The 2026 Free Agency Thread

[Canuck]

Do we think that there will be muliple big splurges?

Listening to Keim and Standig it seems like they will not likely land the big fish (Lindenbaum, Pierce, Phillips,Hendrickson) which I am good with, but if I'm going to spend Oweh from SD would be my top pick.

I also really like LBs Nakobe Dean or Kaden Elliss, Tremaine Edmunds would be a good get as well if he is released.

CB Nashawn Wright is alo underrrated IMO and woudl be a significant upgrade.

 

[Discobob]

I’m good with Burks as the 4th outside receiver (regardless of whether he’s considered #4/5/6 on the depth chart). As the backup X or Z though? I wouldn’t be at all happy with that.

Now, it’s hard to really judge him based on our qb play and other issues (he went against some quality secondaries, for example), but his best game was 3 catches on 3 targets for 58 yards in the blowout vs DET. His second best game was either 1 for 1 for 15 yards (in 33 plays), or 2 for 5 for 30 yards (in 45 plays). He had 10 catches on the year. Yes, he didn’t play a ton, but that’s a whole lot of projection/hope for a guy to be 1 injury away from starting.

Yes, yes, yes

I'd like him on our roster, but the problem is Burks, Lane, and McCaffery are all in the same boat IMO. They haven't justified being anything other than a "what if" type of player.

I'm not saying ditch them all, but we need some WRs that have actually proven they can do it.

 

[Canuck]

I dont think people are doing the math here.

We have 30 unrestricted free agents and most of them aren't expected back.

We have 6 draft picks but only two in the first 4 rounds.

So unless we're planning on fielding a roster with 2 dozen undrafted free agents we need to bring in at least 20 free agents.

So yeah if we bring in only 6 or 7 mid level guys or 2 big name guys we're fucked.

We literally have no choice but to go nuts in free agency, so it'll either be like 2 years ago when we had the most roster turnover in the league with mostly aging stop gap signings or it'll be a plethora of big names combined with a bunch of stop gap type signings but it won't be 6 to 8 guys unless we're planning to transfer to the NBA.

IDK, from what we have been hearing it sounds like the would like to bring back some of the UFAs on teh team, but in reduced roles.

 

[heisenberg]

IDK, from what we have been hearing it sounds like the would like to bring back some of the UFAs on teh team, but in reduced roles.

Im sure we'll probably bring a few back that dont get opportunities elsewhere but even still we are most likely going to have the highest roster turnover in the league for the second time in 3 years and this time we have far less draft capital.

The question really isn't whether or not we're going to be bringing in a huge influx of free agents but how much we're going to spend on them.

 

[Bulldog]

When you finish 5-12 and are the oldest team in the league the one positive is that there are usually a few options for ANY player that leaves your club because the talent level was not that high to begin with.

Are you really going to miss anyone who departs from the defensive line, secondary or wide receiver?

I think we can find comparable players on waivers, forget top end free agency

 

[Anselmheifer]

I dont think people are doing the math here.

We have 30 unrestricted free agents and most of them aren't expected back.

We have 6 draft picks but only two in the first 4 rounds.

So unless we're planning on fielding a roster with 2 dozen undrafted free agents we need to bring in at least 20 free agents.

So yeah if we bring in only 6 or 7 mid level guys or 2 big name guys we're fucked.

We literally have no choice but to go nuts in free agency, so it'll either be like 2 years ago when we had the most roster turnover in the league with mostly aging stop gap signings or it'll be a plethora of big names combined with a bunch of stop gap type signings but it won't be 6 to 8 guys unless we're planning to transfer to the NBA.

It’s not the whole 90 man roster that counts toward the cap though, right? Isn’t it just the top 53 salaries?

On a different note, spotrac says the Giants only have 13 million to spend. How are they goong
To be big players?

 

[Higskin]

This to start building the Dline....

 

[Higskin]

 

[Bulldog]

So, if he comes here what guarantees do we have that a guy who seems very mercurial and with a big attitude is going to mesh with Quinn and Blough and not become a distraction?

Once a guy shows you that he basically holds an organization up after he is paid his money and thumbs his nose at them is a guy that can do the same things in a new place.

Just think Antonio Brown here. A few teams thought he would be different with them and that blew up in their faces as he turned out to just be a bad guy.

Just because a guy played college with another player to me doesn't mean much.

Daniels is just starting out in the NFL in developing his career, he isn't a mid-career or late career veteran like Peyton Manning or Tom Brady that can step up and tell receivers when they are coming up short and need to work harder.

I don't know if he would be comfortable if that situation arose here.

Better not to test it IMO.

 

[Anselmheifer]

I wonder when SF is going to release Aiyuk. It seems like they may be ****ing with him by waiting. If they wait until after the draft a lot of spots will be filled and money spent, and he’ll be stuck with a small deal without any good choices.

 

[Primus Porcus]

I dont think people are doing the math here.

We have 30 unrestricted free agents and most of them aren't expected back.

We have 6 draft picks but only two in the first 4 rounds.

So unless we're planning on fielding a roster with 2 dozen undrafted free agents we need to bring in at least 20 free agents.

So yeah if we bring in only 6 or 7 mid level guys or 2 big name guys we're fucked.

We literally have no choice but to go nuts in free agency, so it'll either be like 2 years ago when we had the most roster turnover in the league with mostly aging stop gap signings or it'll be a plethora of big names combined with a bunch of stop gap type signings but it won't be 6 to 8 guys unless we're planning to transfer to the NBA.

It's something we have to consider about what kind of moves we're actually going to be making this offseason. There are going to be A LOT of moves, but the ability to go big very well may be limited to a point. I do think we're gonna be more aggresive than the last two years, but I do feel there will be a level of disappointment with some fans, and it may not be warranted.

 

[skinsinparadise]

 

[Anselmheifer]

It's something we have to consider about what kind of moves we're actually going to be making this offseason. There are going to be A LOT of moves, but the ability to go big very well may be limited to a point. I do think we're gonna be more aggresive than the last two years, but I do feel there will be a level of disappointment with some fans, and it may not be warranted.

We Have very little high end talent. Solid depth without solid starters buys you very little. I’d rather they swing big on high end talent and go cheap on depth if they have to.

 

[skinsinparadise]

Aiyuk I am guessing is the gravy WR to another bigger money signing. If that's what they do at WR I am more than cool with it

 

[The Brotherhood]

Aiyuk I am guessing is the gravy WR to another bigger money signing. If that's what they do at WR I am more than cool with it

It makes sense, not putting all your eggs in the Aiyuk basket

 

[skinsinparadise]

I dont think people are doing the math here.

We have 30 unrestricted free agents and most of them aren't expected back.

We have 6 draft picks but only two in the first 4 rounds.

So unless we're planning on fielding a roster with 2 dozen undrafted free agents we need to bring in at least 20 free agents.

So yeah if we bring in only 6 or 7 mid level guys or 2 big name guys we're fucked.

We literally have no choice but to go nuts in free agency, so it'll either be like 2 years ago when we had the most roster turnover in the league with mostly aging stop gap signings or it'll be a plethora of big names combined with a bunch of stop gap type signings but it won't be 6 to 8 guys unless we're planning to transfer to the NBA.

Judging by Keim and Standig, mostly Keim.

I get the vibe, 3 big signings -- 17-25 million range. One at corner, One at edge, One at WR.

Then they'd look at edge #2 at something moderate to lower and Wr #2 at something moderate to lower and TE at something moderate to lower and perhaps RB also moderate to lower.

Like I was saying yesterday, no way they are signing like 6 marquee expensive FAs. It just seems crazy from a cap standpoint. But if they do 3 big swings and a few moderate swings, that will likely make them one of the biggest FA spenders maybe the top spender.

 

[Primus Porcus]

We Have very little high end talent. Solid depth without solid starters buys you very little. I’d rather they swing big on high end talent and go cheap on depth if they have to.

I get it, but 'cheap' is relative. Plus, there was a lot of shrapnel fired at Peters stating that he didn't load the depth well enough. It's going to cost money to build out the roster. Not to mention, the FA market is not beaming with elite talent, so there's going to be a level of over-spending because of the demand across the NFL outweighing the supply. Guys are going to get more than they are worth, because there isn't a massive pool of premium talent at a lot of positions.

 

[heisenberg]

It's something we have to consider about what kind of moves we're actually going to be making this offseason. There are going to be A LOT of moves, but the ability to go big very well may be limited to a point. I do think we're gonna be more aggresive than the last two years, but I do feel there will be a level of disappointment with some fans, and it may not be warranted.

No doubt, all I want is an offseason like the patriots had last year then fill in the rest with cheaper guys.

I think you'd be fooling yourself if you expected or even hoped they'd fill 30 roster spots with marquee free agents.

All im hoping for is 2 or 3 that get noticed then maybe another 3 or 4 that are solid contributors, the other 15 to 20 can be mostly camp body/low depth kind of guys.

 

[SkinsLife]

So, if he comes here what guarantees do we have that a guy who seems very mercurial and with a big attitude is going to mesh with Quinn and Blough and not become a distraction?

Once a guy shows you that he basically holds an organization up after he is paid his money and thumbs his nose at them is a guy that can do the same things in a new place.

Just think Antonio Brown here. A few teams thought he would be different with them and that blew up in their faces as he turned out to just be a bad guy.

Just because a guy played college with another player to me doesn't mean much.

Daniels is just starting out in the NFL in developing his career, he isn't a mid-career or late career veteran like Peyton Manning or Tom Brady that can step up and tell receivers when they are coming up short and need to work harder.

I don't know if he would be comfortable if that situation arose here.

Better not to test it IMO.

There are no guarantees in life! period! Chase Young was a guaranteed elite talent DE. How did that work out?
He is no Antonio Brown and its unfair to compare him to Brown. He is not locker room cancer by all accounts. he doesnt get in to fights or beat womens, etc.

He is just unhappy in SF.. by all accounts he is a very good WR, borderline elite when healthy.. and he has a hard on for playing with JD... its stupid not to take advantage of this situation. I am sure that he know that he fucked up with SF.. he tried to backtrack at some point. He should have learned a lesson.
I am not paying him 30mil a year.. but getting him relatively cheaply on a short contract when fa options are very thin... its a no brainer.

 

[Primus Porcus]

No doubt, all I want is an offseason like the patriots had last year then fill in the rest with cheaper guys.

I think you'd be fooling yourself if you expected or even hoped they'd fill 30 roster spots with marquee free agents.

All im hoping for is 2 or 3 that get noticed then maybe another 3 or 4 that are solid contributors, the other 15 to 20 can be mostly camp bodies.

Well there's a lot of criticism regarding the roster make up, and we're into the 3rd rendition of what is seemingly the same story. Likely a number of short term contracts to continue to field a 53 man roster, a couple 'longer' term contracts, and draft picks. The alternative to what we've been watching happen, is signing a bunch of guys to multi-year deals that ultimately end up weighing down the roster. There aren't just a bunch of 25 year old depth guys walking the street either, those guys are on rosters elsewhere. Free Agents are free agents because they either got too expensive for their current team (doesn't mean they aren't worth it), or they weren't good enough for their current team. The first guy cost a lot, the second guy you hope you can get more out of them but don't want to invest long term because there is a reason they're unemployed. So I understand the frustration with the choice to continue to buy short term, i also can understand that those 'worthy' of a long term spend may not exactly be out there just ready to be picked up.