Great Blue View Mail Bag: Jarren Williams, Kenny Golladay, Tanking & More

It’s time for Big Blue View Mailbag, so let’s open it up and see what New York Giants-Related questions we can answer today.

Gino Phillips asks: Given the disappointing performance to date of the Giants’ secondary, mainly the CBs, in hindsight why do you think they released Jarren Williams (UDFA Albany) so early in camp? I thought he showed some promise in a few games last year, and he was also being considered for safety depth early on. Was there probably more to his pitch than just the field performance?

Ed says: Gino, I was rooting for Williams myself. I know defensive backs coach Jerome Henderson likes the youngster — he spoke positively of him several times the past two seasons.

Now, why did the Giants release him the first week of training camp? The fact is, during training camp, there is no patience for injured players at the bottom of the 90-man roster. Teams need as many players as possible on the field to practice the way they want/need to practice.

Williams missed the entire spring with an unknown injury. Remember, teams are not required to give us injury information in the spring. When training camp rolled around, Williams still wasn’t practicing. I have no idea what the injury was or how long before he would have been available to practice. However, the Giants knew both. They also knew that a young player transitioning from cornerback to safety can’t do it without practice reps.

So, they moved on. Unlucky for Williams, but such is life in the NFL.

ctscan asks: Hi Ed, we all know what’s going on with Kenny Golladay this summer. At the end of each critical piece, though, there’s the warning that there’s no way the Giants will release Golladay because of the $25 million debt cap. In economics, that’s called the sunk cost fallacy, essentially overvaluing something because he already paid for it.

While the dead cap on Golladay would be big, the $4.2 million saved is nothing on a cash-strapped team. The appearance of Colin Johnson doing a much better job in the presumed role of Golliday so far is also important.

Now it’s entirely possible for Golladay to get in shape and for Johnson to reverse the typical productivity of two last-round picks, but what if neither of those things happened at the end of the summer? One week? or two

If Golladay doesn’t improve and Johnson continues to impress, would you personally consider eating the $25 million to develop Johnson and save that $4.2 million? Do you think the Giants would ever do such a thing considering the current management has no ties to Golladay?

Ed says: CT, this question gives me an opportunity to correct a mistake I made. I already fixed it in my recent Kenny Golladay story, but I’m sure not everyone who read the post saw the fix.

The Giants do NOT save $4.2 million if they cut Golladay. In fact, they lose so much. Golladay’s maximum cap for 2022 is $21.15 million. If he is released, that salary cap goes up to $25.4 million.

How is that possible? It’s due to guaranteed prorated money already paid to Golladay, but for accounting purposes it’s part of the Giants’ salary-cap charge for 2023. If they cut him, that prorated money rolls over to the 2022 salary-cap. it makes the Giants’ already precarious salary-cap situation even worse.

Over the Cap, using the top 51 rule, has the Giants with about $5.3 million in cap space for 2022. Golladay cut, which drops to about $1 million. They just can’t go into the season that way.

My apologies to BBV readers for misreading the numbers in Golladay’s contract.

Edwin Gommers asks: Short and sweet mailbox question. What specific things do you want to see from the starters in the game against Cinci to give you a level of reassurance that the team is headed in the right direction?

Ed says: Well, just like last week, you want to see the first-team guys going about their business as they play the Bengals’ backups. It would be nice to see the offense complete a drive or two in the end zone. It would be nice to see the defense get off the field quickly. He wants to see a fair game, without turnovers or a significant number of penalties.

Beyond that, it’s really about looking for individuals who stand out, either in a positive or negative way, as the Giants try to build their roster.

Ultimately, while I’m all for the starters playing because the Giants are developing, you hope to get out of the game without further injuries to key players.

James Stoll asks: As we’ve heard all offseason, this is the so-called make-it-or-break-it year for Daniel Jones, and Daboll and Schoen will give him every opportunity to succeed. I question this narrative. By all accounts, the Giants roster has numerous holes to start with (CB, TE), injuries will follow, and our depth is questionable, with several key players already (Toney, Golladay, Barkley) who have long injury histories. and others (Shephard, Martinez, Lemieux) who are struggling to recover from injuries. In short, objectively speaking, this looks like a 5 or less win team. That said, there doesn’t seem to be a scenario where Jones displays the qualities that make you want him as a QB long-term. For him to prove himself to be that guy, he would need to throw 2-3 TDs a game with no corresponding turnover rate, and the defense, in turn, would have to be beyond terrible. Of course, everything could work out for the team, no one could get hurt, the defense could be outstanding and Jones could muddle through or surprise. But the last scenario is the most unlikely. Accepting all these premises, do you think the “give Jones every chance” scenario is really a sham? Daboll and Schoen hope it fizzles out and this is basically a year of “stealth” tanking with an eye toward grabbing Will Levis, Bryce Young, or some other QB (not of Ohio State thanks) in the ’23 draft?

Ed says: James, first of all, I don’t think I can make a general statement that I accept all the premises on which your question is based. Second, I absolutely cannot accept the idea that playing Jones is a “farce” or that this is some kind of “stealth tank year” for the Giants.

I’ve said many times that I think the odds are against Daniel Jones proving enough to be the quarterback beyond this year, but it’s not a fait accompli or a farce. There’s too much respect for Jones in that building. John Mara loves him and desperately wants him to succeed. Organizations love him as a person and respect how hard he works. He has the respect of the players.

Jones might not be able to convince Joe Schoen and Brian Daboll not to look for a new quarterback next offseason. The Giants could be bad. Those things are absolutely possible. It won’t be because they’re trying to throw Jones under the bus or trying to be mean in 2022, though. What guarantee is there that they can draft a future franchise quarterback next offseason? Or, if they draft a quarterback, will it be good?


If the Giants wanted to be bad, why would Schoen bring back veteran players like Blake Martinez and Sterling Shepard? Yes, they both took heavy pay cuts. However, cutting them out completely would have saved even more money.

If they wanted to be bad, why would they bother giving Mark Glowinski a three-year, $18.3 million deal?

If they wanted to be bad, why is Saquon Barkley still on the team? Why didn’t Schoen just convince John Mara that moving from Barkley was the right thing to do and collect some future draft assets?

The Giants could end up with a high draft and a new quarterback next year. However, you will never convince me that it is because they dropped the 2022 season on purpose.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.