The Giants are a perfect example of why pure talent doesn't always or actually seldom, works in the NFL. Football is the ultimate team game. No matter how talented a team may be, me first players, behavior problems and the like preclude ultimate team success. This is one reason why a team like NE is successful. They weed these types out. Furthermore, a common culture that is instilled on a properly selected draft choice just adds to the team concept and success. This is why free agency used to the max like the Giants did, is also seldom successful. No common upbringing or even worse, an upbringing by a dysfunctional team can make many FA's fools gold.. These dysfunctional teams can be a source of talented but weak character FA's (see Janoris Jenkins for example ). The Giants need to clean house, get a new GM and coach, keep the appropriate players and rebuild their corporate culture and talent intelligently. As the Eagles have shown, a smart GM can do this quickly. I must say, having rooted for the Giants since 1970, this is the most unlikable group from management down through the coach and many of the players that I have endured. Many of them embody many things I detest in people ranging from arrogance to stupidity to lack of effort. It does piss me off that all rooting interests aside, both the Eagles and to an extent the Cowboys ( several players to be excluded ), are more likeable than the Giants.
Furthermore, a common culture that is instilled on a properly selected draft choice just adds to the team concept and success. This is why free agency used to the max like the Giants did, is also seldom successful. No common upbringing or even worse, an upbringing by a dysfunctional team can make many FA's fools gold.. These dysfunctional teams can be a source of talented but weak character FA's (see Janoris Jenkins for example ). The Giants need to clean house, get a new GM and coach, keep the appropriate players and rebuild their corporate culture and talent intelligently.
As the Eagles have shown, a smart GM can do this quickly. I must say, having rooted for the Giants since 1970, this is the most unlikable group from management down through the coach and many of the players that I have endured. Many of them embody many things I detest in people ranging from arrogance to stupidity to lack of effort.
It does piss me off that all rooting interests aside, both the Eagles and to an extent the Cowboys ( several players to be excluded ), are more likeable than the Giants.
You mean like Aaron Hernandez? Gronk, dancing with a broken arm? Wes Welker stealing people's girlfriends?
The Pats have had their share of idiots, but they win.
This isn't to imply character doesn't matter, but choosing what character traits are bringing things down is difficult.
When Cam Newton acts like a jackass two years ago, he's just having fun. Now, he's a brooding malcontent. Every star WR is mercurial and diva-like, so discussing them in the context of character is really strange. There's a lot of character concerns with Seahawk players - but wjile they are winning, it is all good.
That's the key just win - win and character becomes part of the story of the "fun" and "looseness". Lose, and character becomes a talking point of Cancer.
The fact that Reese drafted him instead of Zach Martin when we had a crying need on the O line should be grounds alone for him to be fired.
A: Because he drafted Odell Beckham.
Your theories are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Furthermore, a common culture that is instilled on a properly selected draft choice just adds to the team concept and success. This is why free agency used to the max like the Giants did, is also seldom successful. No common upbringing or even worse, an upbringing by a dysfunctional team can make many FA's fools gold.. These dysfunctional teams can be a source of talented but weak character FA's (see Janoris Jenkins for example ). The Giants need to clean house, get a new GM and coach, keep the appropriate players and rebuild their corporate culture and talent intelligently.
As the Eagles have shown, a smart GM can do this quickly. I must say, having rooted for the Giants since 1970, this is the most unlikable group from management down through the coach and many of the players that I have endured. Many of them embody many things I detest in people ranging from arrogance to stupidity to lack of effort.
It does piss me off that all rooting interests aside, both the Eagles and to an extent the Cowboys ( several players to be excluded ), are more likeable than the Giants.
You going to send Snacks back to the Jets? Oh, and by the way:
Anyone who's been suspended please raise your hand:
Quote:
This is one reason why a team like NE is successful. They weed these types out
You mean like Aaron Hernandez? Gronk, dancing with a broken arm? Wes Welker stealing people's girlfriends?
The Pats have had their share of idiots, but they win.
This isn't to imply character doesn't matter, but choosing what character traits are bringing things down is difficult.
When Cam Newton acts like a jackass two years ago, he's just having fun. Now, he's a brooding malcontent. Every star WR is mercurial and diva-like, so discussing them in the context of character is really strange. There's a lot of character concerns with Seahawk players - but wjile they are winning, it is all good.
That's the key just win - win and character becomes part of the story of the "fun" and "looseness". Lose, and character becomes a talking point of Cancer.
x2. Trying to put a finger on what exactly would "fix" things from a character standpoint is a worthless exercise. Apply it to Pittsburgh and the Bryant situation which likely blows up if they were 2-6 but is just seen as a minor nuisance at 6-2.
and they have none of that...
----------------------------.
Would you say the Sir Winston Churchill 'had no character' because he woke up with a whisky or two and often had a smoke? And made funny, nasty comments to the ladys?
Well, he was all about 'us' ....nothing about 'me' and saved western civilization, freedom and all we hold close.When it was all over, did he whine and bitch? No, the usual Normative Normans sent him back out to pasture and he flew off like a fat little bird.
Sometimes individuals with the Good Character (to fight hard for the 'us', play a role for the team, to be lunchpail, to keep mouths shut when its needed).
ALSO party at times, have lots of babys (who doesn't love
babys? ....with different baby mammas, ok, none of your damn business actually), drink, smoke, etc. at times.
Whereas you might have a tea-toteller, a vegan person, sober, self righteous, who is in fact a self centered P.O.S.
THINK PEOPLE, THINK!
Like I said - losing brings on all sorts of imagined impressions.
Language matters and discussion is how we refine it.
Is it taking your helmet off to showboat so that a rule is actually created in your honor?
Is it fighting with coaches and staff during games?
I'm confused here.
The Leon Lett School of Fumble Returns?
In some communities you work, get salary and leave. I kind of like that model, because it reflects the idea that the boss respects you as an individual, one that has his own free time.
In other situations, boss wants you to attend his rock shows, church, yoga sessions, family birthdays.
In a sense it's less respectful. This second model, Because it implies that the normal hierarchy - the one that we all sign up for, to get dollars- exists beyond the usual parameters. Boss may think it's an invitation, but maybe it's an intrusion.
Think Harvey weinstien. As a random example.
Yeah, yeah, I know - "football character". Like the kind that hasn't produced a SB since the mid 1990's.
The fact that Reese drafted him instead of Zach Martin when we had a crying need on the O line should be grounds alone for him to be fired.
You should never be allowed to post again after this disaster.
"The perception is you have been winning championships with bums."
Jerruh: "Bums don't win championships."
The Giants won 11 last season with most of these guys. The season went into the crapper for various reasons. The character quality is insignificant , other than to remind that losing begets all sort of negative behavior . Such is the human condition .
Or is it because they win? How many teams with bad records look like they have poor leadership or are low character?
But your not wrong though.
Quote:
This is one reason why a team like NE is successful. They weed these types out
You mean like Aaron Hernandez? Gronk, dancing with a broken arm? Wes Welker stealing people's girlfriends?
The Pats have had their share of idiots, but they win.
This isn't to imply character doesn't matter, but choosing what character traits are bringing things down is difficult.
When Cam Newton acts like a jackass two years ago, he's just having fun. Now, he's a brooding malcontent. Every star WR is mercurial and diva-like, so discussing them in the context of character is really strange. There's a lot of character concerns with Seahawk players - but wjile they are winning, it is all good.
That's the key just win - win and character becomes part of the story of the "fun" and "looseness". Lose, and character becomes a talking point of Cancer.
This was my initial reaction.
The Pats don’t win because they have a roster loaded with high character try hards. They win because BB has a system, he gets players that fit that system, and he’s able to manage character issue guys enough due to his credibility. McAdoo has no credibility.
In some communities you work, get salary and leave. I kind of like that model, because it reflects the idea that the boss respects you as an individual, one that has his own free time.
In other situations, boss wants you to attend his rock shows, church, yoga sessions, family birthdays.
In a sense it's less respectful. This second model, Because it implies that the normal hierarchy - the one that we all sign up for, to get dollars- exists beyond the usual parameters. Boss may think it's an invitation, but maybe it's an intrusion.
Think Harvey weinstien. As a random example.
Why does every thread on here have to include your random streams of consciousness?
Is a 'bum':
1. A person who fails to produce.
2. A person who fails to try.
3. A person who doesn't have his brothers back?
4. A smelly homeless person?
With jerruh it may be a combination of one with a narrow version of two.
The problem with this team isn't lack of character. It's a lack of talent and the above-mentioned quality. Talent on the OL and LB is sparse. The some of the guys who should be great players, like JPP, just don't hate losing enough and sometimes seem happy cashing a check.
But even in this thread, when other guys hate losing - it is a positive. When we hate losing, it is due to poor character.
The difference? Leadership.
The difference? Leadership.
Yes, but most of that has to do with the coach. Like I said earlier, does every team with a poor record have bad leadership? I think that's bullshit.
That's why the whole discussion of if character matters is bullshit. Not because character isn't an influence, but because people are making assumptions on who has high character and low character, based on various reports.
The only thing clear is that something is broken. I'm not sure anyone can say with certainly what it is, but it sure is a heck of a lot easier to blow up leadership than it is to blow up the entire team.
The problem with this team isn't lack of character. It's a lack of talent and the above-mentioned quality. Talent on the OL and LB is sparse. The some of the guys who should be great players, like JPP, just don't hate losing enough and sometimes seem happy cashing a check.
Great post
Again - speculative assumptions about players. JPP is so de-motivated that he rehabbed half a hand to come back and play - and play well.
Christ, we have taken guys like Jenkins, Vernon, JPP and DRC who have played well in the past and now are making them out to be low character guys who don't mind losing.
Other than the most extreme cases, and even then you will find a lot of fans supporting them, for the most part how they are viewed is usually based on how they preform.
There is a fine line between being a rowdy mans man and a trouble maker, and that difference usually depend on their success.
Take the Steelers. . . Ben Roethlisberger is a massive piece of shit. But he is a winning football player. But the Steelers are usually a winning football team.