Michael Robinson lives here in Richmond, and goes in studio once a week with a local radio host. First question of the day: "What team, good or bad, has surprised you the most?" He said the Giants, and said the following things in order:
-worst offensive line in the NFL by far
-Erik Flowers worst offensive tackle in the NFL by far
-Brandon Marshall looks like he doesn't want to play
-DE's are holding meetings at Eli Manning because they're beating both tackles so badly, Eli won't make it through the season
-Paul Perkins should not be a starting RB
-says max protect won't do any good because the defense never has to bring more than 4 guys, 3 of them are getting to Eli Manning every time regardless of protection, and there's nowhere to throw the ball because all passing lanes are flooded with seven defenders constantly.
He sounded genuinely shocked that the situation could be this bad, and says he plans on showing video on NFL Network of just how bad our line is on NFL Network Sunday morning.
The guy is probably going to feel the effects of this punishment for the rest of his life.
The guy is probably going to feel the effects of this punishment for the rest of his life.
No doubt...this line is taking quality years off of Eli's post-football life. He was fortunate not to take a serious injury this past Monday
Then I come here, and a decent size contingent of posters seem to want to put Eli near the top of the issues.
It's kind of strange.
So when the national media shits on Eli, they are biased and don't pay enough attention like the folks on BBI. When they relieve Eli of all responsibility for how bad the offense is, they are much more perceptive than BBI?
I am not an Eli basher or apologist. I think he is not the source of the problem but he is also not part of the solution. But these posts are biased to a pretty silly extent.
Quote:
on all the talk shows, on the radio shows, etc.... I hear a lot of the things Michael Robinson mentioned being the issues, but also like Robinson, I don't hear anybody putting blame on Eli.
Then I come here, and a decent size contingent of posters seem to want to put Eli near the top of the issues.
It's kind of strange.
So when the national media shits on Eli, they are biased and don't pay enough attention like the folks on BBI. When they relieve Eli of all responsibility for how bad the offense is, they are much more perceptive than BBI?
I am not an Eli basher or apologist. I think he is not the source of the problem but he is also not part of the solution. But these posts are biased to a pretty silly extent.
Think about it this way... The media has sh-t on Eli his whole career. A little odd that they're not taking this opportunity to use it to further that agenda, unless they know they'll look foolish doing so.
If you can't see that Eli is missing the few opportunities that are there for him in each game, I'm not sure what to say.
But some here can't see that, and insist that despite everything, he needs to elevate things. I just don't see how he can.
If you can't see that Eli is missing the few opportunities that are there for him in each game, I'm not sure what to say.
It's been increasing in frequency since 2015 season began.
If you can't see that Eli is missing the few opportunities that are there for him in each game, I'm not sure what to say.
That's really not the main problem. Eli has always made his share of mistakes. It's really hard to see where Eli is at under these cobditions.
The OL is the main problem first and foremost. Fix that and then we can get a read on what Eli has left in the tank. I suspect we will never get that opportunity and we will be arguing this same point long after Eli retires.
McAdoo will likely get a shot to do this with his own QB.
People are angry and looking for the easiest outlet available.
McAdoo will likely get a shot to do this with his own QB.
If we are picking a QB with a high first round pick, that would imply this season had a losing record. Brylcream Ben and his staff was only given a 3 year contract. Are you implying that the F.O. will get a QB suited for a HC with only 1 year remaining on his contract? Or are you wanting to see Ben get an extension after 1 winning season and 1 losing season?
Most people's beliefs are based on interpreting facts to fit their preconceived notions, not what a logical analysis tells them.
Quote:
Really?
Most people's beliefs are based on interpreting facts to fit their preconceived notions, not what a logical analysis tells them.
Totally agree.
Quote:
safety.
But some here can't see that, and insist that despite everything, he needs to elevate things. I just don't see how he can.
There are people who have an emotional stake in Ben and Jerry having been the right call.
I would think all Giants fans would have this? That means the team is doing well. If you don't, then why wouldn't you? Is not seeing the team do well more important than whatever reason you have?
Quote:
In comment 13609328 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
safety.
But some here can't see that, and insist that despite everything, he needs to elevate things. I just don't see how he can.
There are people who have an emotional stake in Ben and Jerry having been the right call.
I would think all Giants fans would have this? That means the team is doing well. If you don't, then why wouldn't you? Is not seeing the team do well more important than whatever reason you have?
Said fans tend to struggle with objectivity and understanding what is more likely reality.
Quote:
In comment 13609581 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Really?
Most people's beliefs are based on interpreting facts to fit their preconceived notions, not what a logical analysis tells them.
Totally agree.
Its deductive vs. inductive reasoning
Quote:
In comment 13609216 crick n NC said:
Quote:
paid 20mill he has to overcome.
Not true. He is only being paid $13 MM for 2017. Don't confuse cap hit with paid salary.
While that's accurate, the cap hit is what affects roster construction; paid salary is irrelevant. Eli represents ~12% of the overall salary cap for the Giants this season. That's one player, and it implies that he should be at least 6x more valuable than an average player just to get back to even for his cap number.
That's the important point, IMO - the OL isn't doing Eli any favors, but Eli's cap hit isn't doing the team any favors either if he needs significant roster support in order to be successful.
Unless you have a QB on a rookie deal you're gonna be overpaying at the QB spot. Just the way the league is.
Quote:
The longer this goes on the more I suspect they implode this offense next year and go with a QB more suited to McAdoo.
McAdoo will likely get a shot to do this with his own QB.
If we are picking a QB with a high first round pick, that would imply this season had a losing record. Brylcream Ben and his staff was only given a 3 year contract. Are you implying that the F.O. will get a QB suited for a HC with only 1 year remaining on his contract? Or are you wanting to see Ben get an extension after 1 winning season and 1 losing season?
Where did I say what I "wanted"?
I'm suggesting that if Eli is on the downside they may not want to continue with 36 year old, old-school pocket passer that doesn't suit their offense.
They might very well can McAdoo, and if this season continues the way it's going he may very well deserve it.
Don't confuse my suggestions as to what might happen as what I want to happen.
Whatever happens, Eli's seasons are likely numbered.
Quote:
In comment 13609580 LakeGeorgeGiant said:
Quote:
The longer this goes on the more I suspect they implode this offense next year and go with a QB more suited to McAdoo.
McAdoo will likely get a shot to do this with his own QB.
If we are picking a QB with a high first round pick, that would imply this season had a losing record. Brylcream Ben and his staff was only given a 3 year contract. Are you implying that the F.O. will get a QB suited for a HC with only 1 year remaining on his contract? Or are you wanting to see Ben get an extension after 1 winning season and 1 losing season?
Where did I say what I "wanted"?
I'm suggesting that if Eli is on the downside they may not want to continue with 36 year old, old-school pocket passer that doesn't suit their offense.
They might very well can McAdoo, and if this season continues the way it's going he may very well deserve it.
Don't confuse my suggestions as to what might happen as what I want to happen.
Whatever happens, Eli's seasons are likely numbered.
I was prefacing the questions I posed to you based on your prior response that the
McAdoo will likely get a shot to do this with his own QB.
Your suggestions (not "wants") seem to cater to a scenario that suits Ben. My suggestion that if the season goes into the shitter, why would the F.O. choose a QB suited for a HC that has 1 year remaining on his contract. And if the 1 year is limiting, than why would the F.O. give an extension to a HC with 1 winning season and 1 losing season?
I'll agree with you that whatever happens, Eli's seasons are likely numbered.
And point-of-fact I agree. Winning those 2 rings is really all that matters, and when the stories all said and done, no one will remember the shitty season when he led the lead league in picks.
But Manning has played significantly long enough to show that he's not flawless.
If someone wants to suggest he's a problem, that's completely reasonable. But it is impossible to determine the extent to which he is a problem because the disastrous play of the offensive line overshadows everyone else on the team, including the coaching staff.
We can not do either of the following, and the trickle down effect is total:
- block a conventional pass rush
- run block in situations where defenses show 6 or even 5 defenders in the box
Opponents know that they don't have to blitz in order to destroy the timing of a passing play. That is simply not a tenable situation, and it renders the other 6 offensive players impotent.
Talking about Eli as the problem is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic as the north Atlantic is being hit by an asteroid.
I'd question how, with yet another negative leak from the team about him today, something that's been happening with increasing frequency since McAdoo took over as HC and with how he's seemingly the only player he'll harshly single out (Eli isn't the only player who could ever take criticism and not crumble; that's insulting to everyone else) one would think it isn't.
games last year just to prove it . To think that was gonna
change this year by adding a TE is delusional .
We just din't expect them to get worse in which they absolutely have .
On two or three of the sacks OBJ was wide open slanting 25
yards down field on another play Brandon Marshall had slipped
by two defenders all Eli had to do was float it to him easy
20 yards or more . Both times Eli had less than 3 seconds
he dropped the ball perfectly to Marshal again a good 30 yards down the field and he dropped . Then Adams got open
deep the pass wasn't perfect but it was the biggest play
of the game , Given time Eli can get the job done but with
no run game no QB is gonna work wonder unless he is Russel
Wilson .
Whats the big shock here ?
Quote:
paid 20mill he has to overcome.
Not true. He is only being paid $13 MM for 2017. Don't confuse cap hit with paid salary.
It's a $20M cap hit because of the $7M in bonus that's prorated and guaranteed and already paid.
That's a hell of a lot of money for a QB who's racking up losses.
If someone wants to suggest he's a problem, that's completely reasonable. But it is impossible to determine the extent to which he is a problem because the disastrous play of the offensive line overshadows everyone else on the team, including the coaching staff.
We can not do either of the following, and the trickle down effect is total:
- block a conventional pass rush
- run block in situations where defenses show 6 or even 5 defenders in the box
Opponents know that they don't have to blitz in order to destroy the timing of a passing play. That is simply not a tenable situation, and it renders the other 6 offensive players impotent.
Talking about Eli as the problem is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic as the north Atlantic is being hit by an asteroid.
Or...it's a practical view of a bad team that requires an overhaul and then weighing the benefit of paying a 37 year old QB $40M over the next two years and whether those assets can be better allocated.
The 2011 line was pretty decent in pass protection they just couldn't run block.
If any schmuck at a job got a bonus 3 years ago, they don't consider that they are being paid currently a pro-rated amount of that bonus. They are being paid what they receive that given year. Eli is only being paid $13 MM this year.
The pro-rating of a signing bonus and the accounting towards the salary cap is more of an "administrative footnote".
I am legitimately regretful that we'll never get to see you put together an NFL roster. I want to see what this would look like. The reason these players get this money is because good luck finding a quarterback that can play. They come along every handful of drafts and you're lucky to get one.
Not to even considering the per play value of a position who touches the ball on the vast majority of all offensive plays and has the ability to negatively impact every possession.
There are outliers. Every decade or so there are a few quarterbacks who peak early and that's a boon. And there are generational defenses that carry a team. Winning in the NFL already has a major element of chance, if you want to double down on it with hoping for an outlier that is one way to manage a roster.
If any schmuck at a job got a bonus 3 years ago, they don't consider that they are being paid currently a pro-rated amount of that bonus. They are being paid what they receive that given year. Eli is only being paid $13 MM this year.
The pro-rating of a signing bonus and the accounting towards the salary cap is more of an "administrative footnote".
So what you're saying is that he's paid $13M this season + a $7M prorated signing bonus for a total of $20M cap hit.
That's precisely what we've said. You're the one carrying on as if you invented cap economics.
Quote:
My views on paying a QB that kind of money are well documented here. Unless we have a generational player at the position I wouldn't pay that kind of money for a QB.
I am legitimately regretful that we'll never get to see you put together an NFL roster. I want to see what this would look like. The reason these players get this money is because good luck finding a quarterback that can play. They come along every handful of drafts and you're lucky to get one.
It's one thing to make your QB the highest paid player on the team. It's something else entirely to resign that player to what's probably a guaranteed 4 yr $84M deal at age 35 when he isn't playing particularly well.
That's the part I think Go Terps and I have an issue with.
If you are paying a player a lot $$ it means you cannot use that money to buy production elsewhere. If he is not bringing back the return on the spend.. AND you allow that situation to continue, then you are not doing your job as a GM. There is no other way to look at it.
So, again taking the emotion out of it and what Eli has done for us 6-10 years ago, if we are not getting the return on the $20 in cap that his contract is costing us, then we need to make a change. That change FIRST would be to reduce that number and keep him. If that does not work, then moving on is the second option.
You cannot be scared to cut the ties eventually. If we were to do it now, what is the fear? going from the worst offense in the league to the worst offense in the league with additional funds available to sign Odell and improve the offensive line?
I know people like to say "this is not fantasy football". However, the daily games with the salary cap are a lot like this in a way. You are looking for value and production for the cost for that player. So, we need to fix the cost/value situation with Eli or find another option.
Quote:
In comment 13610124 Go Terps said:
Quote:
My views on paying a QB that kind of money are well documented here. Unless we have a generational player at the position I wouldn't pay that kind of money for a QB.
I am legitimately regretful that we'll never get to see you put together an NFL roster. I want to see what this would look like. The reason these players get this money is because good luck finding a quarterback that can play. They come along every handful of drafts and you're lucky to get one.
It's one thing to make your QB the highest paid player on the team. It's something else entirely to resign that player to what's probably a guaranteed 4 yr $84M deal at age 35 when he isn't playing particularly well.
That's the part I think Go Terps and I have an issue with.
Perhaps so, but in general he's vehemently opposed to paying anyone and it's unrealistic.
Quote:
In comment 13610150 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
In comment 13610124 Go Terps said:
Quote:
My views on paying a QB that kind of money are well documented here. Unless we have a generational player at the position I wouldn't pay that kind of money for a QB.
I am legitimately regretful that we'll never get to see you put together an NFL roster. I want to see what this would look like. The reason these players get this money is because good luck finding a quarterback that can play. They come along every handful of drafts and you're lucky to get one.
It's one thing to make your QB the highest paid player on the team. It's something else entirely to resign that player to what's probably a guaranteed 4 yr $84M deal at age 35 when he isn't playing particularly well.
That's the part I think Go Terps and I have an issue with.
Perhaps so, but in general he's vehemently opposed to paying anyone and it's unrealistic.
I don't know. I wont speak for GoTerps, but I specifically recall him opposing the Eli and JPP deals. Mostly because I agreed with him at the time.
JPP has been pretty okay so far.
Quote:
But his salary is NOT equivalent to his cap hit. Some poster early in the thread that it was "administrative footnote". But the reality is he is not being paid $20 MM this year. Nor will he be paid $40 MM over the next 2 years.
If any schmuck at a job got a bonus 3 years ago, they don't consider that they are being paid currently a pro-rated amount of that bonus. They are being paid what they receive that given year. Eli is only being paid $13 MM this year.
The pro-rating of a signing bonus and the accounting towards the salary cap is more of an "administrative footnote".
So what you're saying is that he's paid $13M this season + a $7M prorated signing bonus for a total of $20M cap hit.
That's precisely what we've said. You're the one carrying on as if you invented cap economics.
That is not what you said -
Let me spell it out for you. He is not being paid $20 MM/year (or $40 MM over 2 years). The signing bonus was earned when he signed his contract. The pro-rating of that signing bonus is only for the accounting regarding the cap. But he is not being paid his cap hit.
If you are paying a player a lot $$ it means you cannot use that money to buy production elsewhere. If he is not bringing back the return on the spend.. AND you allow that situation to continue, then you are not doing your job as a GM. There is no other way to look at it.
So, again taking the emotion out of it and what Eli has done for us 6-10 years ago, if we are not getting the return on the $20 in cap that his contract is costing us, then we need to make a change. That change FIRST would be to reduce that number and keep him. If that does not work, then moving on is the second option.
You cannot be scared to cut the ties eventually. If we were to do it now, what is the fear? going from the worst offense in the league to the worst offense in the league with additional funds available to sign Odell and improve the offensive line?
I know people like to say "this is not fantasy football". However, the daily games with the salary cap are a lot like this in a way. You are looking for value and production for the cost for that player. So, we need to fix the cost/value situation with Eli or find another option.
And to remove the emotion and names out of it, but if you make an investment based on current market conditions, doesn't it make sense to protect that investment? If the person you have hired to manage your investment, fails to do so, would you continue to employ that manager?
Quote:
In comment 13610142 Diver_Down said:
Quote:
But his salary is NOT equivalent to his cap hit. Some poster early in the thread that it was "administrative footnote". But the reality is he is not being paid $20 MM this year. Nor will he be paid $40 MM over the next 2 years.
If any schmuck at a job got a bonus 3 years ago, they don't consider that they are being paid currently a pro-rated amount of that bonus. They are being paid what they receive that given year. Eli is only being paid $13 MM this year.
The pro-rating of a signing bonus and the accounting towards the salary cap is more of an "administrative footnote".
So what you're saying is that he's paid $13M this season + a $7M prorated signing bonus for a total of $20M cap hit.
That's precisely what we've said. You're the one carrying on as if you invented cap economics.
That is not what you said -
Code:
Or...it's a practical view of a bad team that requires an overhaul and then weighing the benefit of paying a 37 year old QB $40M over the next two years and whether those assets can be better allocated.
Let me spell it out for you. He is not being paid $20 MM/year (or $40 MM over 2 years). The signing bonus was earned when he signed his contract. The pro-rating of that signing bonus is only for the accounting regarding the cap. But he is not being paid his cap hit.
Let me spell it out for you. Semantics. His cap hit is $20M this season and roughly the same next. That $7M is used up and cannot be spent because it's already been paid.
If any schmuck at a job got a bonus 3 years ago, they don't consider that they are being paid currently a pro-rated amount of that bonus. They are being paid what they receive that given year. Eli is only being paid $13 MM this year.
The pro-rating of a signing bonus and the accounting towards the salary cap is more of an "administrative footnote".
The cap number is what matters. The cap number is what affects your ability to build your roster. The current salary is only a factor for the Giants' P&L, and THAT is the one element that is truly insignificant and irrelevant to us as fans. The true salary relative to cap number is much more of a footnote than looking at the cap number by itself.
This isn't about fans being upset that Eli is currently being paid more in his weekly paycheck than he's worth; it's about him representing a higher cap value than he's currently delivering upon, and further, whether that cap number actually impacts the Giants' ability to go get him the supporting cast (specifically the OL) that he seems to need. I'm not sure why I'd expect the person who only a few months ago repeatedly called for Eli to hold out for more money to actually understand this.