I can see 2 premium at most: 1 FA acquisition to start immediately at LG/RT and possibly an OL in the top 3 rounds. Though if they get a starter in FA, I think they can wait until the 4th and grab a developmental guy (Marpet?) as well.
offer to trade down. I don't think Reese approaches it that way. I think he attacks need in free agency when he can. I think he tries to stick with his mantra of BPA in the draft while being very concious of need. I doubt he ever puts himself in the box that the press outlines for him.
I think we do need at min 3 lineman (I would be ok with 4 new ones), 2 of which looked as LONG term starters.
We also need WR, Blocking TE, RB (late in draft or vet like Bush for 2.5m 1 yr deal, etc), LB, DE, Safety and Nickel corner (that might be filled with WT3rd possibly staying)
you should have five starter-caliber players, but your first and second guys off the bench cannot be guys like Walton who lose their physical matchups more often than not. Injuries will happen and those guys will play.
Based on that, 2 solid players off the bench plus the first-rounder comes to Mike's number. Jones is an unknown, but hope springs eternal.
Did Da Pope provide any context for his argument?
They need one starter and a couple of really solid depth guys.
Garbage like Jerry can't cut it anymore, given the questions about some of the [penciled in] starters. However they find those three or so guys is however they find them.
The problem is that they also need help at pretty much every position on defense and only have one weapon to really bank on when it comes to offensive skill players too. There's only so many picks and so much cap space, with only so much talent as feasible options for them given the draft/FA pools.
Like it or not, seems to me the Giants have 1 hole to fill on the starting O-Line. Have to believe given where they sit right now, Beatty, Richburg, Schwartz and Pugh are all penciled in as starters. Who knows what they do in F/A. But given that line-up, to think they will spend 3 premium picks on the line is naive.
Giants high on Richburg at Center ( they signed the #1 CFL player as a backup/maybe more),Beatty had a pretty good bounce-back season last year, Schwartz is good just needs to be healthy, Pugh battled through injury but was very good his rookie year.
That's 4 of 5 OL (not counting Jones) that have a decent chance to be pretty good. Get a quality OT/OG in FA and a highly graded OL in the top 3 rounds and you have 6 quality players.
One plug-and-play starter via free agency; one future starter in the draft.
A depth upgrade is needed too, but that's not a "premium" acquisition. Besides, MF has no more insight than we do about the team's view of developmental linemen already on the roster, like Brett Jones, Eric Herman and Michael Bamiro.
Like it or not, seems to me the Giants have 1 hole to fill on the starting O-Line. Have to believe given where they sit right now, Beatty, Richburg, Schwartz and Pugh are all penciled in as starters. Who knows what they do in F/A. But given that line-up, to think they will spend 3 premium picks on the line is naive.
Not sure why you think Beatty wouldnt start. He wasn't remotely a problem last season.
said, I'd like to see them sign one UFA to start on the OL and then draft another OL in the 2-4th round to develop. I'd rather see us draft Cooper/White at #9 if one falls to us or draft defense in that spot, rather than an OL.
and Schwartz comes back ready, I'd like a big nasty G who can maul and provide stability to the C And T positions on doubles, traps, pulls, screens and pass blocking. Look to FA for some experienced depth after that.
This is why I like drafting Scherff and kicking him inside.
really need three or four players, at least two of whom can start. The starters are presumably:
Beatty.
FA/Draft pick.
Richburg.
Schwartz.
Pugh.
Lot of questions with that group. Can Richburg succeed in his first year at center? Will Schwartz provide a boost to the run game? Can Pugh improve over his performance last year? If LG is a draft pick, can that player come in and play well right away. Beatty probably has the fewest question marks.
Most of the rest of the OL should just be jettisoned en masse. That won't happen, but Reynolds, Walton, Jerry, Snyder, and probably Herman and Mosley, shouldn't even be on the team. Mosley couldn't even beat out Jerry. Brown is gone. So is Brewer. Rogers Gaines and Jones are probably the best backups right now, even though neither has played in a regular season game.
We need a FA and a high draft pick, along with a day three pick. Then you hope that Gaines, Jones, and another player are good enough to justify roster spots.
a bit but the point is Reese has been willfully blind to this need for years and he better wake up. This patchwork process has failed miserably. He better start with Scherff or Peat at 9 and go from there.
The hysteria over the OL continues. Complete garbage.
If not via 2 FAs then 1 FA and 1 @ #9, then at 72?(if they can find one to develop).
Need at least 1 vet, 1 rookie to start, and 1 projected upgrade over Walton/Jerry/Brewer and Co.
Unless Jones wins a spot.
Can't count on Schwartz; but if he comes thru the 72? can be developed.
I completely agree that most of our attention should be on defense but which 3 of the following 6 players do you believe are not starters now: JPP, Hankins, Beason, Kennard, Amukamara, DRC?
When it comes to draft & player/personnel, FA, etc...
Salary cap, do the cuts that are needed and then restructure Eli contract. Sign Mike Iupatie and then draft the best offensive lineman no early then the third round. Any other good free agents signing is a plus.
I don't think its full blown hysteria, though they're obviously not
going to invest in the OL the extent one want. Nor can/should they, given how many other issues are on this roster.
The Giants had the 30th YPC in the NFL in 2014, but were still tenth in rushing attempts. Given the clear focus on running the ball (that isn't likely to go away), they absolutely have to improve on their dog shit run blocking along the OL, regardless of what they trot out there at RB, in order to not continue to almost haplessly give away downs.
come in day one and compete with Beatty for LT and another guard in case Schwartz goes down again (Marpett maybe).
Imo if you are going to pay what Beattys contract next contract is going to cost you want to know you have the guy there. Nobody really thinks Beatty is the guy. Not on the Left anyway.
2nd round needs to be a DT or Maxx Williams if he makes it that far or even the DE from Washington.
The Giants will draft a lineman early once again, although maybe not the first round, but probably the second, and they will get a good player too, and i think they will add a lineman through free agency, let's remember we also have Schwartz coming back, he is like adding a free agent also. But I think if the Giants just do that, they should be able to have a pretty good offensive line.
I would not be so eagar to do what the Cowboys did, like so many here are saying, sure they have a great offensive line, and did well with that defense, but I want to see that done again before I say that is the way to do things, and maybe we should ask ourselves how many championships has that produced before we are so certain that is the way to go.
The Giants way of doing things in my view is just fine, Reese has done just fine, he had some bad breaks, and some bad picks also, but EVERYONE does, we need defensive line help, we need help at the safety position, we need help at linebacker, we need help at running back, and we need help at tight end, and these positions should not be ignored just to put all our eggs in upgrading the OLine. Why do that when you can try and do more then that. Spags is going to ask for help to make his defense work, and they have got to give him that help also, or why bring him in here. He is not a magician.
Hes been in the business long enough to know how to address topics like he knows what hes talking about. I dont mean that as a knock, its a remarkable skill. If hes asked a question he cant answer he answers a question that he can speak on rudimentally. Its alot like watching a skilled appellate lawyer addressing questions from a panel of judges.
and the dominos fall into place. all the sudden this Line doesn't look too bad. obviously schwartz needs to be healthy but i was impressed w/him in his brief regular season play
...is horrid and needs to be rebuilt. That said, I think that the best way to ensure that this team makes some noise next year is to build a real o-line. Even one that performs at league average would do wonders for the team.
If the O line sucks again next year it would be criminal.
when it comes to his take on the Giants. But I think he is wrong here. Giants have two young guys and high priority FA on that line right now.
FO has to assume they were good picks, and go forward accordingly. It would be a shame to miss out on some of these receivers and pass rushers that might be available by overloading in one area.
a bit but the point is Reese has been willfully blind to this need for years and he better wake up. This patchwork process has failed miserably. He better start with Scherff or Peat at 9 and go from there.
This is a myth. Reese and the Giants haven't been blind to anything. They've been ineffective, which arguably is worse.
2014 - Weston Richburg - C - 2nd round pick
2013 - Justin Pugh - OT - 1st round pick
2013 - Eric Herman - OG - 7th round pick
2012 - Brandon Mosley - OL - 4th round pick
2012 - Matt McCants - OL - 7th round pick
2011 - James Brewer - OT - 4th round pick
2010 - MItch Petrus - OG - 5th round pick
2009 - Will Beatty - OT - 2nd round pick
Plus free agents (off the top of my head): Geoff Schwartz, John Jerry, J.D. Walton, David Baas.
This isn't "patchwork." It's a team expending huge resources, both in cash and draft picks, to maintain and upgrade its line. The problem isn't lack of attention or lack of resources, it's that most of those moves have failed.
I'd be happier if it really was a problem of inattention. It's worse to see the team blowing pick after pick on OL prospects who never amount to anything, and on free agents who leave you thinking "Oh, THAT's why he was allowed to walk."
I wonder how much film Mike has studied of the Giants
Presuming Pugh is moving inside, you have one OG. Schwartz mans the other OG. That moves Richburg to C. three spots are set to the point that you can't plan on replacing them just yet. On paper, they are the future inside. you don't spend premium picks as a backup plan for a plan you haven't even tried yet.
IF you move Pugh, that leaves no one at RT. So you need an acquisition. If you leave Pugh at RT, you still need an acquisition for OG. either way, only one.
Beatty is the wildcard. they know what they have. If it's good enough, we have LT locked up. If it's not, draft a player to replace him after another year. that player is a backup for this year.
I wouldn't be upset at spending 3 premium picks on OL, but I also don't think it's necessary unless Giants are not sold on one of Schwartz, Richburg, Pugh, and all three have been premium picks over the last 2 years.
nice post. I could argue that they've tried to get too cute in bringing in low draft picks, and marginal FA, so except for the last couple years, they haven't spent massive amounts on OL. but they tried, and failed spectacularly, jury still being out on the last 2 years.
As I've stated multiple times, I'm a firm believer that the position coaches get some significant input in acquisitions in their area. So, what does this say about McNally? that his input is bad over the last 5 or more years, or that they ignore him?
Said Pugh was moving anywhere, what was said was that they are considering it, and that it could be an option depending on what players were added, nothing more then that, and it is also true that Pugh wants to remain at right tackle, so lets not make it a given because that is total bullshit.
that this O-line does not need an overhaul. The running game for this team has been subpar for the past few years. I cannot remember the last time we were able to push the pile forward and gain a yard when we need it. I cannot remember the last time a defense feared our running game and had to stack the box to stop it.
IMO, only Pugh and Richburg should feel comfortable as starters. The others may end up starting for us but this does not mean that their performance and production is adequate.
we need to spend 3 of those 6 "premium acquisitions" on OL. I think two is a more fair #...1 FA and 1 draft pick, and then maybe pick up another low priced vet FA and spend a later draft pick on one. We aren't THAT far away from a solid OL. As long as Schwartz is back healthy, 4 of our 5 starters are set and pretty solid. We do need to acquire 2 guys that are good enough to start right away, which means we would have 6 "starter quality" type OL, and then need to continue to build our depth. Haven't hit on a late (4th or later) round lineman in a while...need to get better there.
was glaring last year. Schwartz was better than Pugh in the short time he played RT and he's a failed RT. And a failed LG too. Schwartz needs to play RG if he can play. That leaves LG or RT for Pugh. But if Pugh plays as poorly next year at either as he did in 2014 he's a problem. He was average at best his rookie year and worse last year supposedly due to playing hurt. Richburg playing LG was below average last year. Walton was even worse at center. If Richburg is just a decent NFL starter at center thats a huge upgrade. If Pugh is a decent NFL starter anywhere on the line that's an upgrade. If there isn't major improvement on the OL next year it will be 6 out 7 with no playoffs. A strong OL fixes the whole team.
a bit but the point is Reese has been willfully blind to this need for years and he better wake up. This patchwork process has failed miserably. He better start with Scherff or Peat at 9 and go from there.
Let's see, we've spent 2 second rounders, a first rounder and one last year's big FA acquisition on the o-line. We draft at least one every. How is that being "willfully blind"?
Repeating the same stupidity over and over again doesn't degrade its continued stupidity.
What he is saying is that the oline has to he what it was and can't use injuries as an excuse. If it takes 3 premium players, so be it but getting the oline to control the game is job 1.
By the way, people are making assumptions that Richburg is an NFL ready center and Pugh is a NFL ready guard. Possibly. They're assuming Schwartz will come all the way back and Beatty will stay healthy. Maybe. But, if they are niot, then what happens? I think that's Francesa'd point
to fix the OL good luck. There's not one guy out of those four that's above average. There'a also zero history of the Giants OL coach improving players. There better be more than that.
the guess would be in the Giants' braintrust is "how well" the Giants are "set" at the OTs.
- They don't seal very well, therefore the Giants don't run outside the Ts very well, and screens are inconsistent, at best (part of the problem is the lack of an everyday, good blocking TE)
- They are not maulers and Giants don't run off or inside T very well, neither Beatty nor Pugh is powerful, being "technicians", at best (part of the problem is the lack of effective play at OGs)
- Their pass protection improved in 2014, in part because of BM's scheme to get the ball out of Eli's hand faster, but each can be crashed or vulnerable to outside rush
One can say the Giants "are set at the tackles", but the question is how high the the quality. I would argue the quality is mediocre and is an area of the roster that can and should be upgraded, at one, if not both Ts, via FA and draft.
This is not to say I agree with Francessa, because his statement is absurd, not because the team doesn't need to upgrade at multiple positions, but because there are so many other roster weaknesses that also must be addressed.
either RT or LG and Pugh moves depending on who it is.
Jones is the new top C/G backup probably.
We need to draft a LT to groom behind Beatt. It likely won't be at 9 but I could easily see 40 (maybe Jake Fisher). Beatty is NOT the long term answer and it's in our interest to draft his successor.
RE: The hysteria over the OL continues. Complete garbage.
would be an OL or DL at #9 then the opposite at 40 then WR or RB whoever grades out better. We have a boatload of holes to fill, but as stated an OL addition either at 9 or 40 along with a F/A signing on the OL and we should be fine.
They will add a RT or LG. And, that player doesn't have to be the #9 overall pick.
Agreed. If there was a blue-chip OL with elite LT ability, I could see them going here at 9. The only guy that could be that is Peat IMV and don't know if he ranks that high on their board.
Reese has ignored the Oline? 2 years ago the number 1 pick last year their number 2 pick and first FA were Oline. Do you people write this stuff thinking we are all brain dead and will swallow the crap you write?
Best OL they have had had Deihl - a 5th rd pick, Suebert - UDFA, O'Hara - UDFA and castoff, Snee - second rd pick and McKenzie - 3rd rd pick and castoff
Enough of this notion that only high draft picks on the OL will work. NE won the SB with 2 UDFA G's and a 4th rd C.
For all the unlimited praise the Cowboys OL gets, somehow they managed to give up the same amount of sacks as the Giants OL while having 160 less pass attempts
If you want to get rid of Beatty and draft his replacement at 9, the guy is not going to play as a rookie. There is no OL right now who is capable of coming in to play LT from the draft
Schwartz is a big deal because he can move guys off the ball. Richburg going to his natural position and replacing Walton is a big deal. Find another G in FA and draft and OL in the 2nd rd
The only OL I draft at 9 is Peat - and he may not play as a rookie
The Giants most pressing offensive line need is a RT
in the mold of McKenzie. A RT like McKenzie would instantly upgrade the running game. In my opinion, Pugh is a little too small to be a top flight RT. I like him at guard, especially LG, because I think he's quick enough to pull on running plays.
Giants interested in RT/G Jeremiah Poutasi according to his agent..........nicknamed baby Iupati
never heard of him but he has 20+ interviews lined up.....scouts have identified him as a solid football player that may have to kick inside to G like lots of college Ts
Like it or not, seems to me the Giants have 1 hole to fill on the starting O-Line. Have to believe given where they sit right now, Beatty, Richburg, Schwartz and Pugh are all penciled in as starters. Who knows what they do in F/A. But given that line-up, to think they will spend 3 premium picks on the line is naive.
Not sure why you think Beatty wouldnt start. He wasn't remotely a problem last season.
I agree. Not sure what in my post you interpreted as me saying Beatty will be benched.
Like it or not, seems to me the Giants have 1 hole to fill on the starting O-Line. Have to believe given where they sit right now, Beatty, Richburg, Schwartz and Pugh are all penciled in as starters. Who knows what they do in F/A. But given that line-up, to think they will spend 3 premium picks on the line is naive.
Not sure why you think Beatty wouldnt start. He wasn't remotely a problem last season.
I agree. Not sure what in my post you interpreted as me saying Beatty will be benched.
Like it or not, seems to me the Giants have 1 hole to fill on the starting O-Line. Have to believe given where they sit right now, Beatty, Richburg, Schwartz and Pugh are all penciled in as starters. Who knows what they do in F/A. But given that line-up, to think they will spend 3 premium picks on the line is naive.
Not sure why you think Beatty wouldnt start. He wasn't remotely a problem last season.
I agree. Not sure what in my post you interpreted as me saying Beatty will be benched.
Whoops! I see now that I misread it. My mistake.
no worries. I had to go back and read it to make sure I wrote it properly.
Because it creates headlines. The Giants top 6 needs at this point, in order of importance, are something like:
1. Resign JPP or replace with pro bowl caliber DE
2. OG or RT starter (FA)
3. A playmaker at a skill position on offense. WR or impact RB
4. Starting safety
5. starting OLB
6. Depth at OG, OT, safety, DT and LB (not starters). They will bring in draftees and vet minimum guys to compete as backups
You are really looking at 1-2 priority oline since other needs do come into play. If you stack the o line with three priorty signees and draft picks then you will field a lousy D and will have only one offensive playmaker. That is not a balanced approach to meeting roster needs.
and Schwartz comes back ready, I'd like a big nasty G who can maul and provide stability to the C And T positions on doubles, traps, pulls, screens and pass blocking. Look to FA for some experienced depth after that.
This is why I like drafting Scherff and kicking him inside.
I agree with everything except the last sentence. You don't spend the #9 overall pick on a guard in the modern NFL -- unless, maybe, you think he is going to be the best guard in the NFL for about 10 years to come, and a possible HOFer. Hard to predict that though.
You can get a big nasty guard who can maul in the 2nd. (That's where they got Snee.)
Anything he says about the intricacies of building teams, positioning players, trades, Free Agency, etc should be taken with a healthy grain of salt.
More likely, they sign a FA RT and kick Pugh inside, or just sign a FA OG.
We also need WR, Blocking TE, RB (late in draft or vet like Bush for 2.5m 1 yr deal, etc), LB, DE, Safety and Nickel corner (that might be filled with WT3rd possibly staying)
O-line has become an obsession around here.
Based on that, 2 solid players off the bench plus the first-rounder comes to Mike's number. Jones is an unknown, but hope springs eternal.
Did Da Pope provide any context for his argument?
The problem is that they also need help at pretty much every position on defense and only have one weapon to really bank on when it comes to offensive skill players too. There's only so many picks and so much cap space, with only so much talent as feasible options for them given the draft/FA pools.
Giants high on Richburg at Center ( they signed the #1 CFL player as a backup/maybe more),Beatty had a pretty good bounce-back season last year, Schwartz is good just needs to be healthy, Pugh battled through injury but was very good his rookie year.
That's 4 of 5 OL (not counting Jones) that have a decent chance to be pretty good. Get a quality OT/OG in FA and a highly graded OL in the top 3 rounds and you have 6 quality players.
A depth upgrade is needed too, but that's not a "premium" acquisition. Besides, MF has no more insight than we do about the team's view of developmental linemen already on the roster, like Brett Jones, Eric Herman and Michael Bamiro.
Not sure why you think Beatty wouldnt start. He wasn't remotely a problem last season.
This is why I like drafting Scherff and kicking him inside.
Beatty.
FA/Draft pick.
Richburg.
Schwartz.
Pugh.
Lot of questions with that group. Can Richburg succeed in his first year at center? Will Schwartz provide a boost to the run game? Can Pugh improve over his performance last year? If LG is a draft pick, can that player come in and play well right away. Beatty probably has the fewest question marks.
Most of the rest of the OL should just be jettisoned en masse. That won't happen, but Reynolds, Walton, Jerry, Snyder, and probably Herman and Mosley, shouldn't even be on the team. Mosley couldn't even beat out Jerry. Brown is gone. So is Brewer. Rogers Gaines and Jones are probably the best backups right now, even though neither has played in a regular season game.
We need a FA and a high draft pick, along with a day three pick. Then you hope that Gaines, Jones, and another player are good enough to justify roster spots.
I don't think the Giants will necessarily draft an OL in the top 3 as long as they've signed a decent starting FA G or T and a backup or two.
Need at least 1 vet, 1 rookie to start, and 1 projected upgrade over Walton/Jerry/Brewer and Co.
Unless Jones wins a spot.
Can't count on Schwartz; but if he comes thru the 72? can be developed.
His answer is always something like: "It's too early to talk draft." or "We don't even know who's in the draft yet."
He has no clue. He loved Teddy Bridgewater when he wasn't even in the draft.
He's rather talk about the Mets #2 hitter than the NFL draft.
The Giants had the 30th YPC in the NFL in 2014, but were still tenth in rushing attempts. Given the clear focus on running the ball (that isn't likely to go away), they absolutely have to improve on their dog shit run blocking along the OL, regardless of what they trot out there at RB, in order to not continue to almost haplessly give away downs.
Imo if you are going to pay what Beattys contract next contract is going to cost you want to know you have the guy there. Nobody really thinks Beatty is the guy. Not on the Left anyway.
2nd round needs to be a DT or Maxx Williams if he makes it that far or even the DE from Washington.
I would not be so eagar to do what the Cowboys did, like so many here are saying, sure they have a great offensive line, and did well with that defense, but I want to see that done again before I say that is the way to do things, and maybe we should ask ourselves how many championships has that produced before we are so certain that is the way to go.
The Giants way of doing things in my view is just fine, Reese has done just fine, he had some bad breaks, and some bad picks also, but EVERYONE does, we need defensive line help, we need help at the safety position, we need help at linebacker, we need help at running back, and we need help at tight end, and these positions should not be ignored just to put all our eggs in upgrading the OLine. Why do that when you can try and do more then that. Spags is going to ask for help to make his defense work, and they have got to give him that help also, or why bring him in here. He is not a magician.
i'm very high on richburg at C
If the O line sucks again next year it would be criminal.
FO has to assume they were good picks, and go forward accordingly. It would be a shame to miss out on some of these receivers and pass rushers that might be available by overloading in one area.
This is a myth. Reese and the Giants haven't been blind to anything. They've been ineffective, which arguably is worse.
2014 - Weston Richburg - C - 2nd round pick
2013 - Justin Pugh - OT - 1st round pick
2013 - Eric Herman - OG - 7th round pick
2012 - Brandon Mosley - OL - 4th round pick
2012 - Matt McCants - OL - 7th round pick
2011 - James Brewer - OT - 4th round pick
2010 - MItch Petrus - OG - 5th round pick
2009 - Will Beatty - OT - 2nd round pick
Plus free agents (off the top of my head): Geoff Schwartz, John Jerry, J.D. Walton, David Baas.
This isn't "patchwork." It's a team expending huge resources, both in cash and draft picks, to maintain and upgrade its line. The problem isn't lack of attention or lack of resources, it's that most of those moves have failed.
I'd be happier if it really was a problem of inattention. It's worse to see the team blowing pick after pick on OL prospects who never amount to anything, and on free agents who leave you thinking "Oh, THAT's why he was allowed to walk."
Presuming Pugh is moving inside, you have one OG. Schwartz mans the other OG. That moves Richburg to C. three spots are set to the point that you can't plan on replacing them just yet. On paper, they are the future inside. you don't spend premium picks as a backup plan for a plan you haven't even tried yet.
IF you move Pugh, that leaves no one at RT. So you need an acquisition. If you leave Pugh at RT, you still need an acquisition for OG. either way, only one.
Beatty is the wildcard. they know what they have. If it's good enough, we have LT locked up. If it's not, draft a player to replace him after another year. that player is a backup for this year.
I wouldn't be upset at spending 3 premium picks on OL, but I also don't think it's necessary unless Giants are not sold on one of Schwartz, Richburg, Pugh, and all three have been premium picks over the last 2 years.
you don't spend premium picks on backups.
As I've stated multiple times, I'm a firm believer that the position coaches get some significant input in acquisitions in their area. So, what does this say about McNally? that his input is bad over the last 5 or more years, or that they ignore him?
Anything he says about the intricacies of building teams, positioning players, trades, Free Agency, etc should be taken with a healthy grain of salt.
and a side of diet coke
Is it a myth?
Quote:
is completely overstated.
Is it a myth?
Really. What myth? TC said himself on the Francesa show that it's a possibility.
IMO, only Pugh and Richburg should feel comfortable as starters. The others may end up starting for us but this does not mean that their performance and production is adequate.
TC is very strategic. He said what he said for a reason.
Repeating the same stupidity over and over again doesn't degrade its continued stupidity.
By the way, people are making assumptions that Richburg is an NFL ready center and Pugh is a NFL ready guard. Possibly. They're assuming Schwartz will come all the way back and Beatty will stay healthy. Maybe. But, if they are niot, then what happens? I think that's Francesa'd point
Beatty
Pugh
Richburg
Schwartz
They will add a RT or LG. And, that player doesn't have to be the #9 overall pick.
- They don't seal very well, therefore the Giants don't run outside the Ts very well, and screens are inconsistent, at best (part of the problem is the lack of an everyday, good blocking TE)
- They are not maulers and Giants don't run off or inside T very well, neither Beatty nor Pugh is powerful, being "technicians", at best (part of the problem is the lack of effective play at OGs)
- Their pass protection improved in 2014, in part because of BM's scheme to get the ball out of Eli's hand faster, but each can be crashed or vulnerable to outside rush
One can say the Giants "are set at the tackles", but the question is how high the the quality. I would argue the quality is mediocre and is an area of the roster that can and should be upgraded, at one, if not both Ts, via FA and draft.
This is not to say I agree with Francessa, because his statement is absurd, not because the team doesn't need to upgrade at multiple positions, but because there are so many other roster weaknesses that also must be addressed.
Jones is the new top C/G backup probably.
We need to draft a LT to groom behind Beatt. It likely won't be at 9 but I could easily see 40 (maybe Jake Fisher). Beatty is NOT the long term answer and it's in our interest to draft his successor.
I don't think the Giants will necessarily draft an OL in the top 3 as long as they've signed a decent starting FA G or T and a backup or two.
Thank you. An island of reason in a sea of panic
Beatty
Pugh
Richburg
Schwartz
They will add a RT or LG. And, that player doesn't have to be the #9 overall pick.
Agreed. If there was a blue-chip OL with elite LT ability, I could see them going here at 9. The only guy that could be that is Peat IMV and don't know if he ranks that high on their board.
Francesa said that about Manziel? What prompted him to say that? Did he think Manziel was the next Russell Wilson?
Dynamite drop in, micky.
Enough of this notion that only high draft picks on the OL will work. NE won the SB with 2 UDFA G's and a 4th rd C.
For all the unlimited praise the Cowboys OL gets, somehow they managed to give up the same amount of sacks as the Giants OL while having 160 less pass attempts
If you want to get rid of Beatty and draft his replacement at 9, the guy is not going to play as a rookie. There is no OL right now who is capable of coming in to play LT from the draft
Schwartz is a big deal because he can move guys off the ball. Richburg going to his natural position and replacing Walton is a big deal. Find another G in FA and draft and OL in the 2nd rd
The only OL I draft at 9 is Peat - and he may not play as a rookie
never heard of him but he has 20+ interviews lined up.....scouts have identified him as a solid football player that may have to kick inside to G like lots of college Ts
Quote:
Like it or not, seems to me the Giants have 1 hole to fill on the starting O-Line. Have to believe given where they sit right now, Beatty, Richburg, Schwartz and Pugh are all penciled in as starters. Who knows what they do in F/A. But given that line-up, to think they will spend 3 premium picks on the line is naive.
Not sure why you think Beatty wouldnt start. He wasn't remotely a problem last season.
I agree. Not sure what in my post you interpreted as me saying Beatty will be benched.
Quote:
In comment 12153672 Bernie said:
Quote:
Like it or not, seems to me the Giants have 1 hole to fill on the starting O-Line. Have to believe given where they sit right now, Beatty, Richburg, Schwartz and Pugh are all penciled in as starters. Who knows what they do in F/A. But given that line-up, to think they will spend 3 premium picks on the line is naive.
Not sure why you think Beatty wouldnt start. He wasn't remotely a problem last season.
I agree. Not sure what in my post you interpreted as me saying Beatty will be benched.
Whoops! I see now that I misread it. My mistake.
Quote:
In comment 12153682 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
In comment 12153672 Bernie said:
Quote:
Like it or not, seems to me the Giants have 1 hole to fill on the starting O-Line. Have to believe given where they sit right now, Beatty, Richburg, Schwartz and Pugh are all penciled in as starters. Who knows what they do in F/A. But given that line-up, to think they will spend 3 premium picks on the line is naive.
Not sure why you think Beatty wouldnt start. He wasn't remotely a problem last season.
I agree. Not sure what in my post you interpreted as me saying Beatty will be benched.
Whoops! I see now that I misread it. My mistake.
no worries. I had to go back and read it to make sure I wrote it properly.
1. Resign JPP or replace with pro bowl caliber DE
2. OG or RT starter (FA)
3. A playmaker at a skill position on offense. WR or impact RB
4. Starting safety
5. starting OLB
6. Depth at OG, OT, safety, DT and LB (not starters). They will bring in draftees and vet minimum guys to compete as backups
You are really looking at 1-2 priority oline since other needs do come into play. If you stack the o line with three priorty signees and draft picks then you will field a lousy D and will have only one offensive playmaker. That is not a balanced approach to meeting roster needs.
This is why I like drafting Scherff and kicking him inside.
You can get a big nasty guard who can maul in the 2nd. (That's where they got Snee.)
O-line has become an obsession around here.
I forget who it was that said the best defense is a withering offense. Might've been some guy name of Lombardi.
Premium picks:
2 OL
2 Safeties
1 D-line
1 LB
Second tier
OL Depth at least 1
DL depth at least 1
TE depth 1
LB depth at least 1
This would adjust slightly if WR is BPA at #9 or #40
Mike Bless.