Maybe it's as obvious as many BBI'er's think. I checked Walter Football's list of prospects with whom Giants have met, and over 40% of them are OL's.
The facts about this list are that it's almost certainly not inclusive and might be inaccurate regarding a meeting actually occurring. And from past history, the Giants not only meet with players about whom they have questions, as is often stated, but also with those without questionable issues.
Still, it's an interesting stat, and makes me wonder if the Giants' self-scouting at season's end worries them more than they might wish it to appear.
Julie'n Davenport, OT, Bucknell (SR)
Gehrig Dieter, WR, Alabama (EW)
Rasul Douglas, CB, West Virginia (SR)
Antonio Garcia, OT, Troy (SR)
Dieugot Joseph, OT, Florida International (EW)
Kyle Kalis, G, Michigan (SR)
Obi Melifonwu, S, Connecticut (SR)
Fabian Moreau, CB, UCLA (EW)
Taylor Moton, OT/G, Western Michigan (SR)
Antonio Pipkin, QB, Tiffin (SR)
Justin Senior, OT, Mississippi State (SR)
Tedric Thompson, S, Colorado (EW)
Josh Tupou, DT, Colorado (EW)
Joseph Williams, RB, Utah (EW)
Walter Football Lists - (
New Window )
If they're not interested in them, why do they want to know more about them?
Quote:
Aren't necessarily guys they are interested in. They are guys they need to know more about.
If they're not interested in them, why do they want to know more about them?
I didn't say they weren't interested in them. Is English a second language for you?
Quote:
In comment 13364298 BillT said:
Quote:
Aren't necessarily guys they are interested in. They are guys they need to know more about.
If they're not interested in them, why do they want to know more about them?
I didn't say they weren't interested in them. Is English a second language for you?
No, but could you answer the question?
If the Giants are meeting with prospects that "Aren't necessarily guys they are interested in." what are they doing it for? Are they compiling a list of guys they aren't necessarily interested in, but about which there are entertaining facts? :-)
That initial post and following exchange was priceless. Thank you.
Quote:
In comment 13364316 TC said:
Quote:
In comment 13364298 BillT said:
Quote:
Aren't necessarily guys they are interested in. They are guys they need to know more about.
If they're not interested in them, why do they want to know more about them?
I didn't say they weren't interested in them. Is English a second language for you?
No, but could you answer the question?
If the Giants are meeting with prospects that "Aren't necessarily guys they are interested in." what are they doing it for? Are they compiling a list of guys they aren't necessarily interested in, but about which there are entertaining facts? :-)
Maybe you could read all of what I wrote and then you wouldn't have to ask questions that are already answered.
He does look good. Watched his game against Clemson and he did real well.
Actually kind of has a similar playing style as Andrew Whitworth does.
Quote:
Aren't necessarily guys they are interested in. They are guys they need to know more about.
If they're not interested in them, why do they want to know more about them?
'Curarosity,' mah man...like, 'curarosity.'
I am not interested in modern art so I spends my entire vacation every year touring art galleries.
So of course the Giants interview prospects they would never draft and aren't interested in. It makes perfect sense to spend valuable time and money getting details on people or subjects you know you have no interest in. That way you have no details on the things you are interested in - which is perfect!
Duh.
The kid is going to be Cam Chancellor part duex, but with much more range. If the Giants draft him, watch what he does in the big nickle packages.
I agree entirely with your statement, but as other posters have said, there has to be some level of interest, for some reason, or they wouldn't be doing it. In some cases I'm sure it's to definitely rule OUT a prospect, in others, I wouldn't be surprised if they talk with a prospect as a courtesy to a professional colleague.
Mayock had him rated as a top 5 tackle, and I respect Mayock's opinion more than a Daniel Jeremiah for sure!
I am not interested in modern art so I spends my entire vacation every year touring art galleries.
So of course the Giants interview prospects they would never draft and aren't interested in. It makes perfect sense to spend valuable time and money getting details on people or subjects you know you have no interest in. That way you have no details on the things you are interested in - which is perfect!
Duh.
Patrick77 is correct. Players the Giants have no interest in, get passed over. Unless you happen to be stupid, you do not interview or scout players you don't give a rat's ass about.
Quote:
is a good player.
Mayock had him rated as a top 5 tackle, and I respect Mayock's opinion more than a Daniel Jeremiah for sure!
I respect Mike Mayock, too, but let's not forget that in 2015 his #2-rated OT was Ereck Flowers (behind La'El Collins).
I agree.