And workout immediately. Should be familiar with the offense, if he is healthy he would at least provide depth, could supplant Newhouse. You would think this is a no brainer but with JR u never know.
Jerry is a competent pass protector and has issues in the run game. Schwartz looks like a mauler but does not play like one, and is injury-prone. There were also attitude/desire concerns. In any case, I don't want him back. No need to retread guys who did not pan out here.
if he's better than our backups. He has been an INC for pretty much two years, and he can't even survive the first cuts on Detroit.
This argument that Beatty, Long Schwartz and whomever the fuck has a name lay people have heard of before is better than our backups isn't really a good one since all three have issues with dependability.
You know what I want in a backup? The ability to play when needed, not to be constantly injured or opting for a season-ending surgery. Why is this point being so obtusely overlooked?
But I think there are likely going to be better OL depth signings after this and the next round of cuts. The Giants also still must believe Hart can play.
if he's better than our backups. He has been an INC for pretty much two years, and he can't even survive the first cuts on Detroit.
This argument that Beatty, Long Schwartz and whomever the fuck has a name lay people have heard of before is better than our backups isn't really a good one since all three have issues with dependability.
You know what I want in a backup? The ability to play when needed, not to be constantly injured or opting for a season-ending surgery. Why is this point being so obtusely overlooked?
So you have no opinion? You dont have a gut feeling as to whether Schwartz is better than Stingly?
I got news for you. Let's say we cut Stingly and Schwartz is our backup and he gets hurt. Stingly will be available to picked up!
is a backup if when you turn to him in a time of need he's unavailable?
People saying we must sign so and so - and lately have been all ex-Giants or injury cases and have spent the last few years bemoaning the injury situation sound like hypocritical idiots.
I also don't understand that people have the view the OL sucks, but think it will get better by bringing back people who were part of the reason the perception existed that the OL sucked.
It's like "Hey - that guy sucks, but I know his name and other than that I know jackshit about OL play. Sign him!!"
I got news for you. Let's say we cut Stingly and Schwartz is our backup and he gets hurt. Stingly will be available to picked up!
With Schwartz's past, he might be injured AS THE BACKUP.
He's also going to get paid like a fringe starter would. There will be cuts coming up who will have less red flags and who will have survived a first cut from a crappy team, that will be better than our backups if we want to use that rationale.
is a backup if when you turn to him in a time of need he's unavailable?
People saying we must sign so and so - and lately have been all ex-Giants or injury cases and have spent the last few years bemoaning the injury situation sound like hypocritical idiots.
I also don't understand that people have the view the OL sucks, but think it will get better by bringing back people who were part of the reason the perception existed that the OL sucked.
It's like "Hey - that guy sucks, but I know his name and other than that I know jackshit about OL play. Sign him!!"
The Giants evaluated Schwartz as a better player than both John Jerry and Marshall newhouse. He was a starter going into last year. The other two were not. The money they gave each player backs this up as well.
Due to injuries and perhaps other factors at play the Giants moved on. They tried multiple times to upgrade the right side of the OL in free agency and failed. They know they need to get better there.
Schwartz may suck but I know for damn sure he's a better football player than stingly. I'm willing to roll the dice on him being healthy if called upon if losing stingly is the downside.
How anyone could disagree with that is beyond comprehension.
It's like some of you guys don't remember RECENT history
Schwartz came here on a fat contract and completely dogged it. Refused to play with minor injuries (he, as most other o-lineman are- was always HURT- he acted like he was INJURED- two different things)
Guys- just because it's a name that you recognize doesn't mean that it's an upgrade.
I'd literally rather have Emmitt Cleary get substantial time rather than sign Geoff Schwartz. At least with a young unproven guy you aren't questioning the effort or desire.
Will asked to be released earlier when it looks like they aren't going to make the team. Gives them more time to find a new home. Wouldn't be surprised if that's the case.
if he's better than our backups. He has been an INC for pretty much two years, and he can't even survive the first cuts on Detroit.
This argument that Beatty, Long Schwartz and whomever the fuck has a name lay people have heard of before is better than our backups isn't really a good one since all three have issues with dependability.
You know what I want in a backup? The ability to play when needed, not to be constantly injured or opting for a season-ending surgery. Why is this point being so obtusely overlooked?
So you have no opinion? You dont have a gut feeling as to whether Schwartz is better than Stingly?
I got news for you. Let's say we cut Stingly and Schwartz is our backup and he gets hurt. Stingly will be available to picked up!
You keep doing this, and it still makes no sense. So when Schwartz is hurt, the reps in practice he took away from the guy we pick up off the street doesn't mean anything? I simply cannot get over that aspect of this regardless of whether Schwartz would be the starter or the backup. He's incredibly undependable, why would we want reps going to someone like him?
really easy to disagree. And you're making it easier with your own words.
Quote:
Schwartz may suck but I know for damn sure he's a better football player than stingly. I'm willing to roll the dice on him being healthy if called upon if losing stingly is the downside.
How anyone could disagree with that is beyond comprehension.
Hey, he may suck, but he sucks less than the backup! Sign him!
The goal should be to sign competent players, not guys who suck, but suck less.
not uncommon for veterans to be released in the first wave of cuts to try and give them a better chance of catching on with another team. Of all the former Giants, I would take a look at, Schwartz would be the first. We have no veteran OL depth. Hart is a second year seventh round pick. The rest are journeyman who have bounced around the league. Schwartz also doesn't have to pass through veterans. He's a vested veteran and can therefore sign with anyone. My understanding is that he didn't leave the Giants on bad terms. I understand if the Giants don't, but I'd be inclined to give him a call.
if he's better than our backups. He has been an INC for pretty much two years, and he can't even survive the first cuts on Detroit.
This argument that Beatty, Long Schwartz and whomever the fuck has a name lay people have heard of before is better than our backups isn't really a good one since all three have issues with dependability.
You know what I want in a backup? The ability to play when needed, not to be constantly injured or opting for a season-ending surgery. Why is this point being so obtusely overlooked?
So you have no opinion? You dont have a gut feeling as to whether Schwartz is better than Stingly?
I got news for you. Let's say we cut Stingly and Schwartz is our backup and he gets hurt. Stingly will be available to picked up!
You keep doing this, and it still makes no sense. So when Schwartz is hurt, the reps in practice he took away from the guy we pick up off the street doesn't mean anything? I simply cannot get over that aspect of this regardless of whether Schwartz would be the starter or the backup. He's incredibly undependable, why would we want reps going to someone like him?
Geoff Schwartz has more starts than our entire backup OL combined. These guys are literally nobodies. I'm not saying Schwartz is a world beater, he's not. But he knows the system and has actually played in NFL games before.
It's a no fucking brainer. Stingly, Cleary, etc. Give me a break. Those guys suck dick.
really easy to disagree. And you're making it easier with your own words.
Quote:
Schwartz may suck but I know for damn sure he's a better football player than stingly. I'm willing to roll the dice on him being healthy if called upon if losing stingly is the downside.
How anyone could disagree with that is beyond comprehension.
Hey, he may suck, but he sucks less than the backup! Sign him!
The goal should be to sign competent players, not guys who suck, but suck less.
Sucking less is an upgrade and there is little learning curve. He knows the offense. Couldnt be an easier decision.
it is a no brainer to depend on a guy who has been completely undependable for two years.
And you were killing Beason. There isn't a whole lot of difference between Beason and Schwartz other than one was a top 5 guy at his position when healthy and the other guy has been slightly above average.
How is it a no brainer to depend on a guy who has been undependable? Where's the logic in that?
you claim things are no brainers when they are everything but. You are convinced he's better and we all ask you why? Answer that. What practices did you attend, which recent games did you watch that show what he's like in 2016? The Lions cannot protect Stafford and Schwartz just got cut. Is that not alarming to you?
The Lions let up 2.75 sacks per game in 2015, good for 23rd, the Giants, 1.69 per game good for 4th. While this doesn't tell the entire story, it shows we protect Eli and/or he has an offense where he can get rid of the ball and avoid pressure. The same cannot be said in Detroit.
Detroit was also dead last in the league last year in rushing and had 3.8 YPC; Giants were 19th in rushing and 4.0 YPC.
So again, why/how is Schwartz better and why was he cut if Detroit has a worse line (using 2015 as the only tangible benchmark)?
it is a no brainer to depend on a guy who has been completely undependable for two years.
And you were killing Beason. There isn't a whole lot of difference between Beason and Schwartz other than one was a top 5 guy at his position when healthy and the other guy has been slightly above average.
How is it a no brainer to depend on a guy who has been undependable? Where's the logic in that?
you under the impression if you post a variation of this statement several times it makes it true?
Quote:
Couldnt be an easier decision.
It actually isn't an easy or wise decision, and you haven't even used argumentation that makes it true. Basically, you admit you know the guy's name and that he sucks less than the backup.
you claim things are no brainers when they are everything but. You are convinced he's better and we all ask you why? Answer that. What practices did you attend, which recent games did you watch that show what he's like in 2016? The Lions cannot protect Stafford and Schwartz just got cut. Is that not alarming to you?
The Lions let up 2.75 sacks per game in 2015, good for 23rd, the Giants, 1.69 per game good for 4th. While this doesn't tell the entire story, it shows we protect Eli and/or he has an offense where he can get rid of the ball and avoid pressure. The same cannot be said in Detroit.
Detroit was also dead last in the league last year in rushing and had 3.8 YPC; Giants were 19th in rushing and 4.0 YPC.
So again, why/how is Schwartz better and why was he cut if Detroit has a worse line (using 2015 as the only tangible benchmark)?
He's better based on the fact that when he was a free agent NFL teams actually wanted him. The giants had to pony up a legitimate contract to get him. The current backups are closer to being out of the league then they are of starting the amount of games schwartz has in his career and earning a nice contract.
I'm not advocating this guy to come in and start. Sit him on the bench. But anyone here who tells me they'd rather put stingly, cleary, etc in a game over schwartz is full of fucking shit.
than an old retread at this point. Shit...Schwartz could not get on the field when he was here....and some of you actually want him back.
Who are these players with upside though?
Not a damn clue. But based on what Schwartz was unable to do while he was here...added to the fact he was just released...gives me a clue that he ain't the guy with upside.
i try to see the other side in every argument but your take on Schwartz is getting a little tiresome. He's not good. And let's say he was "better" than the backups we have - that doesn't mean you're required to sign him. If that were the case, Giants would bring in every single player for a workout that they thought was better than the backups.
This guy sucks, and he's a roster space eater and generally not interested in focusing on actually playing good football on the field. What else is there to say?
Link - ( New Window )
3-Did he leave on good terms?
Sign him!!
Sign him!!
Fatman,
Is he better then the guys who are backups? In your opinion? Don't give me anything about the Giants and what they're thinking.
In your mind is he a better backup then the guys the Giants have?
Shit,mnow you've got the Kinison scene with Dangerfield swirling around in my head.."Say it! Say it!"
This argument that Beatty, Long Schwartz and whomever the fuck has a name lay people have heard of before is better than our backups isn't really a good one since all three have issues with dependability.
You know what I want in a backup? The ability to play when needed, not to be constantly injured or opting for a season-ending surgery. Why is this point being so obtusely overlooked?
When he actually played here he played well.....just wasn't healthy all that much.
Actually I do want him on this team because he once gave me free tickets, but for the good of this team, I think there will be better options.
He gave me free tickets once so I like his Twitter use :D
Might as well wait to see how things shake out.
This argument that Beatty, Long Schwartz and whomever the fuck has a name lay people have heard of before is better than our backups isn't really a good one since all three have issues with dependability.
You know what I want in a backup? The ability to play when needed, not to be constantly injured or opting for a season-ending surgery. Why is this point being so obtusely overlooked?
So you have no opinion? You dont have a gut feeling as to whether Schwartz is better than Stingly?
I got news for you. Let's say we cut Stingly and Schwartz is our backup and he gets hurt. Stingly will be available to picked up!
People saying we must sign so and so - and lately have been all ex-Giants or injury cases and have spent the last few years bemoaning the injury situation sound like hypocritical idiots.
I also don't understand that people have the view the OL sucks, but think it will get better by bringing back people who were part of the reason the perception existed that the OL sucked.
It's like "Hey - that guy sucks, but I know his name and other than that I know jackshit about OL play. Sign him!!"
With Schwartz's past, he might be injured AS THE BACKUP.
He's also going to get paid like a fringe starter would. There will be cuts coming up who will have less red flags and who will have survived a first cut from a crappy team, that will be better than our backups if we want to use that rationale.
Not sure why Schwartz is that desirable.
People saying we must sign so and so - and lately have been all ex-Giants or injury cases and have spent the last few years bemoaning the injury situation sound like hypocritical idiots.
I also don't understand that people have the view the OL sucks, but think it will get better by bringing back people who were part of the reason the perception existed that the OL sucked.
It's like "Hey - that guy sucks, but I know his name and other than that I know jackshit about OL play. Sign him!!"
The Giants evaluated Schwartz as a better player than both John Jerry and Marshall newhouse. He was a starter going into last year. The other two were not. The money they gave each player backs this up as well.
Due to injuries and perhaps other factors at play the Giants moved on. They tried multiple times to upgrade the right side of the OL in free agency and failed. They know they need to get better there.
Schwartz may suck but I know for damn sure he's a better football player than stingly. I'm willing to roll the dice on him being healthy if called upon if losing stingly is the downside.
How anyone could disagree with that is beyond comprehension.
WHY? What planet are you guys on?
Schwartz came here on a fat contract and completely dogged it. Refused to play with minor injuries (he, as most other o-lineman are- was always HURT- he acted like he was INJURED- two different things)
Guys- just because it's a name that you recognize doesn't mean that it's an upgrade.
I'd literally rather have Emmitt Cleary get substantial time rather than sign Geoff Schwartz. At least with a young unproven guy you aren't questioning the effort or desire.
Quote:
if he's better than our backups. He has been an INC for pretty much two years, and he can't even survive the first cuts on Detroit.
This argument that Beatty, Long Schwartz and whomever the fuck has a name lay people have heard of before is better than our backups isn't really a good one since all three have issues with dependability.
You know what I want in a backup? The ability to play when needed, not to be constantly injured or opting for a season-ending surgery. Why is this point being so obtusely overlooked?
So you have no opinion? You dont have a gut feeling as to whether Schwartz is better than Stingly?
I got news for you. Let's say we cut Stingly and Schwartz is our backup and he gets hurt. Stingly will be available to picked up!
You keep doing this, and it still makes no sense. So when Schwartz is hurt, the reps in practice he took away from the guy we pick up off the street doesn't mean anything? I simply cannot get over that aspect of this regardless of whether Schwartz would be the starter or the backup. He's incredibly undependable, why would we want reps going to someone like him?
How anyone could disagree with that is beyond comprehension.
Hey, he may suck, but he sucks less than the backup! Sign him!
The goal should be to sign competent players, not guys who suck, but suck less.
Only if he's healthy and wants to play.
Quote:
In comment 13092271 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
if he's better than our backups. He has been an INC for pretty much two years, and he can't even survive the first cuts on Detroit.
This argument that Beatty, Long Schwartz and whomever the fuck has a name lay people have heard of before is better than our backups isn't really a good one since all three have issues with dependability.
You know what I want in a backup? The ability to play when needed, not to be constantly injured or opting for a season-ending surgery. Why is this point being so obtusely overlooked?
So you have no opinion? You dont have a gut feeling as to whether Schwartz is better than Stingly?
I got news for you. Let's say we cut Stingly and Schwartz is our backup and he gets hurt. Stingly will be available to picked up!
You keep doing this, and it still makes no sense. So when Schwartz is hurt, the reps in practice he took away from the guy we pick up off the street doesn't mean anything? I simply cannot get over that aspect of this regardless of whether Schwartz would be the starter or the backup. He's incredibly undependable, why would we want reps going to someone like him?
Geoff Schwartz has more starts than our entire backup OL combined. These guys are literally nobodies. I'm not saying Schwartz is a world beater, he's not. But he knows the system and has actually played in NFL games before.
It's a no fucking brainer. Stingly, Cleary, etc. Give me a break. Those guys suck dick.
Quote:
Schwartz may suck but I know for damn sure he's a better football player than stingly. I'm willing to roll the dice on him being healthy if called upon if losing stingly is the downside.
How anyone could disagree with that is beyond comprehension.
Hey, he may suck, but he sucks less than the backup! Sign him!
The goal should be to sign competent players, not guys who suck, but suck less.
Sucking less is an upgrade and there is little learning curve. He knows the offense. Couldnt be an easier decision.
Hey guys, let's bring back Will Beatty and Geoff Schwartz so we can have a great OL like in 2014!!!
And you were killing Beason. There isn't a whole lot of difference between Beason and Schwartz other than one was a top 5 guy at his position when healthy and the other guy has been slightly above average.
How is it a no brainer to depend on a guy who has been undependable? Where's the logic in that?
The Lions let up 2.75 sacks per game in 2015, good for 23rd, the Giants, 1.69 per game good for 4th. While this doesn't tell the entire story, it shows we protect Eli and/or he has an offense where he can get rid of the ball and avoid pressure. The same cannot be said in Detroit.
Detroit was also dead last in the league last year in rushing and had 3.8 YPC; Giants were 19th in rushing and 4.0 YPC.
So again, why/how is Schwartz better and why was he cut if Detroit has a worse line (using 2015 as the only tangible benchmark)?
And you were killing Beason. There isn't a whole lot of difference between Beason and Schwartz other than one was a top 5 guy at his position when healthy and the other guy has been slightly above average.
How is it a no brainer to depend on a guy who has been undependable? Where's the logic in that?
more like "no brains"
Who are these players with upside though?
It actually isn't an easy or wise decision, and you haven't even used argumentation that makes it true. Basically, you admit you know the guy's name and that he sucks less than the backup.
And that's a good decision? Yeah, right.
The Lions let up 2.75 sacks per game in 2015, good for 23rd, the Giants, 1.69 per game good for 4th. While this doesn't tell the entire story, it shows we protect Eli and/or he has an offense where he can get rid of the ball and avoid pressure. The same cannot be said in Detroit.
Detroit was also dead last in the league last year in rushing and had 3.8 YPC; Giants were 19th in rushing and 4.0 YPC.
So again, why/how is Schwartz better and why was he cut if Detroit has a worse line (using 2015 as the only tangible benchmark)?
He's better based on the fact that when he was a free agent NFL teams actually wanted him. The giants had to pony up a legitimate contract to get him. The current backups are closer to being out of the league then they are of starting the amount of games schwartz has in his career and earning a nice contract.
I'm not advocating this guy to come in and start. Sit him on the bench. But anyone here who tells me they'd rather put stingly, cleary, etc in a game over schwartz is full of fucking shit.
What do they have to lose? Money? They have 17 million in cap space. If he's healthy enough to play it's an upgrade at the backup position, right? If he's not they lose one of four useless backup linemen. Oh no!
#1 Ranking Going Into Free Agency Where Is Stingly on this list? - ( New Window )
Quote:
than an old retread at this point. Shit...Schwartz could not get on the field when he was here....and some of you actually want him back.
Who are these players with upside though?
Not a damn clue. But based on what Schwartz was unable to do while he was here...added to the fact he was just released...gives me a clue that he ain't the guy with upside.
This guy sucks, and he's a roster space eater and generally not interested in focusing on actually playing good football on the field. What else is there to say?