Rich Eisen Says Giants Should’ve Paid Saquon Barkley Over Daniel Jones
Hindsight is 20/20, but go ahead and add NFL analyst Rich Eisen to the growing list of industry people who believe the New York Giants should have paid running back Saquon Barkley ahead of quarterback Daniel Jones last off-season.
Remember, the Giants were in a completely different mindset than they are now. They came from a playoff win and decided to build on that success for 2023 and beyond, but that gamble didn’t pay off. The Giants won six games and are back to square one in deciding the franchise's future.
Still, Jones's leading the franchise to its first winning season since and playoff berth since 2016, combined with where the Giants were scheduled to draft in last year's order and a relatively thin quarterbacks class, all resulted in Giants general manager Joe Schoen signing Jones to a four year, $160 million deal with $82 million guaranteed at signing.
But Schoen, who has continued to insist that he has faith in Jones, left himself with an escape hatch from the contract that he can use after the 2024 season. In hindsight, it was a smart move as Jones, who, in addition to inconsistent play, has a growing injury history that now includes his second neck issue in three years and a torn ACL, is a question mark moving forward.
Add to that the struggles of the offense last season, many of which were on Jones's failure to elevate the offense because of hesitation in pulling the trigger on downfield passes, and the Giants are now at a crossroads at the position,
All that is why Eisen, who thinks that Jones hit his ceiling in the playoff game against a weak Minnesota pass defense, believes the Giants made an error in signing Jones over Barkley.
"I just still don't understand why wasn't Saquon worth the (Christian) McCaffrey money," he said on his show, The Rich Eisen Podcast. "The difference between we're offering you an incredible contract of $12, $13 million a year, and they were surprised he turned that down when Christian McCaffrey makes $16 million.
"So we're gonna sign Daniel Jones long term, and now we saw again how significant Saquon is to this offense. It's difficult to watch him get hurt as much as he does or dinged up, I should say. And now Jones is under contract long term after a neck injury and a blown out knee.”
Eisen isn’t the only one with that opinion, as Giants linebacker Kayvon Thibodeaux also expressed his displeasure about Barkley’s contract situation in January during an appearance on Carmelo Anthony’s podcast.
“Talking about the year we won the playoff game. For me, and for the integrity of working together, and we all believe the same things, I feel like Saquon should have gotten paid first,” Thibodeaux said.
Eisen and Thibodeaux seem to miss the fact that the Giants were backed into a corner as far as the quarterback situation was concerned. Drafting at the bottom of the first round and facing a weak quarterback class didn't do the team any good as far as having options to replace Jones.
As for Barkley, the Giants tried to get him signed as far back as the 2022 bye week, with contract offers reportedly reaching as high as $14 million APY, $2 million shy of MCCaffrey's $16 million. However, on the advice of his now former agent Kim Miale of Roc Nation Sports, Barkley turned down at least three known Giants contract offers, reportedly because the guaranteed money wasn't where they wanted it to be.
When Jones and his agency representation agreed to a new deal before the franchise tag window closed last season, that left the Giants, who were also in a better place financially, to use the franchise tag on Barkley with the hopes of getting a long-term deal done. When no such deal materialized, New York was fine with having Barkley play on a modified franchise tag worth $11 million had the running back reached all the incentives (which he did not).
Now? Schoen has not ruled out using the franchise tag on Barkley a second time, despite reports that he will allow Barkley to test the market on the condition he brings any offers back to him. The hope is to get something done that both sides can agree to, but that remains to be seen.
As for Jones, he will be on the team this year due to his salary cap hit. Whether he serves as a bridge to the next quarterback or rebounds and shows he can be, the long-term answer is a question that still needs to be answered.
