Jump to content

Giants are releasing QB Daniel Jones (future backup to Josh Allen)


Recommended Posts

Posted
4 minutes ago, boyst said:

cleveland-ohio-deshaun-watson-of-the-cle

he has won 9 games

 

Jones 24

 

I was kind of thinking Sam Bradford myself, but then your post reminded me...

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

There has never been a player paid more for what little they actually achieved than Jones. 

Sam Bradford. That dude was a highway robber in the NFL. He fleeced the NFL for $129 million. Jones is only at about $72 million in career earnings, according to over the cap.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
18 minutes ago, Cash said:

 

That's a new one for me.  Could you translate to American?

I’m just guessing here…, but I suspect it’s, he shot his wad, but I could be off base 🤣

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

spat out his pacifier? Is that what you'd call it? The thing you give a baby to suck?

 

Spat his dummy, means thrown a childish tantrum essentially. 

 

Yea, he spat his dummy. 

 

Thanks!  Makes total sense.  I've heard a lot of nicknames for pacifiers but hadn't heard that one before.

 

11 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think the owner was the driving force behind it. Not absolving the coach and GM from blame because the owner wanted Saquan back too and they went against his wishes but from everything you hear out of there the owner was all in on Jones. 

 

Yeah, I think 99% of the time franchise QB decisions go to the owner of the team.  What I'd be curious to know is how much flexibility Schoen et al actually had.  Could there have been a scenario where they re-signed Jones, but to a smaller deal that gave the team more flexibility in case he continued being Daniel Jones?  Did they have the freedom to let his agent negotiate with other teams and try to match?  Stuff like that.

 

3 minutes ago, boyst said:

cleveland-ohio-deshaun-watson-of-the-cle

he has won 9 games

 

Jones 24

 

Yeah, Dimes was certainly overpaid, but he's not even close to the top.  Osweiler was another one as mentioned above, and JaMarcus Russell immediately came to mind as well. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Rubes said:

I was kind of thinking Sam Bradford myself, but then your post reminded me...

Yeah, Watson is the new poster boy for sure. But with inflation, it might still be Bradford. He was one of the last to come into the league before the rookie wage scale, so he was hugely paid from day 1.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:

Agree, he was a bad draft pick, had minor success and his re-signing was total buffoonery move on behalf of their GM & HC , 

They convinced themselves he was their Josh Allen. Letting him walk would have been a courageous move, but it would have been the right one. 

  • Agree 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Cash said:

 

Thanks!  Makes total sense.  I've heard a lot of nicknames for pacifiers but hadn't heard that one before.

 

 

Yeah, I think 99% of the time franchise QB decisions go to the owner of the team.  What I'd be curious to know is how much flexibility Schoen et al actually had.  Could there have been a scenario where they re-signed Jones, but to a smaller deal that gave the team more flexibility in case he continued being Daniel Jones?  Did they have the freedom to let his agent negotiate with other teams and try to match?  Stuff like that.

 

 

Yeah, Dimes was certainly overpaid, but he's not even close to the top.  Osweiler was another one as mentioned above, and JaMarcus Russell immediately came to mind as well. 


Russell was over drafted, I put him in a separate class given he didn’t even play out his rookie contract. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Cash said:

Yeah, Dimes was certainly overpaid, but he's not even close to the top.  Osweiler was another one as mentioned above, and JaMarcus Russell immediately came to mind as well. 

Osweiler made $41 million in the NFL. Russell made about $40 million. Sam Bradford's $129 million takes the cake, I think.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, finn said:

They convinced themselves he was their Josh Allen. Letting him walk would have been a courageous move, but it would have been the right one. 


Given the way contracts are for QBs, what they ended up paying him and what would have been the salary for his fifth year option, they should have picked it up and have him play it out instead of putting Al their stock on even more hope he morphs into a top player at his position. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, finn said:

They convinced themselves he was their Josh Allen. Letting him walk would have been a courageous move, but it would have been the right one. 

If they thought Daniel Jones is anything like Josh Allen, that is criminal. Jones is mediocre at just about everything.

Posted
1 minute ago, Sojourner said:


Given the way contracts are for QBs, what they ended up paying him and what would have been the salary for his fifth year option, they should have picked it up and have him play it out instead of putting Al their stock on even more hope he morphs into a top player at his position. 

Play it out or trade him when his stock was highest, at the beginning of that fifth year. I don't recall any team having the foresight to pull off this kind of move. I thought Arizona should have traded Kyler Murray at the same point. I still stand by that judgment, given that haul they could have gotten for him and (I think) how unlikely it is he will take the team to the Super Bowl. 

  • Agree 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...