I was having this discussion with a friend. Would you prefer the Giants to go 5-11, 6-10 OR go all the way to the superbowl and lose on a missed FG ala Norwood?
really aren't that tough to handle, at least for me. Unless you are a Browns fan and get beat over the head with them year after year after year, there comes a point where you just resign yourself to the teams situation. If the Giants lose a game at 2-5 Im not losing a ton of sleep. I've already adopted the mindset that its over. And little nuggets at the end of the rainbow as consolation prizes like the high draft pick help too
Nothing hurts more than getting really close and not getting it done. And Im not talking the Giants getting dominated in SB 35 (although that hurt a ton). Im talking the wide right scenario discussed in Dans post. Those are the ones you play the "what if" game forever with. I can't imagine the mental gymnastics die hard Pat fans will be going through with SB 42 and 46 over the next 25 years. Probably double what I still do with the 94 Knicks.
And in most cases, franchises who come that close to tasting glory and fall short have a tough time ever fully recovering. It is an organizational blow
and how far in development he is. If we had nothing but journeymen QB's, I'd go for tanking every time. If we had an established QB like Eli, I'd rather see 9-7 and 8-8.
grew up a Giant/Knick/Met fan. Too young for 86. Was old enough for 90, but not old enough to fully appreciate the rarity of championships. My experience was basically formed by the following...
When Tynes kick went through the uprights in GB, as thrilled as i was there was a part of me that was completely dreading the prospect of seeing my team get so close yet fall short again.
I'd prefer to see the front office dump bad contracts -
that are nice to imagine while your team is turning in a crappy season. But I also think about the players who will return the following year that much older, or who may not return at all. If this season continues on this arc I'll not only be wondering about how we acquire the additional and upgraded talent we need to improve -- I'll also be wondering about whether the adequate talent we *do* have takes another dip.
Would you rather be Trey Junkin'd and have to deal with all offseason, or would you rather know you're out of it early, and look towards getting a major player in the draft.
Nothing hurts more than getting really close and not getting it done. And Im not talking the Giants getting dominated in SB 35 (although that hurt a ton). Im talking the wide right scenario discussed in Dans post. Those are the ones you play the "what if" game forever with. I can't imagine the mental gymnastics die hard Pat fans will be going through with SB 42 and 46 over the next 25 years. Probably double what I still do with the 94 Knicks.
And in most cases, franchises who come that close to tasting glory and fall short have a tough time ever fully recovering. It is an organizational blow
However, I think the 5-11 season would be better for the Giants as a team because they'd probably recover faster and be competitive again sooner.
If we were a team that had never won one or hadn't in decades and got that close only to lose, though.. man, that would be tough.
94 Knicks- Lose finals
99 Knicks- Lose finals
00 Mets- Lose WS
00 Giants- Lose SB
When Tynes kick went through the uprights in GB, as thrilled as i was there was a part of me that was completely dreading the prospect of seeing my team get so close yet fall short again.
So, do I want a good team that goes to the SB and loses, or a bad team that fails early in the season, and loses a lot?
Guess.....you have 3 guesses....the first two don't count......