Stefon Diggs, Saquon Barkley Drama Highlights Reality of NFL Contenders, Pretenders

Two NFL stars made implicit statements to their respective teams this week, and the reaction to—and fallout from—those statements spoke volumes about their statuses as well as the contender-versus-pretender statuses of their teams.

---

Signs of a Schism Between the Buffalo Bills and Stefon Diggs

Bills wide receiver Stefon Diggs was a no-show for the start of Buffalo's mandatory minicamp, causing head coach Sean McDermott to express considerable concern.

Meanwhile, quarterback Josh Allen didn't try to pretend there weren't issues to be ironed out when he spoke with reporters on Tuesday:

"I know internally we're working on some things, not football-related, but Stef, he's my guy. Excuse my ... I f--king love him. He's a brother of mine. This does not work, what we're doing here, without him. We wish he was in here today and was out there on the field with us and that's not the case, but I've got his back no matter what. And again, I've got no doubts that we will figure out what's going on and freaking love him. I can't stress that enough. There's things that I could do better and to help out with this process and try to get him back here and be the Buffalo Bill that he's meant to be."

Considering Diggs forced his way out of Minnesota just three years ago, there was indeed reason to wonder if this was going to become ugly—with the 29-year-old potentially leaving the Bills high and dry without a player coming off three consecutive triple-digit catch, 1,200-plus-yard, eight-plus touchdown campaigns.

---

Saquon Barkley Doesn't Rule Out Sitting Out the 2023 Season

Meanwhile, running back Saquon Barkley continued to express his own frustration with the fact that the New York Giants slapped him with the franchise tag earlier this offseason.

When asked on Monday if he would considering sitting out the 2023 season if he doesn't have a long-term contract in place, the 26-year-old said "that's a card I could play."

Cooper Neill/Getty Images

Barkley, like Diggs, had been absent from organized team activities (OTAs) throughout the spring, and there haven't been many indications that he's willing to budge, or that the two sides have come close on a long-term deal as we move closer to the July 17 deadline for teams to sign franchise-tag recipients to long-term contracts.

If that date passes without a new deal in place, Barkley will have to sign his tender and play for $10.1 million under the tag in 2023 or not play at all. The latter scenario would not be ideal considering the 2018 No. 2 overall pick put up 1,650 scrimmage yards as a Pro Bowler in 2022.

---

Bills Move Swiftly with Diggs

But here's where the obvious difference lies.

The Bills are a major contender, and they know how critical Diggs is to the operation. Even those words from Allen showed there's an understanding that sacrifices (or at least changes) might have to be made in order to keep the three-time Pro Bowler happy.

And it appears the Bills made sure to do exactly that.

Nic Antaya/Getty Images

Just a day after McDermott voiced his concern about Diggs' absences, the eight-year veteran was a regular participant in mandatory minicamp.

And per Chris Brown of One Bills Live, we heard this from the head coach: "I feel like we're in a real good spot. The details of it are going to remain in house. But we've had very healthy conversations."

In a matter of 24 hours, it sure sounds as though it's hunky-dory for Diggs and the Bills.

---

Still a Stalemate with Barkley and the Giants

Yet nothing has changed on the Barkley front, and on Wednesday, the team went so far as to give wide receiver Parris Campbell reps in the backfield.

It sure seems as though they'd prefer to force Barkley to play under the tag with no long-term financial ties in 2023, likely because he's an injury-prone player at a fragile position that has been devalued by the nature of this pass-happy era, and because the position undoubtedly has the shortest shelf life in pro football.

It also appears the Giants may be willing to call Barkley's bluff on sitting out the 2023 season, possibly because doing so would cost him an extremely critical year in his prime.

Le'Veon Bell did exactly that in 2018, and he now regrets that decision.

---

Leverage, Positional Value and Contender Status

What all of this comes down to is Diggs had leverage and Barkley does not.

Diggs should have many years left as as wide receiver, and he's a key piece at a heavily relied on position for a team that knows he could be the difference. After all, only two teams have better Super Bowl odds than the Bills at DraftKings.

Precedents indicate that Barkley's clock is ticking a lot faster than it is for Diggs. And while he's a very important part of the Giants' makeup, the team sent a message when it handed quarterback Daniel Jones a juicy contract instead of Barkley this offseason.

If Barkley were a Bill, this might have played out differently. But the Giants also have to be realistic about how close they are to being a Super Bowl contender.

Barkley could put a team like Buffalo over the top, but even with him on the roster in 2022, the Giants had a negative scoring margin and failed to truly threaten for a title.

Only six teams have worse Super Bowl odds than New York right now, which is why sacrificing tremendously for a great-but-breakable back who might give in and play anyway doesn't make a lot of sense.

And so once again we're reminded that this is a business. Oftentimes, a cruel one.