Paying a little money now might have helped avoid a potential problem later.
The effort to improve running back pay has two distinct components: (1) the global effort to make things better for the men who play the position; (2) the specific strategies for individual running backs to maximize their deals.
As to the latter, the challenge becomes creating leverage. For franchise-tagged players who don’t sign a long-term deal before the mid-July deadline, there’s no real leverage to create because, by rule, a multi-year deal cannot be signed until the window for a long-term deal re-opens.
The window re-opens not when the season ends, but when the regular season ends. This means that a franchise-tagged player could, in theory, collect his 18 weekly game checks, satisfy his one-year tender, and then refuse to play in the playoffs unless and until he gets a multi-year deal.
It would be difficult for any player to pull that off. But a postseason walkout becomes one of the tools in the leverage box, and it would make sense for a player (especially a running back) to say, “I’ve played my 17 games under the tender. I’m not playing any more without financial security.”
The Giants, whether they intended to do so or not, have built some protection into the tweaked Barkley contract. By paying $2 million of the $10.1 million as a signing bonus, the Giants could try to collect the $2 million if Barkley should dare to walk out after the regular season ends.
Again, it would not be easy for a football player to stop playing football as the playoffs commence. But injuries happen in the playoffs, and franchise-tagged players need to be thinking about that. A torn ACL in January would destroy the player’s market for the coming season.
Barkley, if he were to consider not playing in the postseason, would risk having to pay back the $2 million.
Of course, the Giants have to make it to the playoffs for the question to even become relevant. If they do, it will be interesting to see whether Barkley agitates for a long-term contract.
