The excuse is to absolve Reese of guilt bc of injuries.
Guess what, when you pencil in guys with injury histories or mid round picks who've never played and they wind up not lasting the season, it's on you if that's the reason we fail. The constant reliance on these types at safety and elsewhere has been a Reese staple.
Injuries happen. But when you bank on these types of players, they tend to happen more - and really hurt the team.
The excuse is to absolve Reese of guilt bc of injuries.
Guess what, when you pencil in guys with injury histories or mid round picks who've never played and they wind up not lasting the season, it's on you if that's the reason we fail. The constant reliance on these types at safety and elsewhere has been a Reese staple.
Injuries happen. But when you bank on these types of players, they tend to happen more - and really hurt the team.
TD - I see your point, but I think we disagree just how much the Giants are absolving Reese because of injuries. Most of the guys who went down at Safety this year didn't have any particular injury history. I think it's something of a red herring trolled through by the anti-Reese crowd.
Having said that, the reason for all the injuries during the past three or four years has yet to be established. The "Reese drafts/signs players prone to injury" meme is just that...a meme without actual data to back it up.
Having said that, the reason for all the injuries during the past three or four years has yet to be established. The "Reese drafts/signs players prone to injury" meme is just that...a meme without actual data to back it up.
This ^
It's the current BBI battlecry, "everything is Reese's fault." Putting the injuries all on Reese is complete idiocy. Somehow Reese should have forseen David Wilson would have his career cut short right?
The lengths people go to absolve TC, and Spags by comparison is laughable. Nobody questions our lack of player development but Reese us supposed to be Nostradamus.
The excuse is to absolve Reese of guilt bc of injuries.
Guess what, when you pencil in guys with injury histories or mid round picks who've never played and they wind up not lasting the season, it's on you if that's the reason we fail. The constant reliance on these types at safety and elsewhere has been a Reese staple.
Injuries happen. But when you bank on these types of players, they tend to happen more - and really hurt the team.
TD - I see your point, but I think we disagree just how much the Giants are absolving Reese because of injuries. Most of the guys who went down at Safety this year didn't have any particular injury history. I think it's something of a red herring trolled through by the anti-Reese crowd.
Having said that, the reason for all the injuries during the past three or four years has yet to be established. The "Reese drafts/signs players prone to injury" meme is just that...a meme without actual data to back it up.
What??? They all did! Taylor, Jackson, Berhe all had a history of injury problems going back to college. And all were low-round picks with little experience.
I think a vet like Weddle or Reggie Jackson on a cheaper deal
The excuse is to absolve Reese of guilt bc of injuries.
Guess what, when you pencil in guys with injury histories or mid round picks who've never played and they wind up not lasting the season, it's on you if that's the reason we fail. The constant reliance on these types at safety and elsewhere has been a Reese staple.
Injuries happen. But when you bank on these types of players, they tend to happen more - and really hurt the team.
TD - I see your point, but I think we disagree just how much the Giants are absolving Reese because of injuries. Most of the guys who went down at Safety this year didn't have any particular injury history. I think it's something of a red herring trolled through by the anti-Reese crowd.
Having said that, the reason for all the injuries during the past three or four years has yet to be established. The "Reese drafts/signs players prone to injury" meme is just that...a meme without actual data to back it up.
What??? They all did! Taylor, Jackson, Berhe all had a history of injury problems going back to college. And all were low-round picks with little experience.
I see no evidence of any significant injury history for Berhe or Jackson. Maybe you can provide their college injury history?
I see no evidence of any significant injury history for Berhe or Jackson. Maybe you can provide their college injury history?
You know what's also funny? Prince doesn't appear to have suffered any major injuries in college either. According to Football Reference he played in 41 straight game for the Huskers.
I see no evidence of any significant injury history for Berhe or Jackson. Maybe you can provide their college injury history?
You know what's also funny? Prince doesn't appear to have suffered any major injuries in college either. According to Football Reference he played in 41 straight game for the Huskers.
As I said, it appears to be more of a meme than an established fact. I challenge anyone holding this belief to do some research on how many players who suffered injuries in college went on to play essentially injury-free in the NFL? Also, how many players who suffered injuries in college repeated those same injuries in the NFL?
I'm not the one making the "china doll" claims. Let's see some real proof to back it up.
I didn't say they all had injury histories prior to last year
In other words, you can't rely on injured and/or total unprovens (especially if they were not high picks). None of the safeties outside of Collins gave me any confidence going into last year. And none would give me any confidence going into this year. None have shown they can survive - let alone succeed - in the NFL. Irresponsible for Reese to have gone into the season with that plan at safety.
And for the record, I was very much in favor of letting Coughlin go - have been for a couple of years now. Separate issue there..
RE: I didn't say they all had injury histories prior to last year
In other words, you can't rely on injured and/or total unprovens (especially if they were not high picks). None of the safeties outside of Collins gave me any confidence going into last year. And none would give me any confidence going into this year. None have shown they can survive - let alone succeed - in the NFL. Irresponsible for Reese to have gone into the season with that plan at safety.
And for the record, I was very much in favor of letting Coughlin go - have been for a couple of years now. Separate issue there..
My last post was primarily directed at Victor in CT. Sorry for the confusion. however, the challenge I made above still stands. None of the "previous injury" talk means anything without facts to back it up. And unknown/no-name players make it all the time in the NFL. You couldn't have a league without such players.
Well, true, unkowns/injury history/never was types make it on rosters all the time but relying on a cast of them to fill key starting roles is irresponsible. The results speak for themselves.
Well, true, unkowns/injury history/never was types make it on rosters all the time but relying on a cast of them to fill key starting roles is irresponsible. The results speak for themselves.
There must have been close to a dozen opportunities to plan for the turnover. Unless you're saying there were no solid safety options available via draft and FA in the last few years... Or no team solidified the position during that timeframe? Not sure I get the point.
Do you feel comfortable going into 2016 with the same group??
RE: Ummm going back the past few years? Seriously?
There must have been close to a dozen opportunities to plan for the turnover. Unless you're saying there were no solid safety options available via draft and FA in the last few years... Or no team solidified the position during that timeframe? Not sure I get the point.
Do you feel comfortable going into 2016 with the same group??
Efforts were made to get FA Safeties, but none clicked. Also, recognize that there were significant other areas that needed attention. Teams simply cannot fix all holes over a couple of seasons. Steps are now being taken with Collins and, I suspect, an FA or two plus a relatively high draft pick.
I suspect that the defense we're going to see this year is going to be a 4-2-5, with adjustments made according to the opponent and in-game situation.
Guess what, when you pencil in guys with injury histories or mid round picks who've never played and they wind up not lasting the season, it's on you if that's the reason we fail. The constant reliance on these types at safety and elsewhere has been a Reese staple.
Injuries happen. But when you bank on these types of players, they tend to happen more - and really hurt the team.
Guess what, when you pencil in guys with injury histories or mid round picks who've never played and they wind up not lasting the season, it's on you if that's the reason we fail. The constant reliance on these types at safety and elsewhere has been a Reese staple.
Injuries happen. But when you bank on these types of players, they tend to happen more - and really hurt the team.
TD - I see your point, but I think we disagree just how much the Giants are absolving Reese because of injuries. Most of the guys who went down at Safety this year didn't have any particular injury history. I think it's something of a red herring trolled through by the anti-Reese crowd.
Having said that, the reason for all the injuries during the past three or four years has yet to be established. The "Reese drafts/signs players prone to injury" meme is just that...a meme without actual data to back it up.
Having said that, the reason for all the injuries during the past three or four years has yet to be established. The "Reese drafts/signs players prone to injury" meme is just that...a meme without actual data to back it up.
This ^
It's the current BBI battlecry, "everything is Reese's fault." Putting the injuries all on Reese is complete idiocy. Somehow Reese should have forseen David Wilson would have his career cut short right?
The lengths people go to absolve TC, and Spags by comparison is laughable. Nobody questions our lack of player development but Reese us supposed to be Nostradamus.
Quote:
The excuse is to absolve Reese of guilt bc of injuries.
Guess what, when you pencil in guys with injury histories or mid round picks who've never played and they wind up not lasting the season, it's on you if that's the reason we fail. The constant reliance on these types at safety and elsewhere has been a Reese staple.
Injuries happen. But when you bank on these types of players, they tend to happen more - and really hurt the team.
TD - I see your point, but I think we disagree just how much the Giants are absolving Reese because of injuries. Most of the guys who went down at Safety this year didn't have any particular injury history. I think it's something of a red herring trolled through by the anti-Reese crowd.
Having said that, the reason for all the injuries during the past three or four years has yet to be established. The "Reese drafts/signs players prone to injury" meme is just that...a meme without actual data to back it up.
What??? They all did! Taylor, Jackson, Berhe all had a history of injury problems going back to college. And all were low-round picks with little experience.
Then, you draft a young guy in the 3rd or 4th round.
Quote:
In comment 12801953 TD said:
Quote:
The excuse is to absolve Reese of guilt bc of injuries.
Guess what, when you pencil in guys with injury histories or mid round picks who've never played and they wind up not lasting the season, it's on you if that's the reason we fail. The constant reliance on these types at safety and elsewhere has been a Reese staple.
Injuries happen. But when you bank on these types of players, they tend to happen more - and really hurt the team.
TD - I see your point, but I think we disagree just how much the Giants are absolving Reese because of injuries. Most of the guys who went down at Safety this year didn't have any particular injury history. I think it's something of a red herring trolled through by the anti-Reese crowd.
Having said that, the reason for all the injuries during the past three or four years has yet to be established. The "Reese drafts/signs players prone to injury" meme is just that...a meme without actual data to back it up.
What??? They all did! Taylor, Jackson, Berhe all had a history of injury problems going back to college. And all were low-round picks with little experience.
I see no evidence of any significant injury history for Berhe or Jackson. Maybe you can provide their college injury history?
I see no evidence of any significant injury history for Berhe or Jackson. Maybe you can provide their college injury history?
You know what's also funny? Prince doesn't appear to have suffered any major injuries in college either. According to Football Reference he played in 41 straight game for the Huskers.
Quote:
I see no evidence of any significant injury history for Berhe or Jackson. Maybe you can provide their college injury history?
You know what's also funny? Prince doesn't appear to have suffered any major injuries in college either. According to Football Reference he played in 41 straight game for the Huskers.
As I said, it appears to be more of a meme than an established fact. I challenge anyone holding this belief to do some research on how many players who suffered injuries in college went on to play essentially injury-free in the NFL? Also, how many players who suffered injuries in college repeated those same injuries in the NFL?
I'm not the one making the "china doll" claims. Let's see some real proof to back it up.
In other words, you can't rely on injured and/or total unprovens (especially if they were not high picks). None of the safeties outside of Collins gave me any confidence going into last year. And none would give me any confidence going into this year. None have shown they can survive - let alone succeed - in the NFL. Irresponsible for Reese to have gone into the season with that plan at safety.
And for the record, I was very much in favor of letting Coughlin go - have been for a couple of years now. Separate issue there..
In other words, you can't rely on injured and/or total unprovens (especially if they were not high picks). None of the safeties outside of Collins gave me any confidence going into last year. And none would give me any confidence going into this year. None have shown they can survive - let alone succeed - in the NFL. Irresponsible for Reese to have gone into the season with that plan at safety.
And for the record, I was very much in favor of letting Coughlin go - have been for a couple of years now. Separate issue there..
My last post was primarily directed at Victor in CT. Sorry for the confusion. however, the challenge I made above still stands. None of the "previous injury" talk means anything without facts to back it up. And unknown/no-name players make it all the time in the NFL. You couldn't have a league without such players.
OK, detail the other choices that were available.
Do you feel comfortable going into 2016 with the same group??
Do you feel comfortable going into 2016 with the same group??
Efforts were made to get FA Safeties, but none clicked. Also, recognize that there were significant other areas that needed attention. Teams simply cannot fix all holes over a couple of seasons. Steps are now being taken with Collins and, I suspect, an FA or two plus a relatively high draft pick.
I suspect that the defense we're going to see this year is going to be a 4-2-5, with adjustments made according to the opponent and in-game situation.