When Daniel Jones has 32 or more attempts….

[Rambo89]

The Giants are 6-24 in his NFL career in those games.  This season they are 1-3 in games where he has had 32 or more attempts.

IMO there are one of two ways the Giants can go after this season that they can win with.  One is they can chose to retain Daniel Jones for a reasonable cap hit per season.  For me the max I would go is $20 million per season.  If they go in this direction they need to build the team around their running game and a dominant defense.  Which means investments on offense should be on the interior of the offensive line as well as RB depth.  Almost through 4 seasons it's clear that you can win games with Daniel Jones but it's not going to be in a pass heavy offense where you rely upon his arm to pass you to wins.  The wins are going to come with the running game, Jones being efficient and a stingy defense.

The second direction they can go in is moving on from Daniel Jones acquiring a new starting QB building the team around that player whoever it is.

I have no idea which direction this regime will go in especially if they decide to replace Jones but it is clear for me that building a team that centers around Jones and a heavy passing game regardless of who the receivers are is not something that will lead to consistent winning especially after Jones gets his next contract.

[LennG]

You make some good points. The problem today it is much easier to stop a good running game than a good passing game.  want to win, you need to be able to pass when it is necessary and have a good passing game so that defenses can't sell out to just stuffing the LOS to stop the run.
In today's NFL, rules are there to help the passing game and while a stout defense will win for you, you need a QB who can win thru the air.

[Rambo89]

You make some good points. The problem today it is much easier to stop a good running game than a good passing game.  want to win, you need to be able to pass when it is necessary and have a good passing game so that defenses can't sell out to just stuffing the LOS to stop the run.
In today's NFL, rules are there to help the passing game and while a stout defense will win for you, you need a QB who can win thru the air.

I hear you Lenn and that is true.  But I think with a strong deep versatile running game it will open up enough in the passing game to be productive enough on offense to win especially if you're putting more resources into the defense that you would have spend on the QB and WR's. 

My point was more that if you're going to hold onto Daniel Jones you can't ask him or pay him to be something more than he is.  Put the pieces in place so he can be who he is and how the Giants have won this season.

[Giantleap56]

I don't put to much into past regime records. Without receivers and solid TE it's going to be difficult to pass for anyone. Just look at Rodgers he isn't doing so well without top receivers. Same with Stafford. You name it no receivers it's going to be tough for any QB. I mean this teams receivers have fallen hard. The Giants have gone from three thousand yard receivers to none.

[Rambo89]

I don't put to much into past regime records. Without receivers and solid TE it's going to be difficult to pass for anyone. Just look at Rodgers he isn't doing so well without top receivers. Same with Stafford. You name it no receivers it's going to be tough for any QB. I mean this teams receivers have fallen hard. The Giants have gone from three thousand yard receivers to none.

Again he's 1-3 this season when having 32 or more attempts in a game. Take the prior regime and this regime the theme is consistent when Jones is asked to air it out the results most of the time is a loss.  Those are the facts.

[LennG]

I think we can all agree if that is the way the Giants want to go, strong ground game and a stout defense, then hold onto Jones. Personally, I think they can do just as well with a much cheaper QB and achieve the same results.
The problem is Barkley doesn't seem as if he can go an entire year and be a force. That means we need another RB to help our ground game. And if we hold onto Barkley, he won't come cheap. AND also, any RB can get hurt much easier than a QB or WR and if the RB goes down, there goes your season as Jones could never win us enough games by throwing the ball.

[jgrangers2]

Again he's 1-3 this season when having 32 or more attempts in a game. Take the prior regime and this regime the theme is consistent when Jones is asked to air it out the results most of the time is a loss.  Those are the facts.

I think it's fair to point out that this team isn't built to throw the ball regardless of who the QB is and it's clear to the coaching staff wants this to be a run first team. So if we're throwing that much to start with it's because we are chasing the game. Like you said, if we can build a good team around him we can win (think Jimmy G in San Francisco) but that's going to require signing him to a reasonable cap hit.

I think that the only way Jones ends up not being back here next year is if the Giants fall in love with someone like Anthony Richardson in the draft and can guarantee themselves a chance to get him. Even then, Richardson may not be a day 1 starter.

[madbadger]

The problem with paying Jones $20 million is that you also are going to have to pay Barkley somewhere betewwen $10-$14 million. We have roughly $51 million in cap space with needs at receiver, guard, center, middle linebacker and cornerback and several vets due extensions.

If you give Jones that sort of money you significantly limit your ability to upgrade key positions through free agency. So the question really becomes can you win as many games with Taylor and a couple extra quality free agents along the line or versus with Jones and a couple mid round draft picks?

IMHO if you aren't sold on Jones being the guy capable of winning a Super Bowl then why would we strangle the roster with a guy who isn't the answer. Build the roster and go qb shopping in the next draft.

[LennG]

I think it's fair to point out that this team isn't built to throw the ball regardless of who the QB is and it's clear to the coaching staff wants this to be a run first team. So if we're throwing that much to start with it's because we are chasing the game. Like you said, if we can build a good team around him we can win (think Jimmy G in San Francisco) but that's going to require signing him to a reasonable cap hit.

I think that the only way Jones ends up not being back here next year is if the Giants fall in love with someone like Anthony Richardson in the draft and can guarantee themselves a chance to get him. Even then, Richardson may not be a day 1 starter.

What you say can be true--for NOW, but we aren't building a team for the now, but for the future and probably someone like Barkley will be more on the downside of his career, rather than the upside then. To win in the NFL you have to be able to score from anywhere on the field at any time. You need to move the ball in chunks. There are too many things that go wrong with a 10-yard at a time offense, especially with the way the game is being officiated these days.
For this year, maybe next, we need to put pieces in place to build a winner for the future, and a team built on a big-time ground game, well, how many of them win championships?

[Rambo89]

I think that the only way Jones ends up not being back here next year is if the Giants fall in love with someone like Anthony Richardson in the draft and can guarantee themselves a chance to get him. Even then, Richardson may not be a day 1 starter.

And that's fine if Jones is back next season for me.  If he is back I believe it would be a major mistake to go all in with a pass heavy offense stacking up on weapons.  Taking away cap space and resources from other units will be counterproductive and not result in more wins.

The problem with paying Jones $20 million is that you also are going to have to pay Barkley somewhere betewwen $10-$14 million. We have roughly $51 million in cap space with needs at receiver, guard, center, middle linebacker and cornerback and several vets due extensions.

If you give Jones that sort of money you significantly limit your ability to upgrade key positions through free agency. So the question really becomes can you win as many games with Taylor and a couple extra quality free agents along the line or versus with Jones and a couple mid round draft picks?

IMHO if you aren't sold on Jones being the guy capable of winning a Super Bowl then why would we strangle the roster with a guy who isn't the answer. Build the roster and go qb shopping in the next draft.

I'm not so sure if you bring back Jones with the focus on the running game that you have to bring back Barkley.  You could look to the draft and some less expensive Free Agents to make you deeper in that department rather than top heavy like you are now.

You bring up some good points which if they aren't completely sold on Jones make sense.

[jgrangers2]

What you say can be true--for NOW, but we aren't building a team for the now, but for the future and probably someone like Barkley will be more on the downside of his career, rather than the upside then. To win in the NFL you have to be able to score from anywhere on the field at any time. You need to move the ball in chunks. There are too many things that go wrong with a 10-yard at a time offense, especially with the way the game is being officiated these days.
For this year, maybe next, we need to put pieces in place to build a winner for the future, and a team built on a big-time ground game, well, how many of them win championships?

I agree, which is why I'm perfectly fine moving on from Daniel Jones and don't want to give him anything more than a bridge deal. I'm a firm believer in the idea that if you don't have one of those top 5 to 10 type QBs you should be looking to find that kind of guy.

[madbadger]

And that's fine if Jones is back next season for me.  If he is back I believe it would be a major mistake to go all in with a pass heavy offense stacking up on weapons.  Taking away cap space and resources from other units will be counterproductive and not result in more wins.

I'm not so sure if you bring back Jones with the focus on the running game that you have to bring back Barkley.  You could look to the draft and some less expensive Free Agents to make you deeper in that department rather than top heavy like you are now.

You bring up some good points which if they aren't completely sold on Jones make sense.

So we don't re-sign a top 3 running back but elect to retain a guy who's never been anything other than a poor to average quarterback? That makes no sense to me.

[Jclayton92]

The problem with paying Jones $20 million is that you also are going to have to pay Barkley somewhere betewwen $10-$14 million. We have roughly $51 million in cap space with needs at receiver, guard, center, middle linebacker and cornerback and several vets due extensions.

If you give Jones that sort of money you significantly limit your ability to upgrade key positions through free agency. So the question really becomes can you win as many games with Taylor and a couple extra quality free agents along the line or versus with Jones and a couple mid round draft picks?

IMHO if you aren't sold on Jones being the guy capable of winning a Super Bowl then why would we strangle the roster with a guy who isn't the answer. Build the roster and go qb shopping in the next draft.

Great points.

[Rambo89]

So we don't re-sign a top 3 running back but elect to retain a guy who's never been anything other than a poor to average quarterback? That makes no sense to me.

Because the top 3 RB has a shorter shelf life.  Listen if it's my call I let Jones walk and consider tagging Barkley.  But it's not my call this thread was just pointing out the Giants haven't won when it's been a heavy passing game with Jones.

[Blue Fire]

Because the top 3 RB has a shorter shelf life.  Listen if it's my call I let Jones walk and consider tagging Barkley.  But it's not my call this thread was just pointing out the Giants haven't won when it's been a heavy passing game with Jones.

Very simply put winning coaches rely more on the stronger parts of their team. Our OL run blocks better and we have one of the top 3 runners in the NFL. Conversely our OL is mich worse in pass blocking and we have a bottom 3 receiver corps in the NFL (give or take 1-2 teams).

The passing game isn't failing because of the airplane its failing because the airplane has no landing strip.