Big Blue Huddle

Hard Knocks took us through the time frame of Rich Eisen's well-reported comments about the Giants having "buyer's remorse" from having signed Daniel Jones.  Based on what we have seen, I would have to say Rich's claims don't seem to ring true.

"Done," Eisen said. "Might have to play him this year... The words I heard at the combine multiple times, two words were 'buyer's remorse.'"


https://www.si.com/nfl/giants/big-blue-plus/rich-eisen-claims-giants-have-buyers-remorse-over-daniel-jones-contract

https://x.com/clt_ny/status/1811365921169998317

Rich doesn't seem to be willing to admit his report was off.  In fact, he is suggesting that somehow what we saw, might prove he was right.

It's a magic act, Rich. That show is all about the narrative they want to put out there. Do you really believe they would throw DJ under the bus on Hard Knocks? I don't know if Eisen had it right or not, but there is no more transparency now than before.

Quote from: Ed Vette on July 11, 2024, 09:04:41 AMIt's a magic act, Rich. That show is all about the narrative they want to put out there. Do you really believe they would throw DJ under the bus on Hard Knocks? I don't know if Eisen had it right or not, but there is no more transparency now than before.

In fact I'd argue there's less- when you get to control your own narrative, it impacts the other way.  It would be smart to keep this in mind with whatever "info" comes up about Barkley- they are telling you the story that best benefits the organization (which of course....they should.....but it certainly doesn't mean it's the whole story).

Quote from: Ed Vette on July 11, 2024, 09:04:41 AMIt's a magic act, Rich. That show is all about the narrative they want to put out there. Do you really believe they would throw DJ under the bus on Hard Knocks? I don't know if Eisen had it right or not, but there is no more transparency now than before.

And @PSUBeirut

From what I understand, HBO puts together the show.  The Giants can nix a segment if they feel it hurts them competitively, but its show is not being produced by the Giants.  I don't think Joe Schoen faked a phone call where he talked about Daniels being the starter and the need to find a backup or draft a backup in case Daniel wasn't ready for the first few games.  If the Giants were planning on replacing Jones, I don't think Schoen would call a meeting in his office to tell his top lieutenants that he still believes in Jones.  I don't think Schoen talks about being locked into Jones for 3 more years.  If this was an inhouse production, I would absolutely agree.  Since it was produced by an outside entity, I have my doubts the Giants were able to have the show create the impression they wanted people to see.

Quote from: PSUBeirut on July 11, 2024, 09:12:03 AMIn fact I'd argue there's less- when you get to control your own narrative, it impacts the other way.  It would be smart to keep this in mind with whatever "info" comes up about Barkley- they are telling you the story that best benefits the organization (which of course....they should.....but it certainly doesn't mean it's the whole story).

If I were the Giants, I would not have wanted that phone conversation between Barkley and Schoen to be shown. That was painful to watch.

Quote from: MightyGiants on July 11, 2024, 09:16:38 AMIf I were the Giants, I would not have wanted that phone conversation between Barkley and Schoen to be shown. That was painful to watch.

Painful as it may seem, it definitely favors the Giants and makes SB look like the bad guy for saying he wants to be a Giant for life but not going back to them to for the opportunity to match the offer.

Quote from: T200 on July 11, 2024, 09:26:25 AMPainful as it may seem, it definitely favors the Giants and makes SB look like the bad guy for saying he wants to be a Giant for life but not going back to them to for the opportunity to match the offer.

Tim, I am not certain how that plays out.  The Eagles gave Barkley a contract that averages $12.5 million a year and was at least for two years.  I am not sure the Giants would have wanted to try and match that.

Quote from: MightyGiants on July 11, 2024, 09:31:40 AMTim, I am not certain how that plays out.  The Eagles gave Barkley a contract that averages $12.5 million a year and was at least for two years.  I am not sure the Giants would have wanted to try and match that.

Neither am I, Rich. But, I do know that the reason Saquon is in Philly is not a fault of the Giants so anyone mad that he's gone should direct it to Barkley, not Schoen.

Two tempests in teapots.

Barkley: Didn't go back to the Giants because he KNEW Giants had already made their best offer. 

Eisen: Doubling down on "wrong" is never a good idea, even for a relative nonentity. 

Bob

Quote from: MightyGiants on July 11, 2024, 09:15:40 AMAnd @PSUBeirut

From what I understand, HBO puts together the show.  The Giants can nix a segment if they feel it hurts them competitively, but its show is not being produced by the Giants.  I don't think Joe Schoen faked a phone call where he talked about Daniels being the starter and the need to find a backup or draft a backup in case Daniel wasn't ready for the first few games.  If the Giants were planning on replacing Jones, I don't think Schoen would call a meeting in his office to tell his top lieutenants that he still believes in Jones.  I don't think Schoen talks about being locked into Jones for 3 more years.  If this was an inhouse production, I would absolutely agree.  Since it was produced by an outside entity, I have my doubts the Giants were able to have the show create the impression they wanted people to see.

We'll have to disagree on this.  The Giants org had final say (from what I have read) on the pieces that were able to be shown.  You can also be fairly certain they noticed the giant cameras and microphones on them as they were having their discussions, phone calls with players (which the player may or may not have known were being recorded....that would be an interesting question to pursue...), etc.  These people are not idiots and they have a heavy investment in making their organization look as good as possible.  Which, by the way, I completely agree with- they SHOULD put the org in the best light possible. 

It's just wise to remember when watching that this is the "angle" they are hoping to portray, so it's highly unlikely they'd be doing anything to tarnish this (this could be why they probably loved that moment of Schoen nudging Daboll about his temper in a light-hearted manner....rather than, say, watching the head coach absolutely lose it on someone, which obviously has happened repeatedly.  See how the narrative changes?).

Quote from: PSUBeirut on July 11, 2024, 09:41:46 AMWe'll have to disagree on this.  The Giants org had final say (from what I have read) on the pieces that were able to be shown.  You can also be fairly certain they noticed the giant cameras and microphones on them as they were having their discussions, phone calls with players (which the player may or may not have known were being recorded....that would be an interesting question to pursue...), etc.  These people are not idiots and they have a heavy investment in making their organization look as good as possible.  Which, by the way, I completely agree with- they SHOULD put the org in the best light possible. 

It's just wise to remember when watching that this is the "angle" they are hoping to portray, so it's highly unlikely they'd be doing anything to tarnish this (this could be why they probably loved that moment of Schoen nudging Daboll about his temper in a light-hearted manner....rather than, say, watching the head coach absolutely lose it on someone, which obviously has happened repeatedly.  See how the narrative changes?).

You could be right, but considering how badly they bungled things with Wink's departure, this doesn't strike me as a team with the PR acumen you are giving them credit for.

Quote from: MightyGiants on July 11, 2024, 09:31:40 AMTim, I am not certain how that plays out.  The Eagles gave Barkley a contract that averages $12.5 million a year and was at least for two years.  I am not sure the Giants would have wanted to try and match that.

Even if they wouldn't have matched, he could have given them the chance.  And to be fair maybe he does.  We haven't gotten that far yet and maybe we see a different call coming up where he does just that and the Giants turn it down.  But given what we know right now I kinda doubt it.  I think Barkley wanted out and it will likely benefit both him and the Giants that he's gone.

Quote from: Gmo11 on July 11, 2024, 09:49:51 AMEven if they wouldn't have matched, he could have given them the chance.  And to be fair maybe he does.  We haven't gotten that far yet and maybe we see a different call coming up where he does just that and the Giants turn it down.  But given what we know right now I kinda doubt it.  I think Barkley wanted out and it will likely benefit both him and the Giants that he's gone.

I agree, if Barkley ever wants a couple of seasons (outside an outstanding rookie season) where he lives up to his 2nd overall status, it will be with the Eagles rather than the Giants.  Although I think it's still a long shot, it's just a more realistic possibility with the Eagles.

I think it's well established that there's a year 2 exit on the deal.

Until that time passes, Eisen's report isn't going to be right or wrong. He readily admits that "they might have to play him next year".

I'm not sure how Eisen's out of character comments have been debunked.