Big Blue Huddle

If the Giants lose to Pitt in MNF to fall to 2-6, should they protect themselves from Jones' injury clause and bench him for the remainder of this year?

Why or why not?

This is the contract they concocted so it's on them for being so stupid. Their decision should be based on the best QB to win games. Period.

Quote from: Ed Vette on October 28, 2024, 05:41:26 PMThis is the contract they concocted so it's on them for being so stupid. Their decision should be based on the best QB to win games. Period.

I doubt they threw this clause in just to be nice. I suspect it was part of the negotiation process. Jones was driving a hard bargain during that process and wanted a $47mm AAV, and the Giants were able to get him down to $40mm. They also structured it in a way that enabled them to wiggle out of it with manageable damage after just two years. I have to believe this injury clause was the result of that negotiation.

I think they need to protect the interests of the organization. Jones is still going to get a $92mm guarantee in just two years that I really don't think he deserves (or ever deserved). He can never work another day in his life and he's set. The Giants owe him absolutely nothing. If he wants to continue playing, how about he waive the injury clause?

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on October 28, 2024, 05:51:35 PMI doubt they threw this clause in just to be nice. I suspect it was part of the negotiation process. Jones was driving a hard bargain during that process and wanted a $47mm AAV, and the Giants were able to get him down to $40mm. They also structured it in a way that enabled them to wiggle out of it with manageable damage after just two years. I have to believe this injury clause was the result of that negotiation.

I think they need to protect the interests of the organization. Jones is still going to get a $92mm guarantee in just two years that I really don't think he deserves (or ever deserved). He can never work another day in his life and he's set. The Giants owe him absolutely nothing. If he wants to continue playing, how about he waive the injury clause?

Well said and absolutely right Dave! Jones stinks and his contract stinks worse.

If they are certain they've seen enough and he's not the one for them. Yes they should.

The product already stinks. Don't make it worse by getting into cap strife next year by elongating a bad decision.

They can own it. They would have to admit they were wrong and he's not the guy, but that's fine. It happens. No need to make it worse.

Mara needs to stew in this mess. Trot Jones out there until he can't no more.

Quote from: T200 on October 28, 2024, 10:06:11 PMMara needs to stew in this mess. Trot Jones out there until he can't no more.

Also fair.

Approaching 20 drives without a TD...

Quote from: EDjohnst1981 on October 28, 2024, 10:08:15 PMAlso fair.

Approaching 20 drives without a TD...

....and 2 years without a TD at Giants Stadium!!!

I've said it for a long time and I'll say it again, unfortunately Daniel Jones is a backup QB.

There is nothing wrong with that either. He will have a lot of success and make a lot of $ in that role.

I would bench Jones and fire Daboll.

Both suck

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on October 28, 2024, 05:25:42 PMIf the Giants lose to Pitt in MNF to fall to 2-6, should they protect themselves from Jones' injury clause and bench him for the remainder of this year?

Why or why not?

I just don't see the point, as the Giants problems are a lot bigger than benching or playing Daniel Jones

Quote from: Ed Vette on October 28, 2024, 05:41:26 PMThis is the contract they concocted so it's on them for being so stupid. Their decision should be based on the best QB to win games. Period.

Not at this point.  Need to think long-term here. Not worry about winning a few meaningless games, AGAIN.  Need to get him off the roster with the ~$20MM cap hit.  He counts $69MM against cap if on the roster next season.  Cant have it, cant risk it.  Justify it by pointing out they are 2-6 and just need to shake things up a bit.

Quote from: MightyGiants on October 29, 2024, 08:37:54 AMI just don't see the point, as the Giants problems are a lot bigger than benching or playing Daniel Jones

Because they need to protect the cap for next year.  If he gets hurt and his salary becomes guaranteed then you can kiss next year goodbye, too.

Is this anything that the league, NFLPA, etc. can intervene with? (Benching Jones)

Quote from: coggs on October 29, 2024, 11:32:50 AMNot at this point.  Need to think long-term here. Not worry about winning a few meaningless games, AGAIN.  Need to get him off the roster with the ~$20MM cap hit.  He counts $69MM against cap if on the roster next season.  Cant have it, cant risk it.  Justify it by pointing out they are 2-6 and just need to shake things up a bit.

The job of the Head Coach is to win games. I also don't think this organization would push to sit Jones for the sake of the injury clause. At least not on the surface. I think if Jones had a similar game that he had against the Eagles, then the conversation would be to prepare and start Drew Lock to see if the results would be better. In my evaluation, Jones played much better, although far from perfect. I think what we may see is the Giants making a change after the Bye. Or when they are completely out of Playoff contention.

You make a compelling point. A shakeup this week is not out of the realm of possibility. Many teams have done that and would do that. I don't see it with this Organization, but Mara does listen to Schoen.