Could New York Giants see some changes to their ownership group in 2026? — and more

The New York Giants have already undergone a shift in their management group this offseason with the hiring of John Harbaugh as head coach and long-time NFL home office admin Dawn Aponte as their new senior vice president of football operations and strategy.

The next moves, however, could be more significant.

John Mara, whose family owns 45 percent of the Giants, has been undergoing treatments for cancer. He has been present throughout, even playing a large role in the courting of Harbaugh, but how long he can actively remain in his job is concerning.

Mara's partner, Steve Tisch, the team's Chairman of the Board, whose family also owns a 45 percent stake in the club, has his own issues. Tisch's name has appeared in the files released by the Department of Justice in the Jeffrey Epstein affair, and discipline from the league could be forthcoming.

There is a scenario where the Giants have a new CEO and a new Chairman this year. It's a difficult subject to broach, but the powers that remain in the building have to be girding themselves for what could be coming.

At the Super Bowl, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell promised to "look at all the facts" in Tisch's case, basically kicking the can down the road. That road is coming to an end soon, as the NFL's new league year begins next week and the owners are scheduled to convene at their annual meeting at the end of the month in Phoenix.

There will be no avoiding the issue. Tisch has violated sections of the Personal Conduct Act, and it has to, at the very least, be a topic of conversation.

Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk recently spoke to a league official who told him that Tisch has to be removed. That may not be as easy to do as one thinks. In fact, some believe the league won't do very much at all unless directed by the Department of Justice.

The league could be waiting for it to all blow over. Alternatively, the NFL could be hoping that the Tisch family will nudge Steve out of the spotlight as the representative of the folks who own the 45-percent share of the Giants.

Regardless, it’s not going away. As one high-level employee with another team told PFT on Friday, “Steve has to go.”

Whatever the outcome, the NFL must investigate Tisch. Until it does, it’s impossible for any league investigation of a player or any other non-owner to have a shred of credibility.

The Giants' ownership structure used to be cut and dry -- 50 percent Mara, 50 percent Tisch. Last summer, they decided to take on a third investor, Juila Koch, whose family bought a 10 percent equity stake in the club.

The brand hasn't taken much of a hit, if at all, which is another reason for inaction. The NFL is more popular than ever, and the Giants are one of its most valuable properties. It's unlikely the Tisch family will sell their stake, which is valued anywhere between $4 and $5 billion.

Knowing the history of this franchise, there probably won't be any selling of any stakes from either side.

As Florio suggests, the organization could coax the 76-year-old Steve Tisch into resigning his titles to another family member (his brother Jonathan or sister, Laurie, who are both board members) and steer clear of the team indefinitely. He'd still be an owner, but he'll be out of sight. That's a face-saving move for all.

As for the Mara end, if John has to step down, the likely candidates to take his spot are his younger brother, Chris, or his sister, Susan McDonnell, both of whom currently serve on the board.

This article originally appeared on Giants Wire: Could New York Giants see some changes to their ownership group in 2026?

Arsenal Interest Rebuffed as Corinthians Hold Firm on Matheuzinho

Arsenal’s long range scouting network has once again led them to South America. Yet, as reported by RTIESPORTE.COM, Corinthians have drawn a clear line regarding right back Matheuzinho, rejecting two offers including one from the Premier League.

The 25 year old has emerged as a central figure under Dorival Júnior. According to the report, Marcelo Paz believes “It is not the right time to negotiate the defender.”, with the club viewing him as a structural pillar rather than a tradable asset. Arsenal have monitored him since last season, but admiration alone does not shift negotiating positions.

Photo IMAGO

Contract Strength and Internal Priority

Matheuzinho’s contract runs until December 2028. That timeframe alters the dynamic significantly. Corinthians hold leverage, reinforced by a release clause of 100 million euros for international clubs and 50 million euros domestically.

RTIESPORTE.COM outline that the club purchased 60 percent of his economic rights in 2024 for 4 million euros from Flamengo. Since then, he has become a dressing room reference point, described as one of the principal leaders within the squad.

With a congested calendar and Copa Libertadores ambitions, stability has become policy. The report indicates that even proposals offering higher wages abroad have not tempted the player. Corinthians are planning a meeting to discuss salary appreciation and to reinforce the sporting project around him.

Arsenal’s Calculated Watch

For Arsenal, this is familiar territory. Monitoring does not equal immediate escalation. The club have built a reputation for patience, identifying profiles that fit technical and developmental frameworks.

Matheuzinho’s versatility and leadership appeal. Yet with Corinthians signalling that negotiations would only begin at figures approaching the international clause, the pathway is narrow.

At present, the message from São Paulo is unambiguous. Matheuzinho remains central to Dorival Júnior’s plans, and Corinthians have little appetite for compromise.

Our View – EPL Index Analysis

For Arsenal supporters, this report reads as both frustrating and encouraging. Frustrating because the profile is compelling. A 25 year old right back with leadership credentials and Libertadores ambition suggests resilience and maturity. Encouraging because it confirms the club’s recruitment radar remains expansive and proactive.

Fans understand that Arsenal rarely rush negotiations where leverage is limited. A 100 million euro clause places Corinthians in command. Even so, the knowledge that the player has not pushed for a move adds nuance. Arsenal supporters tend to favour targets who demonstrate clarity of intent.

There is also strategic patience to consider. If Arsenal view Matheuzinho as long term depth rather than immediate transformation, timing matters. The club’s hierarchy will not be drawn into inflated bidding for symbolic victories.

Supporters will watch closely. South American recruitment has yielded success before. Whether this evolves into a concrete approach may depend less on desire and more on opportunity.

It’s a long-standing feature of this article to point out previous iterations of this article. When I wrote my first one eight years ago (holy crap, I’m getting old), the Rockies were trending in the right direction, and the ownership got precious little credit for it. So I wrote a string of articles focused on countering the narrative that the Monforts (“Cheapfarts”) didn’t want to spend to win, preferring to turn Coors Field into the best bar in LoDo. I stand by those takes at the time. 

Since then, an altogether different narrative has emerged: The Monforts were the baseball equivalent of the golden retriever wearing a necktie sitting at a computer. Sure, they demonstrated a willingness to spend their money on the roster, but after a Super Bullpen, the Ian Desmond Experiment, and especially the Kris Bryant Experience, it cannot be said that they had any idea what they were doing. Had the failures only been with the top-level signings while everything further down the roster functioned, we might be able to find a way to extend ample credit. Unfortunately, the “draft and develop” identity of roster construction has consistently failed to identify and develop MLB-level talent. The Rockies were increasingly viewed as a team stuck in the past, unable or unwilling to change. This was not only a narrative I had evidence with which to counter, but I believe these previews played a part in reinforcing it. 

That was the main theme of last year’s article, even with looming labor unrest between players and owners after the expiration of the 2026 collective bargaining agreement. While I did and do support MLB making structural changes (I wrote an only half-joking article last October titled “Contract the Dodgers”), my point then was that those changes would have no bearing on the Rockies because the team’s struggles ran deeper. At their core, the Rockies were dinosaurs stuck in the La Brea Tar Pits, with (most of) the rest of the league having evolved with the changing conditions of the game. And the reason they were stuck in those pits was because of loyalty, inability, or a tragic mix of both. (Stop picturing Dinger in tar pits! He’s a national treasure, you monster!)

So what should it tell us when a team that could never change actually changes? Yes, they have made changes before, but this time seems different somehow. This time, something at the core seems to have changed. My colleagues will address the front office and coaching staffs in the coming days, and there is a lot of evidence of structural change in those areas beyond mere swapping of personnel. But the changes manifesting at those levels start at the top. After three 100+ loss seasons, including a puncher’s chance at the modern loss record, the Monforts seem to have finally understood that the thing to do when you hit rock bottom is stop digging—you’re more likely to find tar at the bottom of that pit than oil. 

Obviously it’s too soon to tell: the team could improve by 19 games and still lose 100 again. But for those of us still left who care about the Rockies (and if you’re reading this article after the last four seasons, that includes you—and I just have to ask, who hurt you?), we may need to consider the possibility of hope. Yes, I know: it’s the hope that kills you. But we’ve been as good as dead with regard to hope for a long time with this team. And the way this offseason played out indicates that there is certainly something different happening. It remains to be seen whether or not “different” translates into improvement, and even if it does it may be a long time before we actually see results. After all, in sports as in life, nothing is guaranteed; there are only ever a small number of things in your control.

We may as well allow ourselves a little glimmer that we could be looking at the beginning of something…not big maybe, but at least not terrible. We should allow ourselves to hope, not only for the sake of our interactions with a (previously?) moribund baseball franchise in a cow town at the foot of the Rocky Mountains, but for the sake of what it may signal about our own lives.

After all, if Rockies ownership can change, who’s to say you, me, we, or they can’t change, too?

Please keep in mind our Purple Row Community Guidelines when you’re commenting. Thanks!