John Foti asks: The Giants have only $1.8 million in cap space for 2026. I was a bit surprised since Darren Waller and Daniel Jones salaries are finally off the books. I know teams have ways to manipulate the cap and I expect we’ll see some cuts and restructures.
Do you think Harbaugh’s arrival changes how the cap is handled?
One more thing. I keep reading that the Giants have 112 million in cap space for 2027. However, they only have 23 players signed for 2027, so considering that they have to add another 30 players to the roster, that’s not really a lot of cap space.
Ed says: John, Harbaugh is not the GM. So, cap management is not directly in his purview. Still, I wouldn’t be surprised if he has suggestions or if someone from the Ravens’ front office who dealt with the cap ends up with the Giants.
Quite honestly, I think the cap management was going to change somewhat no matter who the head coach was. I know that Joe Schoen has been resistant to using void years, but I also know that he has said he would be willing to do that now with a young quarterback on a rookie contract.
As for 2027, I can’t worry about that right now. We haven’t even gotten to 2206 free agency yet, so that is getting way ahead of yourself.
Karl Oltz asks: I just read that Harbaugh has hired three quality control coaches. I have never been exactly sure what role a QC coach plays. Can you enlighten me?
Ed says: Karl, a quality control coach is basically a low-level coach who does pretty much anything the coach or coaches he reports to don’t want to do or don’t have time to do. They are support staff, in a way.
ESPN once described the role this way:
In a nutshell: They’re responsible for writing scouting reports on future opponents, often working a game or two ahead. They draw up the plays the coaches want in the game plan that week. They put together the practice scripts. They assist in the coaches’ booth on game day.
The short answer is that quality control coaches do whatever anybody else doesn’t want to do. They are the interns of the coaching world. They are assistant coaches for assistant coaches, filling in all the little busywork that other coaches can’t or won’t do in a given week.
The longer answer is that those duties vary a lot by team. Some teams want their quality control coaches down in the weeds, sorting through the little details that other coaches don’t have the time to look at. For other teams, it’s largely a data entry job, going through information in the team’s video cataloging system and making sure it all lines up correctly. On other teams, they might be making cutups of specific down and distance situations for other coaches to look at as they gameplan.
There are two main consistent features, though: it’s all low-level grunt work and it’s all fairly low-paid work.
Jack MacMullen asks: My understanding is that (most?) of the former coaches had (1) year left on their contracts. Are the Giants obligated to pay on these agreements plus all the contracts of the new coaches?
I know some process must be in play, as this always happens when new head coaches come aboard.
Ed says: Jack, the short answer is that to my understanding most coaches contracts are guaranteed. So, provided a coach is fired “without cause,” meaning there was no breach of contract, the firing team is responsible for paying the remaining part of the contract.
There is, though, “mitigation.” When a coach accepts a new job, part or all of his remaining salary from the firing team is “mitigated,” or cancelled. That means the coach isn’t double-dipping and making two paychecks.
This article by Andrew Brandt goes into greater detail.
David Whitford asks: My question is in regards to how teams (most notably the Giants) value their scouting departments? With it being known that the best way to build a sustained winning team is through the draft, wouldn’t it make sense for teams to be falling over themselves to try and find and employ the best scouts in the business? Do you know if Harbaugh’s demand to have more payroll assigned to his assistants include bumping up what budget will be allotted to their scouting department?
Ed says: David, I don’t know about payroll bumps. I do know that GM Joe Schoen has spent two decades in scouting, is still a scout at heart, and places tremendous value on the scouting staff. That is a big reason why that staff has been revamped since Schoen became general manager.
Might there continue to be changes in that department? Sure. I do think, though, that every team tries to hire the best scouts it can.
Kölnerbigblue asks: Given the agility or lack thereof we saw from Evan Neal and the fact that he did not workout at neither the Combine and Alabama ProDay (correct me if I’m wrong, I’d be interested to learn how important Harbaugh considers those tests. I don’t care about the 40 yard dash for OLmen (they should limit it to 10 yds for them IMO) but I suspect the ability to go side to side would be important for OLmen, particularly OTs. If you haven’t heard Harbaugh’s opinion on this topic from him our your colleagues in Baltimore, can you ask him for us? I know we often snidely call them the Underwear Wars but I suspect there is some useful information that can come out of those drills.
Ed says: Kölner, I don’t know for certain about John Harbaugh’s preferences, and how much physical height-weight-size or testing scores matter to him. Right now, all we have to go on are the Ravens drafts.
In 2022, Baltimore took safety Kyle Hamilton and center Tyler Linderbaum in Round 1. Hamilton was considered too slow and unathletic by some. Linderbaum was in the first percentile in arm length and wingspan. In 2023, wide receiver Zay Flowers was taken in Round 1 despite being eighth percentile in height, eighth percentile in wingspan and third percentile in arm length.
We will see how it plays out. We don’t know how much pull Harbaugh had in those drafts. My guess, though, is Harbaugh cares more about what he sees on the tape than he does about someone’s testing or physical profile.
Jim Whelan asks: I read a lot about the Giants good young players but rarely is Tracy mentioned. I see him getting some meaningful snaps in 2026. Your thoughts?
Ed says: Jim, I don’t agree that Tyrone Tracy is rarely mentioned. Without doubt, he was overshadowed early in the season by Cam Skattebo. He is, though, a good player. I would fully expect him to be a major part of the running back rotation in 2026.
Gary Trauner asks: The Giants may be a “storied” franchise, but let’s be honest, they are not a consistently good one. I’ll cherry pick a starting year – the first game I ever went to with my dad/brothers as a wee lad – 1964 (we had season tickets in the end zone bleachers – loved to watch Joe Morrison run down to our end and do his warmups in front of the bleacher bum fans – made me a Giants fan for life which I’ve handed down to my two boys). 1963 was also our last glory year – although we lost the Championship game – before mediocrity and then the Wilderness Years set in.
- From 1964 through 2025, the Giants have had 32 losing seasons (52.5% of years), 7 breakeven seasons (11.5% of years) and only 22 winning seasons (36% of years). If you remove years where we finished just one game above breakeven (basically, 9-7), our strong winning percentage over the year is 26% of years. Granted, one of those 9-7 years we backed into the playoffs and own the Super Bowl.
- We’ve won our division 8 times in those 61 years (13% of the years).
- We had a good run from 1984-1990 where we had winning records in 6 out of 7 years, and 2005 – 2021 where we had winning records in 6 out of 8 years (with the other two year being breakeven). Take out those two stretches and we have had winning records in 22% of the other 46 years since 1964 – 2 out of every 10 years!
Let’s also remember that things only turned around when the league and Commissioner Pete Rozelle inserted itself into the Giants GM hiring process and insisted they hire George Young as a condition for allowing the Giants to continue normal operations. Eventually, Young and then Accorsi moved on and ownership reverted back to – objectively – poor hiring of front office and coaching staffs.
Let’s not ignore the 4 Super Bowl victories – we will always have those and only 4 franchises have more (and the Cowboys haven’t won one in over 30 years. Hah!) And, yes, there are a lot of other franchises that have also been inconsistent, or even consistently bad, in terms of the win-loss metric.
By all accounts, the Mara family are good people and extremely loyal when it comes to their franchise and their employees (again, a sign that they are good people).
But if you assess their ownership by won-lost records and consistency, and assume that winning is a key metric for a successful NFL franchise, it’s hard to come away concluding they are skilled at consistently stewarding the franchise towards that metric.
I would love your thoughts on how important it is to recognize the above, not sugarcoat who we have been for the past 60 years, and how it might impact ownership/fan support going forward.
Ed says: Gary, I am going to give a fairly short answer to a very long, well thought-out question.
It is absolutely fair to look at the Giants and say they have not had the consistent success any franchise would like to have. They have not been the Pittsburgh Steelers, of the Baltimore Ravens of the John Harbaugh years.
Few franchises reach that level of consistency and maintain it for extended periods of time.
That said, the four Super Bowl titles and five appearances tell you that when the Giants get it right, they really get it right.
I always say that the vast majority of NFL fans would trade places with Giants fans in a heartbeat based on the franchise’s overall accomplishments. It is hard to explain why the lows are so low, and they aren’t fun, but no one is giving back the highs.
Submit a question
Have a Giants-related question? E-mail it to [email protected] and it might be featured in our weekly mailbag.
See More:
