Giants Should Sign Barkley

[uconnjack8]

I think I am probably in the minority but I really think signing Barkley to a 4 year extension (or new deal) is the right thing to do. 

First, let's get this out in the open:  I am a huge Barkley fan and loved it when they drafted him.  I watch all Penn St games and was awed by his ability to take over games even with limited blocking. He has said the right things and done the right things as a Giant. He is a local guy as well.  I could go on, but I think the point is made.  I am not denying that my emotion is playing into this thought process.

However, there are certainly logical reasons to sign him. 

He is the offense's MVP and best player(you could argue Andrew Thomas is the best player).  He is elite at his position and is the focal point for opposing defenses' game plan.   In other words, he makes everyone around him better because they have to plan for him. That leaves practice squad receivers single covered.  That gives Daniel Jones extra time to throw when there is a play fake.

When OBJ was jettisoned one of the criticisms was that teams shouldn't get rid of elite difference makers at skill positions.   I think that applies here.  The Giants are building a team, you do that with great cornerstone players and he is absolutely one of them. 

Last year I didn't feel the same way, partially because his play wasn't as well rounded as it is this year.  His blocking was subpar which he turned around and he didn't run downhill, which has also changed.   He makes those tough runs between the tackles that were absent in prior years. Those two things also show he is coachable and a player that is continually looking to improve.  That shouldn't go unnoticed, especially for a guy of his talent. He is a complete RB with absurd abilities for his size and has the right mental makeup.

In terms of cost, the highest paid RB now has a contract that averages 16M/year.  If they offered a contract of 17M/year that is still only about 65% of what teams pay for WRs of the same level (best WRs are averaging 25 - 30 million/year).  And he touches the ball a lot more than any WR. In that way he is an absolute bargain for a difference maker. 

His injuries are a concern but I think we can agree he has fully healed.  Will he have another major injury?  No one knows that.  WRs get injured too (see Jamarr Chase for reference).  I do think he has at least 4 solid years left and for him that means being among the league leaders in yards from scrimmage. He was that as a rookie with an awful line and he is that right now with a better but not great line.  Add a difference maker at WR and this offense could be a juggernaut.   

Let him walk and you get a comp pick and an offense that takes a huge step backwards and probably a lower level of play from guys that benefit from him being there.

[True Blue]

I agree, just less than 17m, would he take less? Should be an interesting thing to watch this offseason.

[Rambo89]

RBs don't hold up well at all especially on their 2nd contracts.  You're seeing that in Dallas with Elliot.

I would use the franchise tag on Barkley to bring him back in 2023 but would not sign him to an extension.

[uconnjack8]

RBs don't hold up well at all especially on their 2nd contracts.  You're seeing that in Dallas with Elliot.

I would use the franchise tag on Barkley to bring him back in 2023 but would not sign him to an extension.

I would argue Elliot had a lot more mileage on those legs than Barkley will when the 2nd contract comes.

One edit to add:

If you franchise him this year and then plan to no sign him, you better have accumulated enough talent to not take a big step backwards in year 3 of a regime.

[Jclayton92]

I wouldn't mind a frontloaded 3yr 48 million deal with incentives based on health.

[Rosehill Jimmy]

It really comes down to the value Schoen/Daboll put on the position. They may already have a $ in mind beyond which they just won't go for a RB, even if he's been touched by the hands of God. 

[babywhales]

Schoen will trade barkley if he isn't resigning him 

If he is on team Nov 2 he will be resigned 

[AZGiantFan]

I wouldn't do more than tagging him.  And frankly, if they were 4-3 or 3-4 - which they could easily be - I'd be trying to trade him for a McCaffey-like haul.

[Slugsy-Narrows]

I wouldn't do more than tagging him.  And frankly, if they were 4-3 or 3-4 - which they could easily be - I'd be trying to trade him for a McCaffey-like haul.

He could/should get more then that with the season he is having


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MightyGiants]

@uconnjack8

I am still not sure this is a good idea owing to the short shelf life of RBs, but your compelling case has me thinking.

[B1GBLUE]

We have a lot of money next year, and still quite devoid of talent. barkley is a true superstar. elite talent. if we had more of that, i would probably let him walk. but we need firepower. and he brings it. i'd keep it a short deal because obviously rb's dont last forever. but i think he still has 3 more super productive years in him, probably more. he's not just a guy that benefits from a great line. he can truly make things happen. i think you gotta keep him.

[MagicRat]

As has been said, I think we tag (on the assumption he stays healthy going forward) then assuming he has an effective and healthy tag year,  we look at a three year, heavily front loaded, contract.
I just don't trust the longevity of any RB these days.

[Bob In PA]

How many times can they tag him under current rules?

[uconnjack8]

How many times can they tag him under current rules?

Bob,

They can tag him three times, but the 2nd year costs 120% of the 1st and then the 3rd costs 144% of the 2nd.

So its cost prohibitive.

[DaveBrown74]

All things considered, my preference would be a pay-as-you-go approach with Barkley, with tagging him this year and then considering a tag for 2024, even though it's more expensive. It still wouldn't be more expensive than a contract, and we'd have the luxury of not being locked in if something happened to him.

Assuming they want to keep him and want to give him a contract, my strong preference would be for a Chubb/Henry style deal (3 years with an easy 2 year out), not a four year. I don't want to be on the hook with ANY running back beyond that 27/28 age threshold, especially one with a major injury history. As it is, I am already not a big fan of paying numbers like $12m-$17m for running backs, but I appreciate how special Barkley has been for us this year and don't mind bringing him back for another year given we're flush next year and he's our only dynamic offensive player.