why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
We're not winning the SB this year, yes, tanking best suits us. I rooted for us to win today too, because I'm an idiot, losses are better.
it was a good win, it demonstrated that maybe this coach is growing. For those that wanted him to be a finished product in his second year, that's not how it goes.
Alot of you calling for his head all week, would have been the same guys calling for Parcells head in 83, or Belichick in his Cleveland days
If this game is a big step in the growth of this coach, that is huge. Starting all over again with another coach is not ideal.
with 12 first downs . It was a dumb move to insert Hart
back into the lineup IMO Pugh should have stayed put .
The defense won this game and players do have pride
we finally got our first two INT's of the season .
The pick six was the difference in the game .
We have a long ways to go yet ...
why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
All this win did was hurt the chance for the top pick and avoid Â
a winless season. I was looking for the young guys to play great and start to develop. I could care less for the vets on this team. This team is not going on a run and are not making the playoffs. It will be just like the Giants to win some games to get a middle of the tier pick and status remains the same. Offense was terrible again as it barely did anything except a few nice runs. The defense won the game vs a terrible Denver QB. Also as Giants fan we know what it is to play down to a garbage team. The Broncos had no fight in them all night and neither did the crowd. They got caught sleeping....I did not see anything tonight that said...We back...
there are 10 games left in the season and a bunch of shitty teams this year. Let’s get to week 8 or 9 before we start tanking for a franchise QB. I like the QBs this year - especially 2 of them. Odds are we would have to have picks 1, 2, or 3 to get them. In week 6, that’s impossible to know.
when we only have 5 losses. I'm sorry, I just can't do that.
Logic vs. Emotion. I agree, it's weird.
you dont have to root for loses...You can root for wins each week and that is perfectly fine. But do not start a thread when a dog had its day telling others they are wrong for given them no chance...Giants have lost to garbage qbs in the past by playing down to the comp. That is what happen tonight and even then the giants offense looks high schoolish.
The Giants won because of a terrific goal line stand and three turnovers to none for Denver. Hopefully, Eli and the wideouts can get to know each other during practice this week and have something ready for Seattle. They will need to be way more productive.
The Giants won because of a terrific goal line stand and three turnovers to none for Denver. Hopefully, Eli and the wideouts can get to know each other during practice this week and have something ready for Seattle. They will need to be way more productive.
and not have the advantage of a team overlooking them with a below average qb
why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
And Rodgers will be 35 coming off another injured season. Should the Packers start tanking now for the next franchise QB?
Or what about the Chargers and Steelers? Should they start tanking for a franchise QB?
How about we just support the team until they're officially eliminated from the playoffs like normal fans and go from there.
This team slept through the first five games of the season, Â
playing without emotion, pass rush, turnovers, short yardage game. Not surprising that they would throw in a good game, when the Broncos were taking them lightly. Let's see them string two or three good games together.
Let's see if McAdoo can patch it up with DRC missing only one game, the way that Coughlin patched it up with Osi when Osi walked out of practice because he was upset with his grading by the coaches.
Did he make one tackle or block out there last night? The team played with a chip on it’s shoulder and won the turnover battle, rushing yards and they kept the other team out of the end zone for most of the game. They were far from perfect but they did more than enough to deserve a win against a reported elite team in a very tough environment. A game like this is why you ask yourself is it the coach or the players who make a game plan look good or bad? We got a win now which team of players will show up next Sunday that’s the really big question.
why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
And Rodgers will be 35 coming off another injured season. Should the Packers start tanking now for the next franchise QB?
Or what about the Chargers and Steelers? Should they start tanking for a franchise QB?
How about we just support the team until they're officially eliminated from the playoffs like normal fans and go from there.
The Chargers are in the exact spot we are and yes, they should be looking beyond Rivers too -- the only thing winning games is doing for them right now is hurting their draft positioning. The Steelers are an actually contending team, with a great staff they rightfully are entirely committed to, so their situation is fundamentally different; that said, their time with Ben is almost up as well and, one way or another, they will soon find themselves in the QB market.
Comparing any of these guys to the younger and unquestionably better player (the best player in the NFL, likely) when healthy in Rodgers doesn't make much sense either.
No one thought Miami was going to win at Atlanta either.
It feels good to win a Sunday night game, but lets put together 2 solid games in a row before we get too excited.
against the Giants and feel much better when they win. Keep the winning going. Let the draft play out. There's still plenty of good players in this draft. I, for one, want to see certain players develop and get better. Most notably Flowers, Thompson, Goodson, Apple, etc. It would be better for this team to have less positions to fill in the off-season and have the ability to take the BPA when we draft. I'm not do sure Eli doesn't have another solid Year left in him.
Given that if the team would be facing a total gut job - regime change as well with a 2-14 season........
Isn't it better to see the talent that is here on this team on defense and even the o line not needing five new starters as people claimed?
Facing a total rebuild is not worth a dozen draft pick positions. In particular given the fact Watson was picked 12th. Draft is always a crap shoot. Not seeing a darnold or a Rosen as someone worth a premium pick.
why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
And Rodgers will be 35 coming off another injured season. Should the Packers start tanking now for the next franchise QB?
Or what about the Chargers and Steelers? Should they start tanking for a franchise QB?
How about we just support the team until they're officially eliminated from the playoffs like normal fans and go from there.
The Chargers are in the exact spot we are and yes, they should be looking beyond Rivers too -- the only thing winning games is doing for them right now is hurting their draft positioning. The Steelers are an actually contending team, with a great staff they rightfully are entirely committed to, so their situation is fundamentally different; that said, their time with Ben is almost up as well and, one way or another, they will soon find themselves in the QB market.
Comparing any of these guys to the younger and unquestionably better player (the best player in the NFL, likely) when healthy in Rodgers doesn't make much sense either.
Again, Rodgers is 35 and is injury prone. That's a fact. It's not like he's going to become more durable as the years go by. So why does Eli belong in a nursing home only 2 years older than Rodgers?
Brady, Brees, and Palmer are older than all of those guys. Should they be tanking too?
Given that if the team would be facing a total gut job - regime change as well with a 2-14 season........
Isn't it better to see the talent that is here on this team on defense and even the o line not needing five new starters as people claimed?
Facing a total rebuild is not worth a dozen draft pick positions. In particular given the fact Watson was picked 12th. Draft is always a crap shoot. Not seeing a darnold or a Rosen as someone worth a premium pick.
If you think the Giants need to replace Eli Manning... if you think Reese and/or McAdoo is over their respective heads... then finishing 5-11 is not better than finishing 2-14.
On the other hand, if you think Eli has 4 more good years, that Reese and McAoo are the answer, then you want to give Mara a good reason to keep the status quo.
I don't see another way of looking at it from my perspective.
Why can't the answer be somewhere in the middle? A 5-11 season would still mean quite a bit of change. At least I'd hope. I think Eli may be extendable as a game manager for example. Maybe a 5-11 team that starts running the ball well does not have to be desperate in retooling the line.
And can't we root for wins at least a few more weeks before mailing it in?
Why can't the answer be somewhere in the middle? A 5-11 season would still mean quite a bit of change. At least I'd hope. I think Eli may be extendable as a game manager for example. Maybe a 5-11 team that starts running the ball well does not have to be desperate in retooling the line.
And can't we root for wins at least a few more weeks before mailing it in?
Again, no one is talking about the Giants quitting. We're talking about which results might be best for the long-term condition of the franchise.
Draft slotting matters (see Cedric Jones).
We also have ownership that we all know is just looking for an excuse to maintain the status quo.
Again, the answer to this question depends on how you feel about Manning, McAdoo, and Reese.
Long term I'd rather keep a core of talent that cares and shows fight and I'd rather see the 3 or 4 lineman showing as viable rather than a total 5 starter search on o line.
Also very happy to see jpp step up. Was fearing end was a big need for draft next year.
I want reese to go but I do think a lot of story on mcadoo and Eli left to be understood this year.
I dont think everyone on BBI said the players quit on the coach... Â
But I'm pretty darn sure that finishing anywhere from 7-9 to 5-11 is going to be a much worse thing for this franchise than finishing 2-14.
I agree with this. John Mara is looking for any reason to not make changes. Anything positive to point to so that he can continue to sell to the fans that the future looks good with our current group of decision makers and coaches. Finishing the year with a couple of wins will give everyone a false sense of what reality is.
Spite of McAdoo and they did it for the guy next to them and the asset. Coaches?
No. I think the personnel/formations and playcalling put the Giants offense into a position to succeed and the D stopped a bad Broncos offense.
We still scored just 23 pts but on the road against a tough D I will take it. This was the best offensive showing all year and the entire WR corp was out.
McAdoo had the most dreadful month coaching in NYG history. He was THAT bad. Believe it. The evidence is downright striking.
in saying that the Giants will play another good game next week at home vs Seattle. May not be enough to win, but the giants finally turned a corner last night.
Too little too late..they likely won't go 10-0 or 9-1 or 8-2 from here on out...the first 5 games killed us. It's a shame because this team has no business being 1-5 right now. THey should be 2-4 at the very least. Oh well...maybe they learned something. Or should I say maybe McAdoo learned something. Keep the fuck away from playcalling.
I get your point. I just think it doesn't make any sense at all for people to say "I'm not rooting for losses" and "we should go 2-14" in the same sentence. You are rooting for losses if you feel that way.
Why can't the answer be somewhere in the middle? A 5-11 season would still mean quite a bit of change. At least I'd hope. I think Eli may be extendable as a game manager for example. Maybe a 5-11 team that starts running the ball well does not have to be desperate in retooling the line.
And can't we root for wins at least a few more weeks before mailing it in?
Again, no one is talking about the Giants quitting. We're talking about which results might be best for the long-term condition of the franchise.
Draft slotting matters (see Cedric Jones).
We also have ownership that we all know is just looking for an excuse to maintain the status quo.
Again, the answer to this question depends on how you feel about Manning, McAdoo, and Reese.
Not sure what Cedric Jones has to do with draft slotting?
We took OBJ, what....9th overall? He should have been the first player chosen that draft. And we got him.
A lot of it is luck.
2-14 versus 5-11 to me doesn't make that huge a difference unless you are taking a franchise QB who almost certainly goes #1 or #2.
That Cedric Jones example is where Giants missed on Ogden Rice Hardy and Keyshawn.
Its a cherry picked example emphasizing draft slotting though. Eddie George went 14th in that draft. Marvin Harrsion at 18, who was better than Keyshawn. Eric Moulds went 24th. And the best player, Ray Lewis went 26th.
Actually a great example of draft slotting betting mostly a short sighted thing. Whole point is tanking in NFL is penny wise and pound foolish. And eric is not rooting for tanking, but some here are.
I'm all for drafting a QB in round 1 if he's the best player on the board, but putting the team in the hands of a supposed QB savior is a bad idea.
Below is a list of the first round QBs selected since 2005 (the year after we traded for Eli). I've divided them into four categories:
** - Super Bowl champion with the team that drafted him
* - Solid Player with the team that drafted him
? - Too early to tell
Unmarked - Didn't work out for the team that drafted him
There have been 35 first round QBs selected in 13 drafts since 2005. Here's how they break down in those four categories:
You can quibble with a couple guys either way, but I think the basic point holds: drafting a first round quarterback has a very high failure rate. I'd argue that of these 35 quarterbacks there is only one truly great player in the group...Rodgers, obviously.
I think the game has changed with regards to the quarterback position. A high level of play is still crucially important to team success, but how that high level of play is achieved has changed. It's not as simple as picking Troy Aikman or Peyton Manning first overall and knowing you're set for a decade. I'm still not sure how, but I believe that changes in college football and the CBA have altered the relationships between the different aspects involved in maintaining a high level of quarterback play.
2005
Alex Smith*
Aaron Rodgers**
Jason Campbell
2006
Vince Young
Matt Leinart
Jay Cutler
2007
JaMarcus Russell
Brady Quinn
2008
Matt Ryan*
Joe Flacco**
2009
Matt Stafford*
Mark Sanchez
Josh Freeman
2010
Sam Bradford
Tim Tebow
2011
Cam Newton*
Jake Locker
Blaine Gabbert
Christian Ponder
2012
Andrew Luck*
Robert Griffin
Ryan Tannehill
Brandon Weeden
2013
EJ Manuel
2014
Blake Bortles
Johnny Manziel
Teddy Bridgewater
2015
Jameis Winston?
Marcus Mariota?
2016
Jared Goff?
Carson Wentz?
Paxton Lynch
2017
Mitchell Trubisky?
Patrick Mahomes?
Deshaun Watson?
Terps - nice post, but I'd be curious to see if things Â
I think the game has changed with regards to the quarterback position. A high level of play is still crucially important to team success, but how that high level of play is achieved has changed. It's not as simple as picking Troy Aikman or Peyton Manning first overall and knowing you're set for a decade. I'm still not sure how, but I believe that changes in college football and the CBA have altered the relationships between the different aspects involved in maintaining a high level of quarterback play.
What's the baseline for this? Is the failure rate really higher now than the decade prior?
is the second contract. Paying $20M plus to a QB erodes your roster substantially. Look at Dak last year playing with an elite offensive line and a handful of weapons, it puts so much less pressure on the QB.
I’d like to see the Giants get stronger at the LOS & run the football. Strengthening the roster from the inside - out allows us to win with a C quarterback. BUT-
When it comes to winning Super Bowls, I don’t know if that can work. Winning a SB requires a whole other level which is tough to predict. You need a guy who can make the throws in crisis.
7 of which came via pick 6. The Giants are virtually eliminated from the playoffs after 1 month. The only prayer they have is if they win every game between now and the end of the season, and let's hope the toe breaker doesn't pit us against PHI or DAL, because we are toast.
But yeah...let's celebrate. No changes need be made.
7 of which came via pick 6. The Giants are virtually eliminated from the playoffs after 1 month. The only prayer they have is if they win every game between now and the end of the season, and let's hope the toe breaker doesn't pit us against PHI or DAL, because we are toast.
But yeah...let's celebrate. No changes need be made.
23 points, not 13 points.
I think celebrating vs. being happy that the team showed up are two different things.
I agree completely on the second contract issue. I watched Flacco yesterday...I know he's a Super Bowl winner, but he is absolutely crippling that team with his play.
I also don't know if a team should be built with the stated goal of winning a Super Bowl. Instead, I wonder if the best approach is to outline a type of football to be played and how the roster should be built to accommodate that style. Ideally, winning would then become a symptom of the successful execution of that plan.
why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
And Rodgers will be 35 coming off another injured season. Should the Packers start tanking now for the next franchise QB?
Or what about the Chargers and Steelers? Should they start tanking for a franchise QB?
How about we just support the team until they're officially eliminated from the playoffs like normal fans and go from there.
The Chargers are in the exact spot we are and yes, they should be looking beyond Rivers too -- the only thing winning games is doing for them right now is hurting their draft positioning. The Steelers are an actually contending team, with a great staff they rightfully are entirely committed to, so their situation is fundamentally different; that said, their time with Ben is almost up as well and, one way or another, they will soon find themselves in the QB market.
Comparing any of these guys to the younger and unquestionably better player (the best player in the NFL, likely) when healthy in Rodgers doesn't make much sense either.
Again, Rodgers is 35 and is injury prone. That's a fact. It's not like he's going to become more durable as the years go by. So why does Eli belong in a nursing home only 2 years older than Rodgers?
Brady, Brees, and Palmer are older than all of those guys. Should they be tanking too?
Brady plays on a team that probably already has his successor and is a perennial title contender, with arguably the GOAT HC. There's zero comparison between the Patriots and Giants right now.
The Cardinals are basically treading mediocre ground with Palmer. They're still in playoff contention though, something the Giants aren't.
Rodgers is, to be blunt, on another planet as a QB than Eli. He had the Packers contending, he gets them to the playoffs consistently. They shouldn't have been worried about things like draft positioning or rebuilding pre-injury because they were actually winning and winning because of him, something the Giants haven't done with their QB out front in quite awhile now. Even after the injury, it's still just a broken collarbone; he will be fine and he had shown zero decline to worry about before it.
The Cardinals are still 3-3 though, in the thick of things in the NFC. A team isn't "better off" losing until the playoffs are out the window, even if it's obvious they won't do much once in. Even if Palmer is probably washed and they should have an eye to the future because the present isn't that great, they have still have something to potentially contend for that matters; the Giants don't.
We're not winning the SB this year, yes, tanking best suits us. I rooted for us to win today too, because I'm an idiot, losses are better.
Alot of you calling for his head all week, would have been the same guys calling for Parcells head in 83, or Belichick in his Cleveland days
If this game is a big step in the growth of this coach, that is huge. Starting all over again with another coach is not ideal.
And ran for 46 yards. Giants won the physical battle for a change, made key stops, got sacks and turnovers. I'll take that most weeks.
back into the lineup IMO Pugh should have stayed put .
The defense won this game and players do have pride
we finally got our first two INT's of the season .
The pick six was the difference in the game .
We have a long ways to go yet ...
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
No. It's just a short term high. Feels nice, but nobody will remember it in April.
Logic vs. Emotion. I agree, it's weird.
Thank you. +1
Quote:
when we only have 5 losses. I'm sorry, I just can't do that.
Logic vs. Emotion. I agree, it's weird.
you dont have to root for loses...You can root for wins each week and that is perfectly fine. But do not start a thread when a dog had its day telling others they are wrong for given them no chance...Giants have lost to garbage qbs in the past by playing down to the comp. That is what happen tonight and even then the giants offense looks high schoolish.
The Giants won because of a terrific goal line stand and three turnovers to none for Denver. Hopefully, Eli and the wideouts can get to know each other during practice this week and have something ready for Seattle. They will need to be way more productive.
Quote:
not go overboard, the Giants had 12 first downs.
The Giants won because of a terrific goal line stand and three turnovers to none for Denver. Hopefully, Eli and the wideouts can get to know each other during practice this week and have something ready for Seattle. They will need to be way more productive.
and not have the advantage of a team overlooking them with a below average qb
Quote:
why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
And Rodgers will be 35 coming off another injured season. Should the Packers start tanking now for the next franchise QB?
Or what about the Chargers and Steelers? Should they start tanking for a franchise QB?
How about we just support the team until they're officially eliminated from the playoffs like normal fans and go from there.
Let's see if McAdoo can patch it up with DRC missing only one game, the way that Coughlin patched it up with Osi when Osi walked out of practice because he was upset with his grading by the coaches.
Quote:
In comment 13651010 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
And Rodgers will be 35 coming off another injured season. Should the Packers start tanking now for the next franchise QB?
Or what about the Chargers and Steelers? Should they start tanking for a franchise QB?
How about we just support the team until they're officially eliminated from the playoffs like normal fans and go from there.
The Chargers are in the exact spot we are and yes, they should be looking beyond Rivers too -- the only thing winning games is doing for them right now is hurting their draft positioning. The Steelers are an actually contending team, with a great staff they rightfully are entirely committed to, so their situation is fundamentally different; that said, their time with Ben is almost up as well and, one way or another, they will soon find themselves in the QB market.
Comparing any of these guys to the younger and unquestionably better player (the best player in the NFL, likely) when healthy in Rodgers doesn't make much sense either.
It feels good to win a Sunday night game, but lets put together 2 solid games in a row before we get too excited.
This ^^
It was a joy to watch a well played win
Yeah, If you root for them to lose...they’ll lose...that’s how it works...
Is there really an arguement about this? Who cares what people root for?
But I'm pretty darn sure that finishing anywhere from 7-9 to 5-11 is going to be a much worse thing for this franchise than finishing 2-14.
Isn't it better to see the talent that is here on this team on defense and even the o line not needing five new starters as people claimed?
Facing a total rebuild is not worth a dozen draft pick positions. In particular given the fact Watson was picked 12th. Draft is always a crap shoot. Not seeing a darnold or a Rosen as someone worth a premium pick.
Quote:
In comment 13651047 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
In comment 13651010 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
And Rodgers will be 35 coming off another injured season. Should the Packers start tanking now for the next franchise QB?
Or what about the Chargers and Steelers? Should they start tanking for a franchise QB?
How about we just support the team until they're officially eliminated from the playoffs like normal fans and go from there.
The Chargers are in the exact spot we are and yes, they should be looking beyond Rivers too -- the only thing winning games is doing for them right now is hurting their draft positioning. The Steelers are an actually contending team, with a great staff they rightfully are entirely committed to, so their situation is fundamentally different; that said, their time with Ben is almost up as well and, one way or another, they will soon find themselves in the QB market.
Comparing any of these guys to the younger and unquestionably better player (the best player in the NFL, likely) when healthy in Rodgers doesn't make much sense either.
Again, Rodgers is 35 and is injury prone. That's a fact. It's not like he's going to become more durable as the years go by. So why does Eli belong in a nursing home only 2 years older than Rodgers?
Brady, Brees, and Palmer are older than all of those guys. Should they be tanking too?
Isn't it better to see the talent that is here on this team on defense and even the o line not needing five new starters as people claimed?
Facing a total rebuild is not worth a dozen draft pick positions. In particular given the fact Watson was picked 12th. Draft is always a crap shoot. Not seeing a darnold or a Rosen as someone worth a premium pick.
If you think the Giants need to replace Eli Manning... if you think Reese and/or McAdoo is over their respective heads... then finishing 5-11 is not better than finishing 2-14.
On the other hand, if you think Eli has 4 more good years, that Reese and McAoo are the answer, then you want to give Mara a good reason to keep the status quo.
I don't see another way of looking at it from my perspective.
And can't we root for wins at least a few more weeks before mailing it in?
And can't we root for wins at least a few more weeks before mailing it in?
Again, no one is talking about the Giants quitting. We're talking about which results might be best for the long-term condition of the franchise.
Draft slotting matters (see Cedric Jones).
We also have ownership that we all know is just looking for an excuse to maintain the status quo.
Again, the answer to this question depends on how you feel about Manning, McAdoo, and Reese.
Long term I'd rather keep a core of talent that cares and shows fight and I'd rather see the 3 or 4 lineman showing as viable rather than a total 5 starter search on o line.
Also very happy to see jpp step up. Was fearing end was a big need for draft next year.
I want reese to go but I do think a lot of story on mcadoo and Eli left to be understood this year.
But I'm pretty darn sure that finishing anywhere from 7-9 to 5-11 is going to be a much worse thing for this franchise than finishing 2-14.
I agree with this. John Mara is looking for any reason to not make changes. Anything positive to point to so that he can continue to sell to the fans that the future looks good with our current group of decision makers and coaches. Finishing the year with a couple of wins will give everyone a false sense of what reality is.
No. I think the personnel/formations and playcalling put the Giants offense into a position to succeed and the D stopped a bad Broncos offense.
We still scored just 23 pts but on the road against a tough D I will take it. This was the best offensive showing all year and the entire WR corp was out.
McAdoo had the most dreadful month coaching in NYG history. He was THAT bad. Believe it. The evidence is downright striking.
Too little too late..they likely won't go 10-0 or 9-1 or 8-2 from here on out...the first 5 games killed us. It's a shame because this team has no business being 1-5 right now. THey should be 2-4 at the very least. Oh well...maybe they learned something. Or should I say maybe McAdoo learned something. Keep the fuck away from playcalling.
Quote:
Why can't the answer be somewhere in the middle? A 5-11 season would still mean quite a bit of change. At least I'd hope. I think Eli may be extendable as a game manager for example. Maybe a 5-11 team that starts running the ball well does not have to be desperate in retooling the line.
And can't we root for wins at least a few more weeks before mailing it in?
Again, no one is talking about the Giants quitting. We're talking about which results might be best for the long-term condition of the franchise.
Draft slotting matters (see Cedric Jones).
We also have ownership that we all know is just looking for an excuse to maintain the status quo.
Again, the answer to this question depends on how you feel about Manning, McAdoo, and Reese.
Not sure what Cedric Jones has to do with draft slotting?
We took OBJ, what....9th overall? He should have been the first player chosen that draft. And we got him.
A lot of it is luck.
2-14 versus 5-11 to me doesn't make that huge a difference unless you are taking a franchise QB who almost certainly goes #1 or #2.
Yeah, but they played hard and smart.........we've seen Giants teams go into games like this and simply quit. Last game in Denver was like that.
Giants team - emphasize team which includes all the coaches - deserve credit for this one.
not go overboard, the Giants had 12 first downs.
Eric
Its a cherry picked example emphasizing draft slotting though. Eddie George went 14th in that draft. Marvin Harrsion at 18, who was better than Keyshawn. Eric Moulds went 24th. And the best player, Ray Lewis went 26th.
Actually a great example of draft slotting betting mostly a short sighted thing. Whole point is tanking in NFL is penny wise and pound foolish. And eric is not rooting for tanking, but some here are.
Below is a list of the first round QBs selected since 2005 (the year after we traded for Eli). I've divided them into four categories:
** - Super Bowl champion with the team that drafted him
* - Solid Player with the team that drafted him
? - Too early to tell
Unmarked - Didn't work out for the team that drafted him
There have been 35 first round QBs selected in 13 drafts since 2005. Here's how they break down in those four categories:
** - 2 (Rodgers and Flacco)
* - 5 (Smith, Ryan, Stafford, Newton, & Luck)
? - 7 (Winston, Mariota, Goff, Wentz, Trubisky, Mahomes, & Watson)
Unmarked - 19 (everybody else)
You can quibble with a couple guys either way, but I think the basic point holds: drafting a first round quarterback has a very high failure rate. I'd argue that of these 35 quarterbacks there is only one truly great player in the group...Rodgers, obviously.
I think the game has changed with regards to the quarterback position. A high level of play is still crucially important to team success, but how that high level of play is achieved has changed. It's not as simple as picking Troy Aikman or Peyton Manning first overall and knowing you're set for a decade. I'm still not sure how, but I believe that changes in college football and the CBA have altered the relationships between the different aspects involved in maintaining a high level of quarterback play.
2005
Alex Smith*
Aaron Rodgers**
Jason Campbell
2006
Vince Young
Matt Leinart
Jay Cutler
2007
JaMarcus Russell
Brady Quinn
2008
Matt Ryan*
Joe Flacco**
2009
Matt Stafford*
Mark Sanchez
Josh Freeman
2010
Sam Bradford
Tim Tebow
2011
Cam Newton*
Jake Locker
Blaine Gabbert
Christian Ponder
2012
Andrew Luck*
Robert Griffin
Ryan Tannehill
Brandon Weeden
2013
EJ Manuel
2014
Blake Bortles
Johnny Manziel
Teddy Bridgewater
2015
Jameis Winston?
Marcus Mariota?
2016
Jared Goff?
Carson Wentz?
Paxton Lynch
2017
Mitchell Trubisky?
Patrick Mahomes?
Deshaun Watson?
What's the baseline for this? Is the failure rate really higher now than the decade prior?
I’d like to see the Giants get stronger at the LOS & run the football. Strengthening the roster from the inside - out allows us to win with a C quarterback. BUT-
When it comes to winning Super Bowls, I don’t know if that can work. Winning a SB requires a whole other level which is tough to predict. You need a guy who can make the throws in crisis.
But yeah...let's celebrate. No changes need be made.
But yeah...let's celebrate. No changes need be made.
23 points, not 13 points.
I think celebrating vs. being happy that the team showed up are two different things.
I also don't know if a team should be built with the stated goal of winning a Super Bowl. Instead, I wonder if the best approach is to outline a type of football to be played and how the roster should be built to accommodate that style. Ideally, winning would then become a symptom of the successful execution of that plan.
Quote:
In comment 13651166 WillVAB said:
Quote:
In comment 13651047 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
In comment 13651010 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
why would a win here not be a good thing? Because we should be tanking? Because we might get the 7th pick now instead of the 2nd? Cmon man. Players and coaches responded. Let’s keep it going.
Because Eli Manning will be 37 years old in 2018 and we may have a legit shot at another franchise QB. A 2-14 record is better than a 5-11 record in our situation.
And Rodgers will be 35 coming off another injured season. Should the Packers start tanking now for the next franchise QB?
Or what about the Chargers and Steelers? Should they start tanking for a franchise QB?
How about we just support the team until they're officially eliminated from the playoffs like normal fans and go from there.
The Chargers are in the exact spot we are and yes, they should be looking beyond Rivers too -- the only thing winning games is doing for them right now is hurting their draft positioning. The Steelers are an actually contending team, with a great staff they rightfully are entirely committed to, so their situation is fundamentally different; that said, their time with Ben is almost up as well and, one way or another, they will soon find themselves in the QB market.
Comparing any of these guys to the younger and unquestionably better player (the best player in the NFL, likely) when healthy in Rodgers doesn't make much sense either.
Again, Rodgers is 35 and is injury prone. That's a fact. It's not like he's going to become more durable as the years go by. So why does Eli belong in a nursing home only 2 years older than Rodgers?
Brady, Brees, and Palmer are older than all of those guys. Should they be tanking too?
Brady plays on a team that probably already has his successor and is a perennial title contender, with arguably the GOAT HC. There's zero comparison between the Patriots and Giants right now.
The Cardinals are basically treading mediocre ground with Palmer. They're still in playoff contention though, something the Giants aren't.
Rodgers is, to be blunt, on another planet as a QB than Eli. He had the Packers contending, he gets them to the playoffs consistently. They shouldn't have been worried about things like draft positioning or rebuilding pre-injury because they were actually winning and winning because of him, something the Giants haven't done with their QB out front in quite awhile now. Even after the injury, it's still just a broken collarbone; he will be fine and he had shown zero decline to worry about before it.
I don't disagree with this.
The Cardinals are still 3-3 though, in the thick of things in the NFC. A team isn't "better off" losing until the playoffs are out the window, even if it's obvious they won't do much once in. Even if Palmer is probably washed and they should have an eye to the future because the present isn't that great, they have still have something to potentially contend for that matters; the Giants don't.