jerry, Stephen, Mike and Dak as to what's the best way forward (highlighted by the recent complemetary comments from Dak about KM).

 

[cnuball21]

Which could also be levelled at our WR's after playing with Dak ie Coop.
The problem with your point about the WR room is that in certain games (Eagles and Buccs) it was OK....the issue may be Dak. That's the reason why it's sensible to identify the reason for the failure (MM's and his play calling are on the block).
There doesn't appear a consensus, looking at the tweets and reports on here, between: Jerry, Stephen, Mike and Dak as to what's the best way forward (highlighted by the recent complemetary comments from Dak about KM).

Cooper had his best season as a pro when healthy in Dallas.

No, you’re missing my point. The problem is this FO is expecting Dak to be perfect with a crap WR room, like he was against PHI / TB, and expecting him to do that all the time which is impossible. Mahomes is the only QB in football who can win with a slightly lesser cast but even he had a better OL and weapons last year.

I’m honestly not sure Jerry cares anymore. When Dak was on a rookie deal he didn’t push the chips in to make a serious run. Now that Dak is paid he’s acting like he can’t give him more weapons - which in reality is false bc creating a ton of cap room is feasible with a few restructures / cuts.

The best path forward is easy - look at the other great teams in football and how loaded they are on offense. Continue to work towards that - if Dak is the QB it helps him go further. If they move on it helps the next guy be setup for success. Jerry just needs to quit with his used car salesman BS blaming it on not having the cap space - make it.

 

[DandyDon52]

Yep, but the paradox is that the only realistic way of competing is when Dak extends and we can kick money down the road into signing bonus. Big contracts are cyclical, in Dak's case, the real window to compete was in the years 2021 and 2022, however, we were chasing our tail as the CAP situation was so dire.
@cnuball21, this is the real reason why you cant/shouldnt restructure all of our contracts this year in a vain attempt compete (whist Da's contract is so high AND WE'RE KICKING MONEY INTO THE VOID 2025 YEAR).......If we kick the money (to free up a net $40m on FA's) then the VOID year which is already over 7% of the CAP gets increased that it wipes out the benefit of the cheap Dak restructure.

Extending dak will create a low cap hit for dal 23 and 24 ,so they have to make a run in the next 2 years.
after that it depends on what kind of raise he gets, and if he still has the no trade clause to evaluate 25 up.
The chiefs and mahomes were smart doing the 10 year deal , as it gives them plenty of room to work during mahomes prime years.
Plus as the cap and qb salarys go up , his salary wont seem that big.

It all depends on what the extension numbers etc for dak turn out to be.
Last time jones boys wanted a 6yr deal, dak wanted 4 years, and that hurt the team but will get him a payraise.
He isnt going to sign an ext for 42 mil a year lol.

 

[doomsday9084]

Overpaid.

Between Carr, Jones and Smith that's a lot of years of contracts given out. I highly, highly doubt that any of their teams win or even get to a super bowl during any of their contracts.

If your goal is to win the big prize, you don't give 2nd and 3rd tier QB's 20% of the cap.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Extending dak will create a low cap hit for dal 23 and 24 ,so they have to make a run in the next 2 years.
after that it depends on what kind of raise he gets, and if he still has the no trade clause to evaluate 25 up.
The chiefs and mahomes were smart doing the 10 year deal , as it gives them plenty of room to work during mahomes prime years.
Plus as the cap and qb salarys go up , his salary wont seem that big.

It all depends on what the extension numbers etc for dak turn out to be.
Last time jones boys wanted a 6yr deal, dak wanted 4 years, and that hurt the team but will get him a payraise.
He isnt going to sign an ext for 42 mil a year lol.

My thoughts were that we don't restructure (much) of Dak's 2023 CAP (there are other ways of putting a decent team on a par with 2022).
The worst thing we can do (imo) is heavily restructure his 2023 CAP, as we aren't certain where the problem lies. Our real window of opportunity (if it's with Dak) will be behind a restructured extension where the remaining contract is ripped up and we restructure the remaining CAP.
I know he's not signing a 42m extension, but the way contracts work is that via prorated bonus you have cheaper first couple of years (followed by painful years), at least that way we have more CAP available for an All-in push.

 

[FanofJerry]

Overpaid.

Between Carr, Jones and Smith that's a lot of years of contracts given out. I highly, highly doubt that any of their teams win or even get to a super bowl during any of their contracts.

If your goal is to win the big prize, you don't give 2nd and 3rd tier QB's 20% of the cap.

I think all the anti-20% crowd wants to focus on is money vs Super Bowls. There is so much more that real GM's have to consider....but that crowd doesnt want to talk about that. They just want to point to a player and say overpaid.

How long has this been talked about now in the internet age? Its been at least 10 years now. Does that crowd not think Front Offices are aware of what fan forums and couch GM's are saying about QB pay? Does this crowd really think Front Offices are that unaware? There are 32 teams with multiple people in each Front Office at competitive jobs and salaries which cause those individuals to constantly be looking for ideas. Why have the 32 Front Offices not veered off course and followed the incessant shouting to not pay QB's who havent won a Super Bowl? Why? Can anyone reasonably answer this question without being lazy and just saying "They're stupid, thats why"

There are factors that real GM's have to take into consideration that couch GM's refuse to consider. But that crowd doesnt want to here that and just wants to argue until the end of time about it. Yet none of the people in that crowd have Front Office positions or any significant position.

 

[Flamma]

thats what I just said.

No, you said rookie contracts had 5th year options. Hurts was a 2nd round pick. He doesn't have a 5th year option.

 

[MikeT22]

Best RB and WRs? Best OL. In 20 and 21 that OL was a joke. Zeke hasn’t been good in years. WRs? Please. You guys still putting Cooper in the Hall to justify the Dak bashing? Did we forget about why they traded for Cooper? Spin away…

You’re right, we didn’t have a pro bowler at every position and the last seven years, which it will apparently take to have a chance to go deep in the playoffs with Dak at QB.

 

[Big_D]

Elite talent??? Schultz is elite? That’s a take. Cooper was elite? Gallup elite? That’s also a take. Lamb borders on elite and that just started this year. TB and McGovern and Steele and Williams elite? Smith was elite but he is always hurt but I guess you think he is elite on IR. Zeke’s been elite all this time? Who knew?

Dallas having elite talent across the board on offense is pretty funny.

Pretending the Giants are in the same category talent wise is even funnier!

 

[doomsday9084]

I think all the anti-20% crowd wants to focus on is money vs Super Bowls. There is so much more that real GM's have to consider....but that crowd doesnt want to talk about that. They just want to point to a player and say overpaid.

How long has this been talked about now in the internet age? Its been at least 10 years now. Does that crowd not think Front Offices are aware of what fan forums and couch GM's are saying about QB pay? Does this crowd really think Front Offices are that unaware? There are 32 teams with multiple people in each Front Office at competitive jobs and salaries which cause those individuals to constantly be looking for ideas. Why have the 32 Front Offices not veered off course and followed the incessant shouting to not pay QB's who havent won a Super Bowl? Why? Can anyone reasonably answer this question without being lazy and just saying "They're stupid, thats why"

There are factors that real GM's have to take into consideration that couch GM's refuse to consider. But that crowd doesnt want to here that and just wants to argue until the end of time about it. Yet none of the people in that crowd have Front Office positions or any significant position.

Jerry Reinsdorf (owner of Bulls and White Sox), once famously said that 2nd place is the best place. His reasoning was that it draws in fans and doesn't necessarily dictate as much risk.

I think this is the elephant in the room. If a team like NY just gives Jones away, they might struggle for a few years to acquire and train a new QB. That will lead to a loss of fan interest and possibly a pink slip for the GM. When GM's give out these type of deals, they are protecting their own rear ends (or with Jerry, profit). 11-6 and a playoff loss is better than 4-13 for these front offices.

So, no, I don't think the GM's are stupid. I just think they are trapped. That still doesn't make giving a 2nd or 3rd tier QB 20% of the cap a route to the super bowl.

I also think that QB scarcity is going down. I strongly suspect that with a good coach and offensive line, you can plug in a random QB and get good results. GM's just don't want to bet their jobs on that though.

 

[CowboyoWales]

I think all the anti-20% crowd wants to focus on is money vs Super Bowls. There is so much more that real GM's have to consider....but that crowd doesnt want to talk about that. They just want to point to a player and say overpaid.

How long has this been talked about now in the internet age? Its been at least 10 years now. Does that crowd not think Front Offices are aware of what fan forums and couch GM's are saying about QB pay? Does this crowd really think Front Offices are that unaware? There are 32 teams with multiple people in each Front Office at competitive jobs and salaries which cause those individuals to constantly be looking for ideas. Why have the 32 Front Offices not veered off course and followed the incessant shouting to not pay QB's who havent won a Super Bowl? Why? Can anyone reasonably answer this question without being lazy and just saying "They're stupid, thats why"

There are factors that real GM's have to take into consideration that couch GM's refuse to consider. But that crowd doesnt want to here that and just wants to argue until the end of time about it. Yet none of the people in that crowd have Front Office positions or any significant position.

There's a distinct correlation between QB and CAP%....indeed the outlier was Mahomes with his 17% this last season (and let's be fair he's heading towards being one of the best QB's of all time) and he could lead most any offense.
The facts of the matter is that some owners (Inc Jerry), are more interested in keeping the team relevant (and in with a chance of the play-offs)...by bringing back fan favorites rather than looking to the future and an All-In approach.
Then again there are many on here that want it now and aren't prepared to regroup in roster and CAP to focus on that All-in in the future.

 

[MikeT22]

Well...what excuse do the Gaslighters moonlighting as Arm-Chair GM's have to say about this?

That NFL Execs are ignorant?

Well. Jerry Jones is

 

[FanofJerry]

Jerry Reinsdorf (owner of Bulls and White Sox), once famously said that 2nd place is the best place. His reasoning was that it draws in fans and doesn't necessarily dictate as much risk.

I think this is the elephant in the room. If a team like NY just gives Jones away, they might struggle for a few years to acquire and train a new QB. That will lead to a loss of fan interest and possibly a pink slip for the GM. When GM's give out these type of deals, they are protecting their own rear ends (or with Jerry, profit). 11-6 and a playoff loss is better than 4-13 for these front offices.

So, no, I don't think the GM's are stupid. I just think they are trapped. That still doesn't make giving a 2nd or 3rd tier QB 20% of the cap a route to the super bowl.

I also think that QB scarcity is going down. I strongly suspect that with a good coach and offensive line, you can plug in a random QB and get good results. GM's just don't want to bet their jobs on that though.

At least you gave a reasonable response.

Trapped is the perfect word for it.

No sane individual who worked their way up the ranks is going to risk a 1M+ year job by being risky. Most have a family to feed and a lifestyle to cater to...and they worked hard for that lifestyle. Couch GM's refusing to put themselves in a real GM's shoes is gaslighting. Dak was a perfect example...put up all those stats for 5 years on a cheap deal...and people still never wanted to give the guy a good paycheck for 5 years of cheap employment. Its disgusting. Not only that....but those same posters dont want to factor in not only losing a great job....but if you let Dak go based on his stats and play and let him walk to a division rival and beat you in the Playoffs, you will be the laughing stock of the NFL. But that crowd doesnt want to factor in those pressures that a REAL GM has. Gaslighting.

Couple that with not wanting to waste the careers of other stars at other positions on your team by letting decent QB's go looking for a Tom Brady...GM's are in tough spots. And paying busdrivers is the safest play. But no one wants to factor in any of the real pressures.

It is a trap so to speak. I think the League should take a look at it and figure out a way to manage this trap. QB agents arent being reasonable...and GM's are the ones getting toasted. I think the League should figure this with a cap on percentage or a fair bonus structure of some sort for QBs. I get that being a GM is about managing the money and its their fault for bad contracts and not the Leagues. But unless the League steps in...I dont see GM's changing course which means this same OLD debate just rages on unfortunately.

 

[Rayman70]

No, you said rookie contracts had 5th year options. Hurts was a 2nd round pick. He doesn't have a 5th year option.

My bad. I forgot he was a 2nd. So my guess is if his agent keeps pushing he will wait til year 4. Roseman wont pay that.

 

[thunderpimp91]

I think all the anti-20% crowd wants to focus on is money vs Super Bowls. There is so much more that real GM's have to consider....but that crowd doesnt want to talk about that. They just want to point to a player and say overpaid.

How long has this been talked about now in the internet age? Its been at least 10 years now. Does that crowd not think Front Offices are aware of what fan forums and couch GM's are saying about QB pay? Does this crowd really think Front Offices are that unaware? There are 32 teams with multiple people in each Front Office at competitive jobs and salaries which cause those individuals to constantly be looking for ideas. Why have the 32 Front Offices not veered off course and followed the incessant shouting to not pay QB's who havent won a Super Bowl? Why? Can anyone reasonably answer this question without being lazy and just saying "They're stupid, thats why"

There are factors that real GM's have to take into consideration that couch GM's refuse to consider. But that crowd doesnt want to here that and just wants to argue until the end of time about it. Yet none of the people in that crowd have Front Office positions or any significant position.

You're not wrong, but it still doesn't make overpaying QBs the right move to make either. I think the issue has to do with owners being content with winning seasons over championships as that keeps selling tickets, meanwhile GMs tend to have short leashes in todays game and one wrong move, especially about a QB could lead to a 3-14 year that gets you fired. This is the piece that surprises me about the Cowboys as their GM has the ultimate job security.

Many teams have started to veer off track though. Indy has been going the discount QB route for a few years now. Vegas just dumped their big money QB. Seattle moved on from Russell Wilson and had success with his backup. Green Bay seems to have grown tired of the Aaron Rodgers games, and Lamar Jackson is being allowed to test the market. It used to be a very rare thing to see a name QB actually hit either the trade or free agency market, now it happens every single year.

I think it's a fascinating conversation that gets even more interesting now that the league has expanded the playoffs to 14 teams where 9 wins should get you in more often than not. I'm sure some teams will think they can be in the playoffs every year with a quality QB, meanwhile others may say better stay in the hunt year after year with dedicating more resources to other positions.

Looking at the results we really don't have a clear answer either. Last years conference championship games offered 3 QBs on rookie deals, but the team to win it all was a big dollar QB. Most teams that made it had QBs on rookie deals (Baltimore, Miami, Cincinnati, Jacksonville, Philly, SF, LA, NYG). Some had big dollar deals (Dallas, KC, Minnesota, Buffalo). Others had unusual situations (Tampa, which Brady is notorious for taking less money. Seattle who used a veteran backup)

I think the Lamar Jackson situation going on right now is a very interesting one to keep an eye on. It seems especially interesting with how many teams are reportedly not interested too. I just look at what Denver gave up just a year ago for Russel Wilson and thought there would be no shortage of interested teams in Lamar.