On July 25, Saquon Barkley agreed to a contract for one-year and up to $11-million with the Giants.
Saquon Barkley finally weighed in on his protracted contract negotiations after hosting a youth football camp in Jersey City on Sunday. Barkley delivered strong remarks on what he called “misleading” leaks from the Giants on the contracts that have been offered to the running back.
Advertisement
This situation appears headed for a tense deadline showdown. The sides have until July 17 to agree to a long-term extension or Barkley will be locked into the $10.1 million franchise tag for this season. With that deadline five weeks away, here are some thoughts on where things stand:
• Barkley had to float the possibility of sitting out the season if a deal isn’t reached. The threat of withholding his services is the only leverage he has at this stage of the negotiations. But it’s inconceivable that he would actually skip the season.
Barkley’s goal is to get compensated as one of the top running backs in the NFL. Sitting out and forfeiting $10.1 million would be counterproductive to that aim.
Even beyond the finances, Barkley is ultra-conscious of his legacy and reputation. Sitting out a season in his prime would be a major blow to the résumé he’s trying to build. And it would wreck his carefully crafted image to sit out a season for a team that is finally building toward contention.
Negotiating ploy aside, Barkley still could stay away from the team to make a point about his unhappiness if an extension isn’t reached. But he’d surely show up before the start of the season because his only way to potentially cash in next year is to produce on the field this fall.
The Giants could have to deal with having a disgruntled leader, which could threaten the chemistry that was so important to their surprising success last season. But they have no reason to fear that they could be without Barkley this fall.
• It’s easy to crush Barkley and his agent for passing on offers that were reportedly worth at least $12.5 million per year now that he’s faced with playing on the $10.1 million franchise tag. Barkley pushed back on the narrative that he’s made a mistake by claiming the reports on the offers have been “misleading.”
Advertisement
Barkley could have erased any ambiguity by sharing the full details of the offers, but he chose not to divulge specifics. Still, there are some criticisms of Barkley’s handling of the negotiations that can be dispelled.
Barkley was smart to pass on the Giants’ midseason extension offer that was worth $12.5 million per year, according to a league source who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation. At that point, Barkley was performing at a high level and had already assumed a half season’s worth of injury risk. It made sense to pass on that offer, which would have slotted him in the second tier of running back contracts, because he was only nine games away from potentially reaching free agency.
We know this was the right call because the Giants reportedly increased their offer after the season. Now, turning down the postseason offer reportedly worth at least $13 million per year could certainly be a mistake, assuming the structure wasn’t egregiously team-friendly.
But it’s important to remember that Barkley was six minutes away from hitting the open market. If the Giants hadn’t signed Daniel Jones moments before the franchise tag deadline in March, the team would have used the tag on the quarterback and Barkley would have been able to field bids from all 32 teams.
Of course, the Giants did lock up Jones with a four-year, $160 million extension and then subsequently tagged Barkley. And in a blink, all of Barkley’s leverage evaporated.
Negotiations are all about timing and leverage. The Giants have all of the leverage right now, but there were times during this process that Barkley was close to being in the driver’s seat. It’s easy now to claim that his camp messed up, but it’s at least understandable to see how things reached this point.
Advertisement
• Barkley made a compelling case that the running back market was artificially lowered by the top three free agents at the position — Barkley, Las Vegas’ Josh Jacobs and Dallas’ Tony Pollard — getting tagged. With that trio setting the ceiling at $10.1 million, running backs at the next tier were slotted even lower. Miles Sanders’ four-year, $25.4 million contract with the Panthers was the most lucrative running back deal signed this offseason.
Getting rid of the franchise tag isn’t a priority for the players association in CBA negotiations because only a handful of the richest players get tagged each year. But all players should be motivated to eradicate the franchise tag because it limits the market for everyone.
Franchise tag aside, the running back market has been remarkably stagnant. As former agent Joel Corry recently laid out, the highest-paid wide receiver in 2011 was Larry Fitzgerald with a $16.1 million average annual value (AAV). The highest-paid running back in 2011 was Adrian Peterson with a $14.2 million AAV.
There are 19 wide receivers who currently have an AAV of at least $16.1 million. Meanwhile, San Francisco’s Christian McCaffrey is the only current running back with a legitimate AAV greater than $14.2 million.
The four-year, $64 million extension McCaffrey signed in 2020 looks more like an outlier as time passes. No running back has signed a contract with an AAV higher than $7 million in the past two offseasons.
The top of the running back market has taken even more hits this offseason, with the Cowboys cutting Ezekiel Elliott ($15 million AAV), the Vikings cutting Dalvin Cook ($12.6 million AAV) and Green Bay’s Aaron Jones ($12 million AAV) taking a $5 million pay cut.
We’ll never know what Barkley would have gotten on the open market. His talent might have made him an exception to the recent trend at the position. But it’s not a profitable time to be a running back.
Advertisement
• The takeaway for elite young athletes hoping to maximize their future earnings: Switch to wide receiver.
• Barkley’s leverage is totally sapped because even if he plays at an All-Pro level this season, the Giants can simply franchise tag him again next offseason at a $12.1 million salary. Paying Barkley an average of $11.1 million over the next two seasons wouldn’t be a bad outcome for the Giants.
If the sides get down to the deadline with no hope for an extension, perhaps Barkley’s side could at least push for a one-year contract at the tag amount that includes a clause that he can’t be tagged again next offseason. That would be a concession by the Giants, but perhaps that gesture would ease some of the hard feelings from what figures to be a contentious negotiation if the sides can’t reach a long-term agreement.
• Giants general manager Joe Schoen is holding the hammer in these negotiations. But that doesn’t mean he needs to wield it.
Schoen has to weigh all aspects of this situation. He could “win” the negotiation, but both sides will lose if a disgruntled Barkley doesn’t have a productive season. On the other hand, Schoen certainly doesn’t need to make any grand concessions based on his leverage.
It still seems like the best outcome for both sides at this stage is a deal in the neighborhood of the previous offers with stronger guarantees, assuming that’s been the issue for Barkley’s camp. That type of compromise from Schoen could go a long way toward establishing goodwill with Barkley and the rest of the locker room.
(Photo: Tim Nwachukwu / Getty Images)
