QB’s like Daniel Jones, what do you do?

[Ram65]

They should do the Non-exclusive franchise tag

What would the market bare for Jones if he hit FA? I'm thinking 10-15M...and if I'm the Giants, that's about where I would start the negotiations.

There is a wide margin of what Jones's value is. With the quality and value placed on NFL QBs, I think he gets near the second-level money. The QB price market seems to increase every year. From the article:

Complicating matters is the average salary for starting quarterbacks, excluding those on rookie contracts, is $32,036,681 per year according to NFLPA data. The number is $21,318,677 per year with the inclusion of starting quarterbacks on rookie contracts. The salaries for incoming players are determined strictly by draft position under the rookie wage scale.

If the Giants decide to move forward a 4-5 year deal around the $32M makes sense with incentives and an out in 3 years would be smart. I would not over-guarantee the money. They could go for a one-year Non-exclusive deal but, they would save cap space earlier in the contract with a long-term deal. The cap will be going up significantly every year now that the Covid losses have been accounted.

It's an interesting decision that will have a big effect on the Giants future.

 

[dieterbrock]

It's an interesting decision that will have a big effect on the Giants future.

I think it's even bigger than that. I believe the Giants could help re-set the market by breaking this ridiculous trend of QB's getting vastly overpaid compared to other positions.
To illustrate the lunacy of it, Aaron Donald, possibly greatest DT of all time, is making 31.7 mill per year on his recent extension, and yet the Giants would be seen as paying Jones "under market value" while offering him more $$ than #99?? Insanity.
Daniel Jones would not see anything close to these numbers in an open market, just like many of the QB's who were re-signed by their current team at a much higher # than what was truly inline with their play/potential

 

[Ram65]

I think it's even bigger than that. I believe the Giants could help re-set the market by breaking this ridiculous trend of QB's getting vastly overpaid compared to other positions.
To illustrate the lunacy of it, Aaron Donald, possibly greatest DT of all time, is making 31.7 mill per year on his recent extension, and yet the Giants would be seen as paying Jones "under market value" while offering him more $$ than #99?? Insanity.
Daniel Jones would not see anything close to these numbers in an open market, just like many of the QB's who were re-signed by their current team at a much higher # than what was truly inline with their play/potential

It would be great if the Giants could break the ridiculous trend of QBs getting overpaid. Some teams will be able to get a good QB prospect in round 1 at a rookie salary. I'm not sure how it shakes out but, his demand may not be as high as the price tag I gave.

What would be Jones' open market value?

It could be worth finding out as Jones said he wants to remain a Giant.

 

[Mackeyser]

This is why we need a separate cap for QBs…

 

[FarNorth]

Similar dilemma with Geno Smith. Do you pay a guy with a questionable history based on one good year?

Geno can really throw the ball. His decision making is much better now than when he was a mistake prone young qb.

I would be shocked if Pete Carroll doesn't bring him back. How much it costs is another matter, but Carroll doesn't have time or patience to be in QB hell at this point. And they need their No. 5 pick for the best D edge available.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I guess the question is do you want to retain the average to good QB and pay out the nose or have no QB and keep searching.

You can still win games with the avg QB and keep fans engaged but your cap is limited. You’re not going to win the big games though.

I happen to think that you kind of have to pay these non elite but decent QB’s. I don’t fault the Rams for paying Goff. The alternative was you no longer have a good QB and that could be franchise purgatory for a very long time.

JMO

 

[Mojo Ram]

This is why we need a separate cap for QBs…

Agreed. A popular solution.

 

[dieterbrock]

I guess the question is do you want to retain the average to good QB and pay out the nose or have no QB and keep searching.

That's what @Ram65 and I are getting at. Who's to say you lose the QB if you dont pay him? when has a team elected to let the QB walk? Seems like unless its a truly bust type QB like Trubisky, all the QB's get re-signed, one ridiculous contract after another. Geno Smith in an open market isnt going to get anything like the starter money being forecasted in Seattle. Same for Jones. It's supposed to be you overpay to keep your player from signing elsewhere for more, instead teams so drastically overpay that they pay seemingly triple what the market will pay.
Jackson? He'll get the big $$ because he was an NFL MMVP who amassed 43 total touchdowns in a single season.
Geno Smith has amassed 73 TD for his entire Career, Jones 72. Totally different league
Let both guys get 3 or 4 year deals for 12-15 mill per and re-set the lower tier market
Again, nothing to say they cant sign another extension if they truly blow up as players

 

[TSFH Fan]

If the Giants think Jones is the answer, sign him. If not, tag and/or find a replacement.

Big picture, setting a max salary like the NBA does, is an option.

People talk about a separate or a QB salary cap. I don't see that working at all. You have the players' portion and the owners' portion of football revenue. The cap is a reflection of the amount that the players' portion of football revenue is apportioned among the teams. The owners aren't going to give anything for a QB cap. So, you need the players to rearrange their portion of football revenue to accommodate QBs. You need to have the non-QB players agree to have the salary cap reduced, in an undetermined amount, so that QBs can be paid. The effect is that there's less money available to pay non-QBs. That's sacrificing the good of the many for the good of the few.
The only way the QB cap is going to "work" like people want is for owners to fork over the money, but that goes against the reason for the cap in the first place, which was optimizing/maxing the owners' share of football income, er, I mean a fair deal with the players.

Some history

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03dhFmWf3q0

 

[Malibu]

What would the market bare for Jones if he hit FA? I'm thinking 10-15M...and if I'm the Giants, that's about where I would start the negotiations.

Hilarious his agents think he is a 40-50m QB due to so many available teams that need QBs. Both sides need to not have knee jerk reactions. Like I've said I would hold him for as cheap as I can for a year or two and negotiate behind the scenes for a big upgrade Rodgers or Lamar. Or cast him aside for Jimmy G.

 

[PhillyRam]

This is why we need a separate cap for QBs…

They should just allow each team to declare one player's whose contract is exempt from the cap and maybe a 2nd player where only 50% of their contract counts against the cap.

This would prevent the contracts of top QBs from penalizing their teams while giving the best QBs a better chance of competing for championships thus putting the best product on the field in the biggest games. That's good for the league.

The 2nd contract allows teams to keep that special player they may have at another position. Like the Rams with Donald or Ramsey. The Chiefs may have been able to keep Hill this yr.

And maybe you make this only apply to players and the teams who originally drafted them. So it wouldn't help Stafford's deal, but it would allow teams who draft their young QBs to continue to develop them like when we had Goff or a situation like the Giants where you still want more time to evaluate Jones. Still have to pay them if you choose to, but it doesn't kill the cap.

 

[CGI_Ram]

They should just allow each team to declare one player's whose contract is exempt from the cap and maybe a 2nd player where only 50% of their contract counts against the cap.

This would prevent the contracts of top QBs from penalizing their teams while giving the best QBs a better chance of competing for championships thus putting the best product on the field in the biggest games. That's good for the league.

The 2nd contract allows teams to keep that special player they may have at another position. Like the Rams with Donald or Ramsey. The Chiefs may have been able to keep Hill this yr.

And maybe you make this only apply to players and the teams who originally drafted them. So it wouldn't help Stafford's deal, but it would allow teams who draft their young QBs to continue to develop them like when we had Goff or a situation like the Giants where you still want more time to evaluate Jones. Still have to pay them if you choose to, but it doesn't kill the cap.

Interesting ideas.

 

[dieterbrock]

They should just allow each team to declare one player's whose contract is exempt from the cap and maybe a 2nd player where only 50% of their contract counts against the cap.

Man, I love this idea.
That's the best suggestion I've heard yet
The cheap wad owners can exempt a cheap salary to keep their cap number down while the owners who will spare no expense can bust the cap to keep their best player(s)
Parity is great, but at some point you've got to be able to keep your star players too
@kurtfaulk , I know we disagreed on how to "fix" this, what do you think of this idea?

 

[Allen2McVay]

FWIW, reported earlier toady on a NY Sports Radio show that Daniel Jones is changing agents.

 

[oldnotdead]

Goff showed that an upper tier two QB is worth having. This past year he elevated his play up another tier. I put him on tier one with an asterisk until he can consistently play at that level. Goff isn't losing games, their defense has been.

So an upper tier two QB is worth building around. But anything below top 10 in tier two is a huge risk and IMO not worth big money. If a team wants to keep him then offer him an incentive laden contract, i.e. "prove you are worth it".

Mayfield is a tier two QB with tier one talent. With the right scheme on the right team, he can be another Goff. Darnold has tier one talent but he's at the low end of the tier because he's had poor coaching. His decision making (reading defenses) is poor and his mechanics are inconsistent. Darnold is the poster boy for QBs coming out early. Right now I see him as a two year project player given good coaching and in a compatible system.

 

[snackdaddy]

This is why we need a separate cap for QBs…

Or maybe some sort of cap relief? Of course if they do that then elite QB's would soon be making 50 mil a year.

 

[kurtfaulk]

Man, I love this idea.
That's the best suggestion I've heard yet
The cheap wad owners can exempt a cheap salary to keep their cap number down while the owners who will spare no expense can bust the cap to keep their best player(s)
Parity is great, but at some point you've got to be able to keep your star players too
@kurtfaulk , I know we disagreed on how to "fix" this, what do you think of this idea?

i think that @TSFH Fan laid out above exactly how i feel.

nfl owners, as a collective, don't want to pay a penny more than what they agree is the players cut of the revenue. more money for qbs, whichever way they structure it, will mean less money for the other players.

.

 

[Mackeyser]

If the Giants think Jones is the answer, sign him. If not, tag and/or find a replacement.

Big picture, setting a max salary like the NBA does, is an option.

People talk about a separate or a QB salary cap. I don't see that working at all. You have the players' portion and the owners' portion of football revenue. The cap is a reflection of the amount that the players' portion of football revenue is apportioned among the teams. The owners aren't going to give anything for a QB cap. So, you need the players to rearrange their portion of football revenue to accommodate QBs. You need to have the non-QB players agree to have the salary cap reduced, in an undetermined amount, so that QBs can be paid. The effect is that there's less money available to pay non-QBs. That's sacrificing the good of the many for the good of the few.
The only way the QB cap is going to "work" like people want is for owners to fork over the money, but that goes against the reason for the cap in the first place, which was optimizing/maxing the owners' share of football income, er, I mean a fair deal with the players.

Some history

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03dhFmWf3q0

Not really.

The overall cap would be lowered, but to accommodate that, the minimum cap would increase

The net effect would see the averages the same. However, if the owners wanted to pay or not pay extra under the QB cap, they could. This way, a rookie QB window ending doesn't mean shipping out mid-tier vets to pay him.

It would lower the overall cap for teams on rookie deals and raise it for those paying top tier veterans.

 

[Malibu]

I guess the question is do you want to retain the average to good QB and pay out the nose or have no QB and keep searching.

You can still win games with the avg QB and keep fans engaged but your cap is limited. You’re not going to win the big games though.

I happen to think that you kind of have to pay these non elite but decent QB’s. I don’t fault the Rams for paying Goff. The alternative was you no longer have a good QB and that could be franchise purgatory for a very long time.

JMO

I disagree in part. We paid Goff at the end of year 3 we did not have to pay him or think about paying him to best case end of year 4.

Giants GM Schoen declined Jones 5th year option so it is pay him now some amount way less than his reported 45m speculation btw he just fired his agent at CAA . I would offer him something mid level and short terms, because that's all he is worth in the 25m range or let him test the waters or franchise tag him which even for 1 year is way too much.

Daboll and Schoen need to build the team in their image screw Jones. I would let him go and take Tannahill, Jimmy G over him. I would shoot for Lamar or Rodgers ideally but neither will come imo.

The question everyone needs to ask is this guy taking us to the Superbowl - I say no and for that reason alone they need to let him go. No $ are worth it. Only system familiarity is the us to keep him but at a reasonable price. He sucked for 3 years not all blame can be put on the coaches back then.

 

[Malibu]

Goff showed that an upper tier two QB is worth having. This past year he elevated his play up another tier. I put him on tier one with an asterisk until he can consistently play at that level. Goff isn't losing games, their defense has been.

So an upper tier two QB is worth building around. But anything below top 10 in tier two is a huge risk and IMO not worth big money. If a team wants to keep him then offer him an incentive laden contract, i.e. "prove you are worth it".

Mayfield is a tier two QB with tier one talent. With the right scheme on the right team, he can be another Goff. Darnold has tier one talent but he's at the low end of the tier because he's had poor coaching. His decision making (reading defenses) is poor and his mechanics are inconsistent. Darnold is the poster boy for QBs coming out early. Right now I see him as a two year project player given good coaching and in a compatible system.

Jones is not a upper tier 2 I think he had 1 good not stellar year on games that they got a ton and I mean a ton of lucky wins.