Fifth-year option would make it harder to implement the Favre-Rodgers approach

[Giant]

Getty Images

After suggesting that the Giants may apply the Kansas City model to the transition from quarterback Eli Manning to a rookie, the Giants have more recently suggested that they may adopt the Green Bay model — which would put first-rounder Daniel Jones on the bench for three seasons. But when the Packers relegated first-rounder Aaron Rodgers to second string behind Brett Favre three years from 2005 through 2007, the rules were very different.

Under the labor deal executed in 2011, a key decision must be made regarding all first-round picks after their first three seasons. As demonstrated by the news cycle from recent days, teams must decide whether to exercise the fifth-year option by May 3 after the player’s third year.

So if a player like Jones were to sit for three years like Rodgers did, the team would have to make a decision on whether to pick up the fifth-year option before the player ever becomes a starter. Complicating the decision is the fact that Jones was a top-10 pick; thus, his 2023 fifth-year option will equate to the 2022 transition tender for quarterbacks. For Rams quarterback Jared Goff and Eagles quarterback Carson Wentz, top-10 picks in 2016 whose fifth-year options recently were exercised, that’s an injury-guaranteed salary of $22.783 million for 2020.

This contractual reality makes it far less likely that the Giants would sit Jones for three years. Indeed, if they don’t plan to transition from Eli Manning to Jones until 2022, why even take a quarterback now? In today’s NFL, it’s important to use first-round picks on players who will be playing as rookies or, at the latest, in their second seasons. And if a team isn’t willing to view a potential first-round pick that way, the team should draft someone else.