how would you guys feel about grabbing BOTH of these guys. The Giants would probably have the best interior OL in the NFL and the running game would take off.
They could probably even trade down a spot or 2 and grab an extra 2nd rounder to use on an RB like Jones, Guice, or Michel.
Then, add an OT in round 2 as well. From rounds 3-6, they can go strictly defense and find guys to fit Bettcher's scheme. There is some quality LB's and EDGE guys who will be there in rounds 3 and 4. (Nwosu, Turay, Lorenzo Carter, Darius Leonard, Shaun Dion-Hamilton, Jerome Baker come to mind)
Quote:
In comment 13840771 uconngiant said:
Quote:
Especially a guard. Just not a pick you make at that point.
It's exactly the pick you make.
You are tiresome. Go away.
No, it's a free country.
2. Nelson #1 draft pick to play LG
3. Either Ragnow or Bozeman #2 draft pick to play Center
Prospective starting line-up as follows:
Solder (LT), Nelson (LG), Ragnow (C), Fluker (RG), Flowers (RT)
All-of-a-Sudden we have a top five O-line = Serious Championship Contender
The Browns will either pick Barkley (if they have any sense) or Darnold (if they have no sense), so Nelson should fall in our laps.
you just lost me when you put Flowers at RT.....
1. That's why he was drafted to do (before Beatty kept injuring himself and turned into mush)
2. Because he's a Kareem McKinzie type tackle - Big brute with good enough feet but tremendous natural strength
3. Even though he has improved, you can't afford to keep matching him against the best speed DEs in the league.
Why would it be a good thing to spend big bucks and a premium high draft pick on the exact same position? I'd take either one of these guys for LG but can't see the logic behind going after both.
There's no evidence to suggest either will be as good a player if moved to RG.
I think going after Norwell should be plan A, and if they can't sign him then consider Nelson in the draft, but trade back to 5 or 6 to do it and get some extra picks in the deal.
Quote:
1. Nate Solder free agent to play LT
2. Nelson #1 draft pick to play LG
3. Either Ragnow or Bozeman #2 draft pick to play Center
Prospective starting line-up as follows:
Solder (LT), Nelson (LG), Ragnow (C), Fluker (RG), Flowers (RT)
All-of-a-Sudden we have a top five O-line = Serious Championship Contender
The Browns will either pick Barkley (if they have any sense) or Darnold (if they have no sense), so Nelson should fall in our laps.
But it presumes Eli can still be a playoff quality QB
or that Webb will surprise and be that QB.
The approach to go for potential All Pro players
as opposed to QB usually leaves teams & fans frustrated.
Everything starts with QB with you intention is the SB.
Me, I'd draft QB at #2. And I'd keep drafting QB's
until I have one that will bring us the SB.
In the playoffs, it's usually the QB's Show. Great defensive
teams like Buddy Ryan's Eagles couldn't beat the best
ones. Remember the playoff game with SF where Montana
was either being dumped on his ass by that great line
until he held on long enough to get those TD's and win.
this is what the jets do. go watch the jets. ....keep picking quarterbacks?????
It's not to say we MUST pick a QB at #2, certainly not unless one carries the grade. But, we need a longer term perspective with this draft pick.
I think the issue though is that the Giants aren't taking a longer term perspective. If they were, I don't think Eli would be the quarterback in 2018.
I think you and I both believe they'll take Darnold AND keep Eli as the 2018 starter. To me that's splitting the baby. I don't think the NFL today is about stashing the blue chip QB behind the aging veteran. I believe if you draft the guy to be the franchise QB, you play him immediately. You get the growing pains out of the way as soon as possible and get on with the future.
There will be other quarterbacks in the 2019 draft. If I'm the GM there is no way I'm entering 2019 with Sam Darnold having spent 2018 on the bench.
Do not understand why people don't see the benefit of having a rookie sit behind Eli for a year or so.
Do not understand why people don't see the benefit of having a rookie sit behind Eli for a year or so.
Two reasons:
1. It's a waste of a year of having the rookie. This is especially relevant if that rookie is a quarterback, as we've seen the value in paying the relatively inexpensive contract at the position.
2. The #2 pick could be used on a player that will actually play out of the gate.
The question we should be asking ourselves is, if we're bent on building for the future in part on the back of this crucial draft, then why are we keeping Eli and allowing his presence to block the future franchise QB from the field? And I say this as a guy that absolutely loves Eli.
No matter how good he plays out of the gate - he won't play as good as Eli. Eli already knows and has chemistry with many of the weapons.
There is no reason to cut or trade Eli.
The squawking this year was due to the fact that the poor offensive play wasn't Eli's fault, for the most part.
No matter how good he plays out of the gate - he won't play as good as Eli. Eli already knows and has chemistry with many of the weapons.
There is no reason to cut or trade Eli.
What happens when the Giants are 3-4 & everyone is bitching for Darnold to start?
Running a professional franchise isn't for the faint of heart.
The game has changed. Having a starting quarterback with a $7 million cap hit is too big an advantage to just throw it away for a year.
If the conviction is to keep Eli, fine; don't draft a quarterback with the second pick. But beware: football is indeed not for the faint of heart. I'd point to quotes from two of the greatest coaches that ever lived (paraphrasing):
"The biggest mistake I made was being sentimental and holding on to the players from the great '70s teams for too long." - Chuck Noll
"Better a year early than a year too late." - Bill Walsh
There is no room for sentimentality here, and fate has not perfectly aligned this quarterback draft, our #2 selection, and Eli's career arc. This is a big boy situation with no room for sentimentality.
If Webb isn't the answer, keep Eli, take one of the QBs if the value is there - he plays out his contract. What he does on the field will tell you what to if he's still playing at a high level.
Getting rid of a proven winner to trust the franchise with an unproven commodity at the next level just doesn't make sense to me. You can have both - a replacement for an aging QB and the last few years of his quality production.
Quote:
used to be expected to sit at least a season or two.
The game has changed. Having a starting quarterback with a $7 million cap hit is too big an advantage to just throw it away for a year.
If the conviction is to keep Eli, fine; don't draft a quarterback with the second pick. But beware: football is indeed not for the faint of heart. I'd point to quotes from two of the greatest coaches that ever lived (paraphrasing):
"The biggest mistake I made was being sentimental and holding on to the players from the great '70s teams for too long." - Chuck Noll
"Better a year early than a year too late." - Bill Walsh
There is no room for sentimentality here, and fate has not perfectly aligned this quarterback draft, our #2 selection, and Eli's career arc. This is a big boy situation with no room for sentimentality.
This is correct. And to defend Reese/McAdoo, they tried to begin this process & fans went absolutely ballistic. Everything was miscommunication, but the move made sense.