Unsurprisingly, guaranteed money has been perhaps the central issue in the Giants’ long-running negotiations with Saquon Barkley. Some numbers have come out regarding the guarantee proposal Thursday.

The Giants are believed to have offered Barkley $19.5MM guaranteed, while the New York Post’s Paul Schwartz indicates the current average annual salary term sits at around $13MM. That number hovers near where the Giants were before withdrawing their offer upon franchise-tagging Barkley in March. Big Blue’s winter proposal was believed to include $26MM over the first two years, but it is clear not all of it was guaranteed. The sides have until 3pm Monday to strike a deal. No extension agreement by then would mean Barkley is tied to the $10.1MM RB tag figure this season.

[RELATED: Barkley To Consider Skipping Week 1 If No Deal Reached]

It has long seemed the Barkley guarantee floor is $22.2MM, the cost of two franchise tags, but that number might not be enough to cross the finish line here. Barkley’s guarantee aim likely comes in a bit higher than the two-tag number, Fox Sports’ Ralph Vacchiano tweets. It should not be too surprising the two-time Pro Bowl running back would want more money locked in, seeing as the top two RB guarantees — for Derrick Henry and Christian McCaffrey — came on deals signed in 2020.

A bit of a difference exists between total guarantees and fully guaranteed money. In terms of guarantees that cover skill and injury, two backs — McCaffrey and Alvin Kamara — signed for more than $34MM apiece. Two other veterans — Henry and Nick Chubb — secured $20MM-plus guaranteed in total.

In terms of fully guaranteed cash, the only veteran deals north of $18MM went to McCaffrey ($30.1MM) and Henry ($25.5MM). Those agreements were finalized in April and July of 2020, respectively. Seeing as the salary cap has jumped by $26MM since then (and is expected to make another big leap in 2024), Barkley seeking that kind of security is not exactly out of step, though Schwartz adds a guarantee in the $22-23MM range will likely move Barkley to sign (video link).

The guarantee component is also interesting because Barkley has already played out a contract that contained more fully guaranteed dough than McCaffrey’s deal. Being drafted at No. 2 overall, Barkley enjoyed the luxury of his entire rookie contract (four years, $31.2MM) being guaranteed. With the Giants currently at $19.5MM on the guarantee front, it does not seem like Barkley will move the number past his rookie pact. But it is notable the sides have already ventured into that territory due to rookie slot money.

Barkley’s injury past has undoubtedly influenced the team’s guarantee figure. In addition to the ACL tear the New Jersey native suffered in September 2020, he sustained a high ankle sprain in 2019 and dealt with more ankle trouble in 2021. But the 26-year-old back rebounded with a healthy 2021 season, suiting up for 18 of the Giants’ 19 games (Brian Daboll rested him in Week 18). Barkley showed enough for the team — which discussed him in trades barely a year ago — to bring out its franchise tag. But time is running out for the sides to make a deal.

The Giants have been here before and come out with a resolution. No deal between the Giants and Daniel Jones was considered imminent two days before the March deadline for teams to tag players. Jones’ AAV ask was at $47MM at one point during the talks; the Giants hammered out a four-year, $160MM contract minutes before the March 7 deadline, allowing them to keep their quarterback off the market and tag their running back. The stakes are higher for Barkley, whose career will almost definitely not last as long as Jones’. This window represents an important opportunity for the sixth-year back to tack on another nice contract before his prime ends.

Considering the string of blows the running back position has absorbed this offseason, the Barkley-Giants talks — as well as the less publicized discussions between the Raiders and Josh Jacobs and Cowboys and Tony Pollard — double as critical for the market as a whole. As the Jones negotiations showed, however, a lot can happen in the final days before a deadline.

JULY 13: An interesting twist to the Barkley negotiations has emerged. Ed Berry of CAA, who has long been involved in marketing for Barkley, is now involved in contract talks. Florio reports that Berry was added to the franchise-tagged star’s camp last month to provide an extra voice in negotiations. As a result, Barkley is now represented by both CAA and Roc Nation (in the form of Kim Miale) as talks are nearing the deadline-imposed finish line.

Meanwhile, Ryan Dunleavy of the New York Post reports that the Giants’ best offer to date included $19.5MM in guaranteed money (Twitter link). Consecutive franchise tags would equate to $22.2M in guaranteed money, so it comes as little surprise that Barkley would turn down such a proposal.

JULY 12: In one of the more eventful stretches for a team and the franchise tag in recent NFL history, the Giants have until 3pm CT Monday to extend Saquon Barkley. As the deadline nears, this situation reminds of their point-of-no-return situation with Barkley and Daniel Jones in March.

Prior to that point, the Giants had made a second offer to Barkley — a deal worth more than $13MM per year. The five-year veteran declined the proposal, with Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk noting the talented running back sought a contract in the $16MM-per-year neighborhood. That would have matched Christian McCaffrey‘s position-record average, which has stood as the top running back contract since April 2020.

[RELATED: Jones’ Asking Price Reached $47MM Per Year]

The Giants informed Barkley that a declined offer would mean the proposal would be pulled if the team tagged him. The subsequent Jones agreement — a four-year, $160MM accord reached minutes before the March deadline for teams to apply franchise tags — led to the Giants following through with that plan/threat, tagging Barkley and withdrawing their best offer. While the parties have continued off-and-on negotiations during the spring and summer, they are believed to be at an impasse.

Earlier this offseason, a report suggested Barkley was pushing for a top-market contract. Barkley, however, said following the Giants’ divisional-round loss to the Eagles he was not looking to reset the market. Pushback has since come out regarding Wednesday afternoon’s report.

The Giants’ offer is believed to have included $26MM in the first two years, per Florio. Only two veteran backs (McCaffrey and Derrick Henry) are tied to guarantees north of $20MM. It does not seem like all $26MM in Barkley’s offer was locked in, with insufficient guarantees being an issue for the running back’s camp. Indeed, the New York Post’s Ryan Dunleavy notes the offer did not include $26MM guaranteed. Barkley also disputes this report (Twitter links). A $16MM-AAV ask never seemed realistic to the standout back, Jordan Raanan adds (on Twitter).

Even if Barkley is angling for McCaffrey-level money, a case exists for it. However, that case was stronger before the carnage at the running back position this offseason. On one hand, the salary cap has climbed since McCaffrey’s four-year, $64MM Panthers extension; the cap stood at $198.2MM at that point. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic reducing the salary ceiling in 2021, it has rebounded to $224.8MM this year. OverTheCap lists $256MM as the projected 2024 ceiling. The cap spiking by $32MM between 2023 and ’24 will lead to position-record deals; will a team be willing to authorize one at running back?

Since Barkley was first connected to $16MM-AAV territory, two of the top four RB contracts (for Ezekiel Elliott and Dalvin Cook) have been shed. The Packers and Aaron Jones agreed to a pay cut that provided more 2023 guarantees; the Bengals have been connected to asking Joe Mixon to accept a trim. No free agent back signed for more than $6.35MM per year, and Austin Ekeler‘s trade request — which came about because he is tied to a Chargers-friendly extension ($6.13MM per annum) — did not spark much interest. During a mostly uninterrupted period of the league devaluing running backs, 2023 has brought a widespread bloodbath.

Then again, free agency was not a true representation of the RB market, since the three tagged backs — Barkley, Josh Jacobs and Tony Pollard — were not available. Barkley, 26, also means more to the Giants than most backs do to their respective teams, seeing as Big Blue recently extended a middling quarterback and has question marks at wide receiver and tight end. It will be interesting to see what other terms are thrown around before Monday’s deadline. Given the frequency of Barkley-related updates this offseason, it seems likely we will find out the particulars.

Five days out from the franchise tag extension deadline, three players — Saquon Barkley, Evan Engram and Josh Jacobs — have not signed their tenders. If no extensions are reached by Monday’s 3pm CT deadline, the trio will not be obligated to report to training camp.

After Jacobs has been connected to rumors of potentially sitting out the Raiders’ regular-season opener, Barkley has now been mentioned as having a chance to stay away from the Giants once the season starts. Barkley’s Week 1 availability against the Cowboys would be “in serious question” if no extension is agreed to, Dianna Russini of ESPN.com tweets.

[RELATED: Examining Remaining Franchise Tag Situations]

This course of action would cost Barkley a game check, but the former No. 2 overall pick is in a unique position compared to other backs who have been tagged. Whereas Jacobs collected his four-year rookie-deal salary as a No. 24 overall pick and Pollard played four Dallas seasons on a fourth-round contract, Barkley earned more than $31MM over his first four years due to his draft slot. The Penn State product then added $7.2MM on the fifth-year option last season, bringing his career earnings close to $40MM.

Barkley missing Week 1 would cost him $560K, and his NFL earnings to date offer him some protection. Barkley, 26, has also said taking the Le’Veon Bell route — skipping a season in protest of the tag — is a consideration. This would be a highly unlikely scenario, however, as it would mean punting on $10.1MM fully guaranteed. Only Bell has gone through with radical route this century. A threat of missing Week 1 will be used as leverage as well, as Barkley is obviously a central component in the Giants’ offense, ahead of Monday’s deadline. Barkley has already been connected to skipping training camp, as Bell did during the first year the Steelers tagged him.

For now, Barkley and the Giants remain at a stalemate, Russini adds (on Twitter). The Giants came through with a resolution at the previous tag deadline, extending Daniel Jones on a four-year, $160MM deal and then tagging Barkley in March. Upon unholstering the tag, the Giants withdrew their extension offer to the sixth-year running back. The team had offered the two-time Pro Bowler more than $12MM on average during November 2022 negotiations and upped the proposal to beyond $13MM AAV earlier this year. Neither offer, however, was believed to have high-end guarantees. Guaranteed money remains a sticking point here.

Last week, some optimism was believed to exist regarding an extension. Ownership remains behind Barkley, and it will be interesting to see if that impacts a final push for a deal. While running back value has taken another dip this year, the Giants are one of the NFL’s more RB-reliant teams. Jones and a low-end pass-catching cast relied on Barkley last season, and the former Offensive Rookie of the Year rebounded from an injury-plagued stretch to lead the team to the playoffs. The Giants have made some skill-position upgrades this offseason. But both their receiving and tight end additions come with questions. Darren Waller has encountered considerable injury trouble over the past two years, and none of Big Blue’s wideout acquisitions will be viewed as a No. 1-caliber target this season. Third-rounder Jalin Hyatt is not expected to be a Week 1 starter.

With the salary cap expected to spike again in 2024, it is interesting teams have cut costs further at running back this year. Christian McCaffrey‘s $16MM-per-year deal has topped this position group since April 2020, and neither Barkley nor Jacobs appears a candidate to take that down. The Giants will also need to decide whether to give Barkley a deal that includes more than $22MM guaranteed, which would cover the cost of a 2024 franchise tag. McCaffrey, Derrick Henry and Bijan Robinson are the only backs attached to more than $18MM guaranteed.

The Giants have until July 17 to reach an extension agreement with Saquon Barkley. Otherwise, the Pro Bowl running back would be forced to play the season on the franchise tag. While acrimony has come out during this process, Barkley is still in talks with the Giants, according to Ian Rapoport of NFL.com.

Barkley turned down multiple proposals from the Giants, one of which in the $13MM-per-year neighborhood. The former Offensive Rookie of the Year has expressed frustration about the leaks from the team’s side during the talks, and the Giants’ previous top offer — which was taken off the table after team applied the tag in March — is not believed to have been favorable on the guarantee side.

Offer No. 1 came during the Giants’ bye week last season, and it was believed to be north of $12MM per year. But Barkley and the Giants did not come close to a deal at that point. The second proposal came this offseason, when the Giants attempted to keep both Barkley and Daniel Jones off the market. They succeeded, extending the fifth-year quarterback minutes before the franchise tag deadline. The third phase of discussions began shortly after the draft, per the New York Post’s Ryan Dunleavy (Twitter link). Since the Barkley tag, however, not much has come out regarding terms.

The prospect of Barkley missing training camp — absent a long-term deal by the July extension date — has emerged, but Rapoport notes the Penn State product should not be expected to follow in Le’Veon Bell‘s footsteps by skipping the season. While Barkley responded in the affirmative when asked if this strategy was in play, the sixth-year back passing on a $10.9MM guaranteed salary has never been a likely scenario.

While the Giants pulling their offer to Barkley suggested these negotiations could take a bad turn, Rapoport adds a deal should not be considered out of the question. The 26-year-old back is the team’s most popular player, and few running backs are as important to their respective franchises. That said, Barkley went through three injury-plagued seasons prior to a breakthrough contract year.

The Giants being hesitant to provide a substantial guarantee is understandable, and the running back market losing two top contracts (Ezekiel Elliott, Dalvin Cook) this offseason while seeing the other free agent backs struggle did not help the tagged contingent (Barkley, Josh Jacobs, Tony Pollard). Jacobs has expressed disappointment with his time on the tag as well.

The Giants have used their franchise tag seven times since the tag’s 1993 inception and have never failed to hammer out an extension, though two players did play on the tag before being re-signed following a second tag. The team reached an agreement with tackle Jumbo Elliott in 1993 and extended punter Steve Weatherford in 2012. Both Jason Pierre-Paul and Leonard Williams were tagged twice; each signed an extension following the second tag (in 2017 and 2021, respectively).

Barkley bucking that trend would certainly be a notable development for the team, which has also given a big-money deal to Dexter Lawrence this offseason. But if the Giants do not submit an offer with at least $22.2MM guaranteed — which would cover a second Barkley tag in 2024 — it will put the dynamic back to a tough decision.

The Giants now have less than a month to hammer out an extension with Saquon Barkley. With the Giants having pulled their offer and Barkley having expressed frustration at the leaks coming from the team’s side, this process has traversed a rocky path for a while.

Barkley remains hopeful for a long-term deal, noting the time still remaining between now and this year’s deadline for franchise-tagged players to sign extensions (July 17), but word out of Giants headquarters is they would be content letting their two-time Pro Bowl back play this season on the $10.9MM tag. While it will be interesting to see which side blinks, Barkley looks to be making preparations in the event no deal comes together.

Franchise-tagged players are not subject to fines for missing training camp, and ESPN.com’s Jeremy Fowler said during a recent SportsCenter appearance (h/t Bleacher Report’s Mike Chiari) Barkley is “a real threat” to skip camp. This tactic would be both aimed at avoiding the extra work come July and August, while penalizing the Giants — via services withheld — for not completing a deal by the deadline.

When the Steelers tagged Le’Veon Bell the first time (2017), he skipped training camp and reported September 1. Bell did start the season slowly, by his standards at the time, but finished with his second first-team All-Pro honor. No backs received the tag from 2019-22, leaving Barkley and Josh Jacobs as the only candidates to skip camp free of penalty since Bell. (Tony Pollard signed his Cowboys tender in March.)

What Bell did the following year generated far more attention. Barkley has referenced skipping the season, as Bell did in 2018 in protest of being tagged a second time, as a viable option. Bell has since expressed regret for doing this. Although Bell prevented a major injury affecting his 2019 market (when he scored $27MM fully guaranteed from the Jets), he missed out on $14.5MM by not signing his franchise tender. Bell is the only player to skip a season on the tag since the 1990s, when defensive linemen Sean Gilbert (1997) and Dan Williams (1998) did so. The salaries they passed on paled in comparison Bell’s, and the ex-Steeler great remains the poster boy for this rare course of action.

Barkley should not be considered likely to take this route, though he is in a better financial position than Bell was in 2018 or his 2023 tagged RB peers are. Barkley being chosen second overall locked in $31.2MM. The Giants exercised his fifth-year option ($7.2MM), putting the former Offensive Rookie of the Year near $40MM in career earnings. If a back were to try the Bell move, Barkley is positioned as well as anyone has been since the 2011 CBA reshaped rookie contracts. Taking this route would mean punting on $10.9MM and skipping an age-26 season. Seeing as Barkley’s prime is unlikely to last too much longer, this will be a valuable year.

The Giants are not introducing a new offense, with OC/play-caller Mike Kafka not being hired in this year’s cycle. The prospect of missing their starting back during camp and the preseason would not be especially damaging, with the looming threat of missed game checks hanging over Barkley in the event he tries to extend his absence into the regular season. That said, Barkley remains New York’s top skill-position player and occupies that role for a team without a top-flight quarterback. The Giants are thin behind Barkley, rostering Matt Breida, Gary Brightwell and fifth-round rookie Eric Gray. They could also bring in a veteran insurance option. A number of accomplished backs remain unsigned, but signing a starter-caliber veteran after failing to come to terms with Barkley by July 17 also runs the risk of Joe Schoen and Co. alienating the locker room.

Guarantees remain a key issue in this Giants-Barkley standoff, and while deadlines spur action, the low tag price and this year’s running back market not taking off did not do anything to convince the team to put its $13MM-AAV offer back on the table. This keeps Barkley in a tough spot at a pivotal career point. These negotiations continue to represent a prime storyline during an offseason in which the running back position has absorbed some significant blows.

The franchise tag deadline annually produces a run of headlines before the pivotal July date. This year’s lead tag story will be Saquon Barkley‘s status with the Giants. After expressing frustration with being tagged, Barkley has until July 17 to sign a long-term extension. No deal by that date tables any negotiations until 2024.

New York pulled its top proposal to Barkley after tagging him in March. That offer was said to be worth in the $13MM-per-year neighborhood. The Giants have not put that $13MM-AAV term back on the table, the New York Daily News’ Pat Leonard notes.

Regarding the two known offers the Giants have made — one north of $12MM on average from November and the $13MM-AAV proposal from earlier this year — Leonard adds these were not high on guarantees. Indicating he would not sign his franchise tender this week, Barkley voiced frustration about the leaks from the Giants’ side regarding the offers he rejected.

Barkley’s guarantee baseline may be in the $22MM range, ESPN’s Jordan Raanan notes, as it would match the cost of playing on the tag this year and being re-tagged in 2024 (video link). Only two veteran backs — Christian McCaffrey ($30.1MM) and Derrick Henry ($25.5MM) — are attached to deals including more than $18MM fully guaranteed. Barkley’s initial NFL contract — from his No. 2 draft slot — once stood atop the position for guaranteed cash ($31.2MM). While Barkley has made nearly $40MM thanks to that deal and his 2022 fifth-year option, he does not have too many more prime seasons to parlay into a multiyear guarantee.

The Giants are believed to be OK with Barkley playing on the tag, despite the $10.9MM cap hold. Barkley, 26, joined Josh Jacobs and Tony Pollard in being cuffed this year. That took the top three backs off the market, but a host of starter-level backs still hit free agency. The buyer’s market, as expected, produced a host of mid- and low-level contracts. Barkley argued this year’s running back market — which saw Miles Sanders‘ $6.4MM-per-year Panthers deal (11th in RB AAV) lead the way — is not a true reflection of the position’s value, since the franchise-tagged heavy hitters would have commanded more.

“I think the biggest thing is being patient, being open to listen and understanding what the market is,” Giants assistant GM Brandon Brown said, via NJ.com’s Bob Brookover. “The market surplus and scarcity dictates a lot on how you make decisions and also being able to agree to disagree at times and being able to get back to the table.”

Said surplus now includes Dalvin Cook, whom the Vikings finally cut last week. It remains highly unlikely the Giants would rescind Barkley’s tag to sign Cook, as that would go over poorly in the locker room given the former’s contributions to last year’s playoff-bound team. Barkley bounced back from three injury-plagued seasons to lead a Giants team low on reliable pass catchers to the postseason.

Giants hesitation regarding a top-flight guarantee is also understandable, with Barkley having suffered a high ankle sprain in 2019, an ACL tear in 2020 and another ankle injury in 2021. Barkley missed 21 games during that span. Barkley acknowledged his injury past when he said in January he was not asking to set the market at running back, but while this position’s value continues to dip across the NFL, the Giants are preparing to build around a quarterback (Daniel Jones) who submitted uneven rookie-contract work. Barkley remains a pivotal part of this plan.

As of late May, no deal was close. The team, however, came to terms with Jones minutes before the March franchise tag deadline, allowing for the Barkley tag. Negotiations with tagged players regularly run up to the July extension deadline.

“I think they’re open to talking,” Barkley said. “I’m open to talking. I think at the end of the day, if you really break it down and look at it as a whole, there is no rush. There is still time on the table to get to July 17. July 17 is not tomorrow. Maybe that is the naïve way to look at it. I could be completely wrong. But for me, that’s how I look at it. I trust in the Giants that we could get something done.”

Although Barkley has banked far more than Le’Veon Bell did when he sat out the 2018 season in protest of the tag, Fox Sports’ Ralph Vacchiano notes the Giants are not concerned he will follow the ex-Steeler’s lead by skipping a season. That would cost him the $10.9MM tag salary and his age-26 season. It is not expected the Giants will raise their offer from March, but it will be interesting to see how the guarantees look in Big Blue’s final proposal before next month’s deadline.