ALL DANIEL JONES POSTS AND DISCUSSIONS HERE

[True Blue]

I never thought I would say this but I think the Giants best bet is to franchise Daniel Jones ride out the 2023 season and take it from there.  I would not sign him to an extension.

I agree with this if they are to prioritize Jones over Barkley. I don't want to commit to either long term so they nay have to choose.

[GordonGekko80]

I suspect the comments are a bit tied to the position each man finds himself in.  If I were the agent of either of these young men I would have advised them to say what they did.

As a matter of fact it's less likely what the Giants will bring Barkley back, and Barkley will want the Fans to know that if it was up to him he'd definitely want to be back.

While the story is a lot different with Jones.

It's a chess match at the end of the day. And it's a lot about perception.

[GordonGekko80]

I never thought I would say this but I think the Giants best bet is to franchise Daniel Jones ride out the 2023 season and take it from there.  I would not sign him to an extension.

The problem is this: You can Franchise Tag the player, will cost you roughly 32mm in Cap space. And it's not to say that the player will sign the tag. He can sit it out if he wants (unlikely though with these numbers).

But if you were to draft a player or sign one from Free Agency, it would be much harder as either you don't know how the player will develop (draft) or he will cost you a ton of effin money (FA). Unless you are happy with a Tannehill type of player, which we already have inhouse.

So, in some way, we are married to the player...

[MightyGiants]

https://twitter.com/RGIII/status/1617029267589586952

[MightyGiants]

@TrueBlueFan @Rambo89 @GordonGekko80

This is not a rhetorical question.  Can any of you remember when franchising a QB for one year proved to be a good thing?

[Jclayton92]

I never thought I would say this but I think the Giants best bet is to franchise Daniel Jones ride out the 2023 season and take it from there.  I would not sign him to an extension.

I wouldn't be opposed to a tag and trade. If Darnold can get the Jets a 2nd and a 5th then Jones can get us something better.

[DaveBrown74]

@TrueBlueFan @Rambo89 @GordonGekko80

This is not a rhetorical question.  Can any of you remember when franchising a QB for one year proved to be a good thing?

I guess we need to define what is meant by "a good thing."

Obviously, anyone who tags a QB and then ends up signing him is likely spending more money that way, but they also preserved the option to not get locked down if they weren't sure. Maybe the Cowboys weren't 100% sure with Dak when they tagged him, and then they got more comfortable with the numbers after another season. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? I'm not really sure - I think you can argue both.

I think the tag would make sense for Jones if the two sides are far apart. If Jones and his camp want a $40-$45mmm/yr contract and Schoen was thinking something more like $30m, then you could argue that it might make sense to tag him and bulk up at WR and IOL and see if he can play like a $45m/yr QB next year. If he does, then they could end up spending even more on him than if they just meet his demands this year, but they will also feel more sure about him in that case, which (in my opinion at least) is a better scenario for the team than paying a little less, but still a lot, for a QB they're not 100% sure is a top 10 QB.

[True Blue]

@TrueBlueFan @Rambo89 @GordonGekko80

This is not a rhetorical question.  Can any of you remember when franchising a QB for one year proved to be a good thing?

what other teams have done is meaningless, let's not look at this in a vacuum, it's about seeing if they can win with him. If they him some WR, OL help and bolster the other skill positions, and it doesn't move the needle much. Then they know they can move on. The debate here is he has no talent. So let them take care of that and see if he does any better.

As it stands now, he has increased his stock, and started to win me over a little down the stretch. However, my meaningless opinion is that he is not worth $35M, maybe Schoen disagrees then okay.

Regardless of what happens or doesn't happen. I trust our coach, GM and FO, and will root for the team to win and succeed regardless.

[True Blue]

I guess we need to define what is meant by "a good thing."

Obviously, anyone who tags a QB and then ends up signing him is likely spending more money that way, but they also preserved the option to not get locked down if they weren't sure. Maybe the Cowboys weren't 100% sure with Dak when they tagged him, and then they got more comfortable with the numbers after another season. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? I'm not really sure - I think you can argue both.

I think the tag would make sense for Jones if the two sides are far apart. If Jones and his camp want a $40-$45mmm/yr contract and Schoen was thinking something more like $30m, then you could argue that it might make sense to tag him and bulk up at WR and IOL and see if he can play like a $45m/yr QB next year. If he does, then they could end up spending even more on him than if they just meet his demands this year, but they will also feel more sure about him in that case, which (in my opinion at least) is a better scenario for the team than paying a little less, but still a lot, for a QB they're not 100% sure is a top 10 QB.

Spot on 100% this

Allows them tk be absolutely certain they can win with them, and determine if they should kee building around him, without jeopardizing the future if he is not the answer

[MightyGiants]

https://twitter.com/MikeGarafolo/status/1617208087349268480

[kingm56]

@TrueBlueFan @Rambo89 @GordonGekko80

This is not a rhetorical question.  Can any of you remember when franchising a QB for one year proved to be a good thing?

Rich, the sample size is pretty small; however, have you considered the reverse?  Specifically, how have franchisees performed after giving thier QBs multi-year lucrative deals, based on one (or two) good (not great) seasons.  Below is a list of the top 12 highest paid QBs, putting the QBs north of 37 aside, those teams that issued large contracts to non top 8 QBs haven't done well at all.  Id prefer the Giants avoid becoming Minn, Tenn, Raiders, etc, which is why I think the franchise tag makes a lot of sense.   

Aaron Rodgers
Russell Wilson
Kyler Murray
Deshaun Watson
Patrick Mahomes
Josh Allen
Derek Carr
Matt Stafford
Dak Prescott
Kirk Cousins
Jared Goff
Carson Wentz
Matt Ryan
Ryan Tannehill
Tom Brady

[Trench]

I'm glad Jones clarified his remarks. I had read it in past tense and that was bothersome. I don't fully even understand what franchising tagging a player means and how it is beneficial or not?...but one thing is for sure - we can't put all our eggs in the Jones basket if that means we won't have $$ to get more players because after last night performance there is severe concern (until Jones proves otherwise in the big game next year)

[Rambo89]

The problem is this: You can Franchise Tag the player, will cost you roughly 32mm in Cap space. And it's not to say that the player will sign the tag. He can sit it out if he wants (unlikely though with these numbers).

But if you were to draft a player or sign one from Free Agency, it would be much harder as either you don't know how the player will develop (draft) or he will cost you a ton of effin money (FA). Unless you are happy with a Tannehill type of player, which we already have inhouse.

So, in some way, we are married to the player...

It's going to cost the Giants that much either way.  I'd rather have the flexibility of moving on after the 2023 season than being locked into Jones for the long term.

[kingm56]

The problem is this: You can Franchise Tag the player, will cost you roughly 32mm in Cap space. And it's not to say that the player will sign the tag. He can sit it out if he wants (unlikely though with these numbers).

But if you were to draft a player or sign one from Free Agency, it would be much harder as either you don't know how the player will develop (draft) or he will cost you a ton of effin money (FA). Unless you are happy with a Tannehill type of player, which we already have inhouse.

So, in some way, we are married to the player...

I don't use the word stupid much, but it would be stupid to not play one year for $32M/yr.  Regardless of the next contract you sign, you're never going to make that money back.  The $32M is fully guaranteed; if anything, DJ should pray for tag as it's the aperture to maximize your salary...the Kirk Cousins model.

[Rambo89]

@TrueBlueFan @Rambo89 @GordonGekko80

This is not a rhetorical question.  Can any of you remember when franchising a QB for one year proved to be a good thing?

I'm not sure when it ever proved to be a bad thing.  It allows the Giants to keep Jones for one more season and for Jones to get a solid contract for 1 season with the chance to earn big money if he has a great 2023 season.