Giants sign Saquon Barkley to 1 year deal

Point-of-the-Star

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,208
Reaction score
3,272
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
Barkley obviously is a very good back. In the right setting he could have been mentioned in the same breath with some of the great ones. Having said that he'll just be a footnote in the NFL RB book.

He'll make the NYG offense pesky but he has never been a Cowboy killer. The NFCE race just got a little bit tighter though.
 

baltcowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,037
Reaction score
17,747
Good, I don’t want any excuses when we play them opening night. I have a bad feeling that the Cowboys will have contract issues with Martin, Diggs, CeeDee, and Steele that the media is going to talk about all summer long. Nobody is taking a discount when your organization makes a billion dollars a year off of non football revenue.
 

baltcowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,037
Reaction score
17,747
The reason why Saquon signed is the endorsement money he makes by playing for the Giants. He probably makes as much money with endorsements in NY as he does with the tag. Saquon had no choice.
 

vlad

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,482
Reaction score
2,407
Wow, threatened to hold out games and got a new deal for this season…people here told me that doesn’t work
Imagine being the jackwagon that says the current highest RB contract is the "floor" (and you are NOT the agent but the team!!!) and then you sign the dude to a $90M contract. Nepotism is a great thing.

This seems as MoVaughn said a complete fold on his part when they had their summit and realized they are a dime a dozen.
 

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,683
Reaction score
12,796
So he's not playing on the tag which means he can get tagged again next year without the multiple tag penalty and compensation increase? And for essentially the same $$. Feels like insider trading.
Franchise tag is one of 2 things: either the current tag number or 20% more than than player made the previous season, whichever is higher.

So even though next year will only count as his first tag it’ll be over 13m$ because of this contract, which is slightly more than a second franchise tag would have been
 

The Quest for Six

Well-Known Member
Messages
20,530
Reaction score
20,651
Big Tough talk Barkley ended up getting nothing long term but a franchise tag signing and 900,000 in incentives and will be his last year with the Giants when they draft a running back in next years draft...I guess he should have signed a deal last year when I believe the Giants were offering 13 mil a season...
 

movaughn88

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
3,442
Franchise tag is one of 2 things: either the current tag number or 20% more than than player made the previous season, whichever is higher.

So even though next year will only count as his first tag it’ll be over 13m$ because of this contract, which is slightly more than a second franchise tag would have been
Ah ok then I'm corrected on that, but still a fold imo. To be fair - its the correct decision. All that bluster in the press wasn't gonna change the market.
 

NeathBlue

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,001
Reaction score
1,604
So he's not playing on the tag which means he can get tagged again next year without the multiple tag penalty and compensation increase? And for essentially the same $$. Feels like insider trading.
If he plays the next two seasons on a tag after this year, he’ll make close to $40 million over the three years…
I’d say if that happens, he’s had a great deal.
 

Redsfan_83

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,154
Reaction score
5,143
What is utterly stupid is watching talk shows this morning (aka. ESPN) and they are suggesting that if he has another 1,000 yard season his value will drop next year due to age, etc. Wasn't part of the issue signing him to a long term deal is his injury past? Now, if he has a 2nd year in a row great season how can his value go down? He's only 27....the Giants won this in the end IMO
 
Top