Big Blue Huddle

For the next season, is it time to move on? This team is so bad and needs a major revam, whats the point to paying an aging RB? Time to move on?

What is with the Barkley hate? When the day arrives that this team is better WITHOUT Barkley and it can be proved on the field i.e. the offense isn't like a 30 something ranked passing offense, and that Barkley's run are hindering them; that is the day you get rid of Barkley.

You do not get rid of your only legit vaible threat on offense because of boredom or because of some philosophical BS that you can just start drafting players and have a pass attack like some of the better ones in the league.

Quote from: Fletch on December 26, 2023, 02:13:12 PMWhat is with the Barkley hate? When the day arrives that this team is better WITHOUT Barkley and it can be proved on the field i.e. the offense isn't like a 30 something ranked passing offense, and that Barkley's run are hindering them; that is the day you get rid of Barkley.

You do not get rid of your only legit vaible threat on offense because of boredom or because of some philosophical BS that you can just start drafting players and have a pass attack like some of the better ones in the league.

Agreed.  He has accounted for 27.5% of the teams offensive yards.  Daboll and Schoen have to be sure they can replace those yards before they say we are not bringing him back. 

There is some sentiment that they can get the same production out of a RB drafted in the 3rd or 4th round.  Personally, given the circumstances of a poor OL and no threat of a passing attack, I think you would be hard pressed to even find a 1st rounder that could be as successful as he has been.

Quote from: Fletch on December 26, 2023, 02:13:12 PMWhat is with the Barkley hate? When the day arrives that this team is better WITHOUT Barkley and it can be proved on the field i.e. the offense isn't like a 30 something ranked passing offense, and that Barkley's run are hindering them; that is the day you get rid of Barkley.

You do not get rid of your only legit vaible threat on offense because of boredom or because of some philosophical BS that you can just start drafting players and have a pass attack like some of the better ones in the league.

You're looking for proof that the offense won't be poorly ranked without Barkley. But we have several seasons with Barkley that the offense has been ranked 30-something and we've never had an offense with Barkley ranked in the top 16. So they're paying Barkley to be an elite player when those days are obviously over. He's a good RB who is being paid like a great RB. It doesn't make sense.

Get rid of him and replace him with a mythical late round RB who will come in and do what Barkley does? Sounds great but odds are the late rd RB won't produce like Barkley and won't draw the attention that Barkley does. Maybe give Gray the job?

Quote from: Fletch on December 26, 2023, 02:13:12 PMWhat is with the Barkley hate? When the day arrives that this team is better WITHOUT Barkley and it can be proved on the field i.e. the offense isn't like a 30 something ranked passing offense, and that Barkley's run are hindering them; that is the day you get rid of Barkley.

You do not get rid of your only legit vaible threat on offense because of boredom or because of some philosophical BS that you can just start drafting players and have a pass attack like some of the better ones in the league.

Hard to call it hate but more of a recognition that he's really unhappy with his contract and it's hard to justify paying him what he wants to get paid if we can't provide him with anything approximating an average offensive line. Part of me thinks it's unfair to keep him around year after year and watch the Giants squander his talent, while the other part of me recognizes that resigning him also restricts our ability to improve the team around him. In some regards he's a victim of his own success while simultaneously punishing him for the personnel mistakes of the front office. It's just a bad situation all around.

Quote from: brownelvis54 on December 26, 2023, 02:04:26 PMFor the next season, is it time to move on? This team is so bad and needs a major revam, whats the point to paying an aging RB? Time to move on?

Nope, it is time to resign him to a decent contract. He adds so much more than just looking at Stats. He is a captain, very well resapected by his teamates and still produces . With an upgraded OL and a coach who will use him as a two purpose back and receiver , his value is wortrhwhile .

That's the problem, schoen offered him more than a decent contract, he offered him an amazing one and Barkley simply wanted more.

Barkley has his upside but not at his price tag. Every successful team in the NFL has cheap RBs besides one SF/CMC. So it's really hard with Barkleys injury history to want to continue investing in the position.

I like SB, so yes if for 3-4 mil a year for 2-3 years but we MUST have an O LINE and priorities should be addressed with the $$$ available.  If he still wants top end $$$ he'll have to look elsewhere.

I would prefer to rip the band-aid off. We need to get younger and cheaper at the position. I want multiple RBs on rookie contracts, not this old fashioned approach of being all-in on one aging guy who gets hurt a lot. I just think the position is not worth paying up for anymore. Hell look at the Browns. They literally lost Nick Chubb in week one, who is as good a pure runner as the league has seen in the past 10-15 years, and they didn't miss a beat. Next man up with Jerome Ford. Is he as good as Chubb? No. Has it really mattered? They're 10-5, and this is the Browns we're talking about, so I'd have to say no.

Barkley is still a good player but he's not elite anymore. Too many injuries, and at 27/28 he will start to decline more noticeably. As it is he's a 4.0 YPC guy this year. That's simply not very good. As a rookie he was 5.0, and the line sucked then too, so I don't want to hear the bellyaching about the line if we're arguing he's still a star worth paying up for.

Throwing guaranteed money at him is a waste, and the tag ($12mm) is way too high. Better to let him hit the open market and let someone else pay up for him. Draft someone, save the $7-$9m, and use that on a free agent IOL or D lineman. RB is a position that is very easily replaced on day two of the draft, when we pick three times. Why not get much cheaper, much younger, and much fresher and healthier at the position?

This is non sense. bark will be paid and rightfully so. The Giants are dead last in passing or damn near there. The Browns are like top 13 passing offense.

Again when the day arrives that his running is holding back the team is the day you cut him. Unless you want to be Carolina panthers bad and keep talking about giving Danile Jones weapons like SF 49ers have given Purdy blah blah blah.

The fact is you cannot look at the Giants in a vaccuum or compare them to other teams. The Giants are what they are. Sp the question is: Who is expendable and who isn't? We watched a Undrafted, third string QB win games and put out similar crappy passing numbers as a QB we are paying top 10 money. Tyrod looked even better just eye test alone.

Who cares about when Barkley hits the wall? Players bust all the time and reach their expiration date all the time. Heck Eli Manning made 22 mil standing on a sideline for nearly his whole last yea r in the league.

I totally get the point of not wanting to spend money on an aging RB.  I am sure Schoen and Daboll do as well.  What seems to be missing from some peoples calculus is that if the offense and the team as a while doesn't improve next year there is a good chance there will be regime change.

It's easy for fans to say don't sign him and move on, our jobs don't depend on improvement.   

A team like the Browns has a top 5 OL, a decent passing attack, and a top 5 defense, so RBs can be less of a priority. 

So let's ask it this way.  If you were Joe Schoen and you knew it was likely that you were gone with another dreadful season with no signs of offensive life, would you say goodbye to Barkley?

If you would let Barkley go, what would you do to improve the offense and not only make up for the 27% of it you are losing, but actually improve the overall performance? 

You cannot go backwards or you are out of a job. Thats really the crux of it. 

Quote from: uconnjack8 on December 27, 2023, 08:57:06 AMIf you would let Barkley go, what would you do to improve the offense and not only make up for the 27% of it you are losing, but actually improve the overall performance? 

It's difficult to imagine that replacing 27% of the yards on the 31st ranked offense will be that heavy a lift. We're talking about an offense that averages 263.7 yards per game. It would be a different story if we were talking about replacing 27% of Miami's 411.5 yards per game or the 49ers 404.3 yards per game. Replacing Barkley's production on this current iteration of the offense is not a huge barrier.

Quote from: uconnjack8 on December 27, 2023, 08:57:06 AMI totally get the point of not wanting to spend money on an aging RB.  I am sure Schoen and Daboll do as well.  What seems to be missing from some peoples calculus is that if the offense and the team as a while doesn't improve next year there is a good chance there will be regime change.

It's easy for fans to say don't sign him and move on, our jobs don't depend on improvement. 

A team like the Browns has a top 5 OL, a decent passing attack, and a top 5 defense, so RBs can be less of a priority. 

So let's ask it this way.  If you were Joe Schoen and you knew it was likely that you were gone with another dreadful season with no signs of offensive life, would you say goodbye to Barkley?

If you would let Barkley go, what would you do to improve the offense and not only make up for the 27% of it you are losing, but actually improve the overall performance? 

You cannot go backwards or you are out of a job. Thats really the crux of it. 

I hear you but I don't think it's a given that Schoen/Daboll get fired if next year doesn't go well. The QB situation is a mess, and that's not really their faults. I think Schoen recognizes that. Perhaps Daboll could get fired after a bad third year, but I don't see it with Schoen. So I'm not sure I agree that he's going to only sign Barkley to save his job.

Quote from: Doc16LT56 on December 27, 2023, 09:24:56 AMIt's difficult to imagine that replacing 27% of the yards on the 31st ranked offense will be that heavy a lift. We're talking about an offense that averages 263.7 yards per game. It would be a different story if we were talking about replacing 27% of Miami's 411.5 yards per game or the 49ers 404.3 yards per game. Replacing Barkley's production on this current iteration of the offense is not a huge barrier.

We are talking about replacing the only plus skill player on the offense.  If it's so easy, why has this offense been terrible as long as it has?  Are the professionals missing this easy solution somehow?

What would you do specifically to not only replace those yards, but improve the offense, that doesn't include Barkley?

Point is you have to replace him and add to the equation OL, WRs and  QB. 

So who are you drafting amd signing? 

Personally I think gaining yardage in this offense being the only legit threat is extremely difficult compared to say being a cog in the Dolphins offense that has multiple weapons.

Quote from: President Rick on December 26, 2023, 04:35:11 PMI like SB, so yes if for 3-4 mil a year for 2-3 years but we MUST have an O LINE and priorities should be addressed with the $$$ available.  If he still wants top end $$$ he'll have to look elsewhere.

3-4 Million a year ? That is a joke . You could be paid more !!!  He would never , ever accept that figure .

Look what happened to the Panthers when they traded McCafferty

Quote from: Brooklyn Dave on December 27, 2023, 10:08:45 AM3-4 Million a year ? That is a joke . You could be paid more !!!  He would never , ever accept that figure .

Look what happened to the Panthers when they traded McCafferty

This is precisely what he'll do. What would you think if Dallas, Philly or Washington pay the man? If I were him, I'd be picking my chops twice a year when NYG comes up next on the schedule.

We'll see, but my thought process is you have someone on the roster who will at least replace his production. Or, you are going to acquire a free agent who will do so. Rookie talents can be hit or miss. Note we haven't seen #20 since he started fumbling the ball.

All that being said, Barkley's asking price is likely going to push him out of New York. I don't think he owes the team anything for his contributions or vice-versa. He's been a stellar athlete and a model leader and will continue to be one wherever he goes.

Schoen will have his work cut out for him either way in finding a back for Daboll's offense. We'll have to see what that looks like going forward.

Peace!

hes an avg back with average stats

Quote from: uconnjack8 on December 27, 2023, 10:05:50 AMWe are talking about replacing the only plus skill player on the offense.  If it's so easy, why has this offense been terrible as long as it has?  Are the professionals missing this easy solution somehow?

What would you do specifically to not only replace those yards, but improve the offense, that doesn't include Barkley?

Point is you have to replace him and add to the equation OL, WRs and  QB. 

So who are you drafting amd signing? 

Personally I think gaining yardage in this offense being the only legit threat is extremely difficult compared to say being a cog in the Dolphins offense that has multiple weapons.

Barkley is only relevant as a franchise player for this franchise BECAUSE they are so bad on offense. The argument that he is a valuable weapon is different and in my opinion more valid than the argument that his production is irreplaceable.

We have 6 years of evidence with Barkley as the centerpiece of the offense to show it hasn't worked out. He isn't getting any better and can't be considered the centerpiece any longer. He's a complimentary player. He should be paid like a complimentary player, and play a complimentary role. If the goal is for him to account for around 30% of the offense then I think we're looking at another year ranked in the 30s in offense.

Quote from: BluesCruz on December 27, 2023, 12:50:48 PMhes an avg back with average stats

That might be a compliment coming from the guy that thinks Brightwell is the next Barry Sanders.

Quote from: Doc16LT56 on December 27, 2023, 01:50:26 PMBarkley is only relevant as a franchise player for this franchise BECAUSE they are so bad on offense. The argument that he is a valuable weapon is different and in my opinion more valid than the argument that his production is irreplaceable.

We have 6 years of evidence with Barkley as the centerpiece of the offense to show it hasn't worked out. He isn't getting any better and can't be considered the centerpiece any longer. He's a complimentary player. He should be paid like a complimentary player, and play a complimentary role. If the goal is for him to account for around 30% of the offense then I think we're looking at another year ranked in the 30s in offense.

Who is saying the goal should be to have him as 30% of the offense? Or that he is irreplaceable?

Quote from: uconnjack8 on December 27, 2023, 02:48:21 PMWho is saying the goal should be to have him as 30% of the offense? Or that he is irreplaceable?

I honestly believe he's 30% of the offense because the staff doesn't have a Qb to throw the ball.

I've never seen a team run more on 2nd and 8+ than the Giants do currently.

Quote from: Jclayton92 on December 27, 2023, 03:07:50 PMI honestly believe he's 30% of the offense because the staff doesn't have a Qb to throw the ball.

I've never seen a team run more on 2nd and 8+ than the Giants do currently.

I agree, they are close to running an 80's college offense at points.

Think about Joe Morris, Tiki Barber, Bradshaw

Does Barkley belong in this group

ABSOLUTELY NOT

Quote from: BluesCruz on December 27, 2023, 04:23:49 PMThink about Joe Morris, Tiki Barber, Bradshaw

Does Barkley belong in this group

ABSOLUTELY NOT

It's not an apples to apples comparison and you knew that before you even typed that.

A) They style of football has changed completely
B) All 3 of those Rbs had really good Qbs to compliment them.
C) They also had significantly better lines than Barkley has had.


Barkley would have won the rushing title every season with the lines Bradshaw had.

Context matter.

Barkley was an elite RB talent coming into the league. I don't think any less than that. The season he had in 2018 as a rookie was nothing short of spectacular.

2019 was great too apart from missing a few games with a high ankle sprain and then coming back from that injury clearly less than 100% and needing a few games to regain his elite form. The last handful of games in 2019, once he was fully healthy again, were awesome.

In 2020 he had the ACL in week two, so that was that for that year.

In 2021 he clearly hadn't fully recovered, and he played poorly for pretty much the whole season. He wasn't even as good as Davonte Booker was for us that year.

In 2022 he was substantially better than 2021 but visibly less than what he was in 2018 and the good parts of 2019. You could see it with your eyes, and it is visible in the numbers. He was definitely very good, but he wasn't that same explosive, electric, special player that he was in those first two years.

This year he has been ok, but not as good as even last year. Plus he had another lower body injury this year.

Unfortunately, the trend arrow is pointing down right now, and the 27/28 threshold is usually the beginning of the end for RBs, even ones who have less of an injury history than he does.

Investing significant capital in him after this season just doesn't make any sense to me. While he was no doubt once special, I feel the RB he is today can be easily replicated (and very possibly improved upon) with a day two pick in the draft at a fraction of the cost. To me this isn't even that controversial, though I respect that it is for others here.

Quote from: BluesCruz on December 27, 2023, 12:50:48 PMhes an avg back with average stats

Forget Stats. When you have a lousy OL and an average QB StAts mean nothing . Plus he brings more to the team 

Quote from: Brooklyn Dave on December 27, 2023, 07:00:18 PMForget Stats. When you have a lousy OL and an average QB StAts mean nothing . Plus he brings more to the team 

The line sucked royally in 2018 too, and he was elite that year. Same with 2019. Our line has been awful for ages.

We can pretend he hasn't declined materially as a player and blame everyone else if we want to, but we'll be in denial if we do.

Quote from: uconnjack8 on December 27, 2023, 02:48:21 PMWho is saying the goal should be to have him as 30% of the offense? Or that he is irreplaceable?

You seemed to be arguing that his 27% share of the 31st ranked offense would be difficult to replace. I don't think those yards will be that difficult to replace, I don't think the offense can get much worse without Barkley, and I think it's much more likely to improve if the money Barkley likely will want is spent on other players. My apologies if I misunderstood your point about the urgency of 27% of the 31st ranked offense.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on December 27, 2023, 07:20:54 PMThe line sucked royally in 2018 too, and he was elite that year. Same with 2019. Our line has been awful for ages.

We can pretend he hasn't declined materially as a player and blame everyone else if we want to, but we'll be in denial if we do.

Barkley is visibly slower than he was as a rookie. We all see it.

You can find running backs anywhere. It's better for the Giants to spend on OL, DL and WR. Do not spend 12 million on a running back. The year 2007 the Giants had 3 capable running backs on the team. SB is going to get hurt and miss maybe 3-4 weeks a year let's face it he is injury prone. Better off having running back by committee. If one gets hurt next one steps in. The Giants need better coaching, they have terrible coaching. If someone gets hurt this team is done there is no next man up. There is no preparation for others it's awful.
To give Barkley a new contract or even bring him back on a tag. I wouldn't do it.

Quote from: Doc16LT56 on December 27, 2023, 07:26:31 PMYou seemed to be arguing that his 27% share of the 31st ranked offense would be difficult to replace. I don't think those yards will be that difficult to replace, I don't think the offense can get much worse without Barkley, and I think it's much more likely to improve if the money Barkley likely will want is spent on other players. My apologies if I misunderstood your point about the urgency of 27% of the 31st ranked offense.

It can get worse.  My point is that fans can easily say "let him walk".  The people whose jobs are on the line have to think about things a little deeper than that. 

Like the the question I asked about how you would replace him and improve the overall offense.  Barkley leaving doesn't fill a hole in the roster it creates another hole.  If you think it will be easy to fill the RB hole that's fine, but it's another position in addition to the any offensive positions that need upgrading.

It will be interesting to see how this goes in the offseason.  Maybe Barkley will be more realistic in his salary demands, maybe not. If I were his agent I would probably advise to sign somewhere with a better team around him.

 

Quote from: uconnjack8 on December 28, 2023, 09:26:18 AMIt can get worse.  My point is that fans can easily say "let him walk".  The people whose jobs are on the line have to think about things a little deeper than that. 

Like the the question I asked about how you would replace him and improve the overall offense.  Barkley leaving doesn't fill a hole in the roster it creates another hole.  If you think it will be easy to fill the RB hole that's fine, but it's another position in addition to the any offensive positions that need upgrading.

It will be interesting to see how this goes in the offseason.  Maybe Barkley will be more realistic in his salary demands, maybe not. If I were his agent I would probably advise to sign somewhere with a better team around him.

How much worse can it actually get? You have to go back to the '70s to find a Giants team with a lower points per game than this season. If Daboll and company feel as though they need Barkley to protect their jobs, then they deserve whatever is coming their way.

I don't think the offense gets much better until the QB position is improved. They may see marginal improvement with Taylor but in my opinion he has a low ceiling and is injury prone. I think the real solution is drafting Daniels or Maye.

If they can get one of those guys and put some free agent money into the interior offensive line and maybe they make a run at one of the better WRs in free agency, then I think we see real and sustainable improvement in the offense with or without Barkley.

Quote from: Doc16LT56 on December 28, 2023, 10:36:23 AMHow much worse can it actually get? You have to go back to the '70s to find a Giants team with a lower points per game than this season. If Daboll and company feel as though they need Barkley to protect their jobs, then they deserve whatever is coming their way.

I don't think the offense gets much better until the QB position is improved. They may see marginal improvement with Taylor but in my opinion he has a low ceiling and is injury prone. I think the real solution is drafting Daniels or Maye.

If they can get one of those guys and put some free agent money into the interior offensive line and maybe they make a run at one of the better WRs in free agency, then I think we see real and sustainable improvement in the offense with or without Barkley.

I agree about what they need to improve.  I also think young QBs have a better chance of success when you put more good pieces around them. 

Not sure exactly what the money for Barkley would net on a FA market.  Probably a lot more on the IOL market than it would a WR.

Lets face it

Mara loves Jones and Barkley immensely with a real man love

Anyone who cuts either puts themselves in deep employment jeapordy

end of story

Quote from: BluesCruz on December 28, 2023, 02:05:15 PMLets face it

Mara loves Jones and Barkley immensely with a real man love

Anyone who cuts either puts themselves in deep employment jeapordy

end of story

Well then they will be in jepapordy because the likelihood that Jones and Barkley are here post 2024 is less than 5%.

The results of this poll suggest the Giants should not re-sign Barkley because they're worried the fan base will be unhappy if they let him walk. While 58 people may not be an overly large sample size, the more than 2-1 ratio is noticeably stark.

Of course, I don't think fear of fan outrage influences Schoen, but I do think Mara is motivated by that sometimes.