"Don't get too cute"

there is a clip on Giants.com of Kim Jones briefly interviewing Gettleman. Once again - for the third or fourth time - he said the #2 pick is a guy who has to be HOF worthy.

If it lands us in a spot we can still have a fair shot at at least Nelson and Chubb. I think Buffalos best shot is with the Browns at #4 but its just a guess im not in any of these phone calls.

knowing that the best minds frequently miss on prospects and that more picks = better odds of hitting and yet clinging to the notion of "my guy" is also getting too cute.

Yes. They have to get great value to move out of the 2 spot because it's a valuable pick. My fear is that the Giants have and will turn down great value because they are enamored with Barkley. With what we know about the draft, I think THAT is "getting too cute".

Absolutely.

There are 3 to 5 players selected in the HOF each year. So IF these players were distributed evenly in each draft (which they aren't) and IF you knew which player the HOFers would be, the HOFers from each draft would come from the top 3 to 5 picks.

At 2nd overall, this needs to be an HOF pick. Ideally, a QB, RB, WR, Edge Rusher or Left Tackle.

In this draft, it looks like the Barkley and Nelson are the most likely HOFers.

In comment 13877142 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

there is a clip on Giants.com of Kim Jones briefly interviewing Gettleman. Once again - for the third or fourth time - he said the #2 pick is a guy who has to be HOF worthy.

So Eric, if there is no "HoF" potentially worthy pick, what do you do? Barkley, maybe? Nelson Maybe? One of the QBs? - very hard to see a HoF pick there.

Think Sy is saying stay put, grab the best player (Barkley) or the best QB (Rosen to me).

I guess a quick trade down with Denver could be the best - take Nelson or Fitzpatrick or Chubb and then some help in the 2nd...

not saying you're wrong, but why would a team that went to the playoffs this past year and would have the #2 overall pick (if they traded with us), be so likely to be one of the 5 worst teams this coming season?

but we already have it this year!! Yet, everyone wants to trade down. Stay at 2.

I'm ok trading down to #4 or #5 if they strongly believe in the move, but not down to #12 sacrificing the best talent available.

Quality over quantity, NYG needs to leave this draft with the best talent they can plug in the future, and not necessarily about 2018.

when do your player evaluations start?

Thanks

Another positive regarding a trade with Buffalo is that it provides this regime a chance to thoroughly check out Webb. Considering the HC we just hired is a QB guru, that's probably not a bad thing.

While Webb is not a prospect on the level of the top QBs in this draft, he is still an asset until proven otherwise. 2018 would give them the opportunity they squandered in 2017.

If he is the goods, then even better that you didnt go QB in 2018, and built your roster up in other areas. If he sucks, you're loaded with that extra #1 which may very well be high coming from Buf, but at the very least can be packaged to move up if necessary.

trading down in tiny increments. For example, if Nelson is our guy, trading with Denver makes a lot of sense to me.

are probably 6/7 blue chip guys, depending on how you feel about the QBs:

Darnold
Barkley
Chubb
Fitzgerald
Nelson
Rosen
Allen

Moving to 12 almost guarantees that we miss out on all of them.

I believe you said a month or two ago you were on the Barkley bandwagon
So am I. I think with a revamped Iine. New coach and OBJ Engram Barkley and SS that this can be an explosive offense
I don’t feel QB is the right pick because
1. Sitting a 2 pick now for a year or two does nothing for this team immediately. And I do feel Eli has another 2-3 years
2. I don’t feel any of these QBs are can’t miss prospects like Andrew Luck etc
3. If DG misses on this pick by taking a QB it sets the franchise back 3-5 years
4. Having Webb makes it even more difficult to pick QB because he is an unknown and who says these QBs are any better than Webb

My pick. Saquan all the way No QB. No trade down

In comment 13877142 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

there is a clip on Giants.com of Kim Jones briefly interviewing Gettleman. Once again - for the third or fourth time - he said the #2 pick is a guy who has to be HOF worthy.

Which is why I don't see him trading back any farther than #5 if at all.

Let Buffalo trade up with Cleveland for the #4 pick and give them the big deal being floated out there. Cleveland has the #1 and can get their top guy, and then I could possibly see DG trading back to #4 with Buffalo for their #1 next year. QBs going 1-2-3 and the Giants taking who they want at 4 from all the remaining top players.

My guess is they see Barkley that way.

If they don't see anyone like that, they should trade down.

interview... Gettleman said, "We can't (afford to) make a mistake."

My guess is Gettleman is going to play it conservatively. This is the upside or downside of having him as GM (depending on you point of view). The "don't get cute" idea supports that too.

Right or wrong, I think they are more likely to stay put and draft the guy who has the LEAST risk to be a bust. To me, that's Barkley, followed by Chubb and Nelson.

If so, that approach is going to piss some people off. I personally hope they are not automatically discounting trade offers.

In comment 13877191 Andy in Boston said:

Quote:

when do your player evaluations start? Thanks

About 3 weeks.

In comment 13877221 Earl the goat said:

Quote:

I believe you said a month or two ago you were on the Barkley bandwagon So am I. I think with a revamped Iine. New coach and OBJ Engram Barkley and SS that this can be an explosive offense I don’t feel QB is the right pick because 1. Sitting a 2 pick now for a year or two does nothing for this team immediately. And I do feel Eli has another 2-3 years 2. I don’t feel any of these QBs are can’t miss prospects like Andrew Luck etc 3. If DG misses on this pick by taking a QB it sets the franchise back 3-5 years 4. Having Webb makes it even more difficult to pick QB because he is an unknown and who says these QBs are any better than Webb My pick. Saquan all the way No QB. No trade down

I've been on the Barkley bandwagon since September.

I do not think Nelson is a blue chip prospect, nor do I feel that way about Chubb.

Blue chip to me...only Barkley and Rosen if he checks ALL of the medical boxes.

is giving me nightmares of Ki Jana Carter, Curtis Enis, Blair Thomas.

In comment 13877242 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

My guess is Gettleman is going to play it conservatively. This is the upside or downside of having him as GM (depending on you point of view). The "don't get cute" idea supports that too. Right or wrong, I think they are more likely to stay put and draft the guy who has the LEAST risk to be a bust. To me, that's Barkley, followed by Chubb and Nelson. If so, that approach is going to piss some people off. I personally hope they are not automatically discounting trade offers.

I’d argue this is correct. A lot of people said the DG hire was safe and the Shurmur hire was safe. Safe is what this franchise needs. Hiring Ben McAdoo was wildly risky and it blew up.

If it means drafting Barkley at 2 & the best available player in every round following, that works for me.

everything on this thread. Barkley is the highest floor/most HOF worthy selection if you are talking about pure talent/athleticism/love of the game type stuff. He’s not a perfect prospect, but it’s close.

I don’t feel like Chubb is an elite prospect. He’s being compared to Guys like Vernon and Chandler Jones. They’ve had really nice careers...but I want a JJ Watt/Aaron Donald type player if I’m picking 2 overall.

the Giants supposedly love Chubb. And they have a good history of drafting DE's. So we're all missing something with him.

You have to get Buffalo's 2019 first rounder in any trade with them. Otherwise they can go find another trade partner because that's too far of a drop. If they think Barkley or one of the QBs have hall of fame potential, just stay where you're at and take one of them unless a trade offer blows you away.

and what I said aligns with your point that more picks does not = more wins.

The Browns collected a lot of picks of the last couple of years and that got then a winless season. Why? Because they do not have a franchise QB. That is the most important position on the field. More than a RB or a pass rusher. If people here doubt that, all you need to do is look at the leagues top salaries and see how many RBs or pass rushers are paid more than the top QBs in this league.

I also mentioned that while L Bell is considered possibly the best RB in the game, the Steelers scored as many points per game without him as they did with him because they had a QB who could run the offense regardless.

So, getting picks from the Bills is a nice idea but what is the point? In a year or two when you NEED that next QB where will we be selecting? We probably will have to deal just as many (if not more) picks back to get to the top of the draft to select a top QB in what MAY also be a thin QB class.... and unwilling teams to trade with because they may want the guy as well.

If we do not select our QB with this pick, in a year or two we will be giving up way too much, or we will be just another one of those average teams with an average QB that is destined to just have an average season with no shot at a championship.

with the 2nd pick?

In comment 13877278 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

the Giants supposedly love Chubb. And they have a good history of drafting DE's. So we're all missing something with him.

Perhaps Chubb is the very best in a weak DE class? He seems like an awesome player with a really high motor. But he doesn't scream Von Miller to me. I don't think he's athletic enough.

In comment 13877278 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

the Giants supposedly love Chubb. And they have a good history of drafting DE's. So we're all missing something with him.

If it wasn't for the Bettcher hire, I'd give Chubb a lot more weight. Hard to see him as the pick though if we're going to be giving more 3-4 looks.

In comment 13877289 barens said:

Quote:

with the 2nd pick?

If you believe Papa, King, Schwartz, they pass on him.

In comment 13877289 barens said:

Quote:

with the 2nd pick?

That's my hope. Then we would have ourselves some incredible options.

Again, don't ignore the repeated "gold jacket" comments.

In comment 13877278 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

the Giants supposedly love Chubb. And they have a good history of drafting DE's. So we're all missing something with him.

He is a top 10 player in this class, maybe even top 7 when all is said and done.

That said, the top of this class is a little weak and I think he is going to benefit from that. He isn't in the same tier as some of the top edge guys in recent years. I do like that he is a safe pick...he wears several hats, he isn't overly reliant on one trait. Plays with good technique.

But man...at #2 overall...I don't see a 12+ sack year in, year out guy here.

In comment 13877293 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

In comment 13877289 barens said: Quote: with the 2nd pick? If you believe Papa, King, Schwartz, they pass on him.

I suspect the prior regime liked Darnold or the type of QB he is.

If we were to consider QB I fully believe the guy they’d look at would be Allen then Rosen.

In comment 13877208 Jon in NYC said:

Quote:

are probably 6/7 blue chip guys, depending on how you feel about the QBs: Darnold Barkley Chubb Fitzgerald Nelson Rosen Allen Moving to 12 almost guarantees that we miss out on all of them.

The Colts have basically written in neon lights that they'd be happy to trade down again.

The Bills have enough ammo that they'd be able to get 6, and still have enough to put together a decent offer.

If I'm Gettleman, I say to Beane get to six and we'll talk.

At 6, they'd be looking at 6, 22, 53 and 2019 1st to move down to 2. (there might have to be say a 2019 4th or so going back to them)

I think the Bills are all in and us or the Browns are their only two potential partners.

In comment 13877242 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

My guess is Gettleman is going to play it conservatively. This is the upside or downside of having him as GM (depending on you point of view). The "don't get cute" idea supports that too. Right or wrong, I think they are more likely to stay put and draft the guy who has the LEAST risk to be a bust. To me, that's Barkley, followed by Chubb and Nelson. If so, that approach is going to piss some people off. I personally hope they are not automatically discounting trade offers.

Agreed. I think they stay put and take Barkley. It will have to be a hell of a trade offer to get DG to move down, and even then I don't think he'd drop past 5. He wants one of the three players you mentioned, probably in that order.

I'm not sure how you can miss the boat on this guy. Turn on an N.C. State game - he looks like a young Michael Strahan. No he isn't that quick twitch guy everyone loves but that's not football.

Strahan was no triangle freak - you just couldn't match his intensity and that's what you see with Chubb. He's also got that gregarious on-field personality that fires his teammates up. And the high football IQ.

In comment 13877287 EricJ said:

Quote:

and what I said aligns with your point that more picks does not = more wins. The Browns collected a lot of picks of the last couple of years and that got then a winless season. Why? Because they do not have a franchise QB. That is the most important position on the field. More than a RB or a pass rusher. If people here doubt that, all you need to do is look at the leagues top salaries and see how many RBs or pass rushers are paid more than the top QBs in this league. I also mentioned that while L Bell is considered possibly the best RB in the game, the Steelers scored as many points per game without him as they did with him because they had a QB who could run the offense regardless. So, getting picks from the Bills is a nice idea but what is the point? In a year or two when you NEED that next QB where will we be selecting? We probably will have to deal just as many (if not more) picks back to get to the top of the draft to select a top QB in what MAY also be a thin QB class.... and unwilling teams to trade with because they may want the guy as well. If we do not select our QB with this pick, in a year or two we will be giving up way too much, or we will be just another one of those average teams with an average QB that is destined to just have an average season with no shot at a championship.

You aren't wrong with any of that.

But you HAVE to be convinced one of the quarterbacks is THE guy. You can't take one just because...

In comment 13877314 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

In comment 13877287 EricJ said: Quote: and what I said aligns with your point that more picks does not = more wins. The Browns collected a lot of picks of the last couple of years and that got then a winless season. Why? Because they do not have a franchise QB. That is the most important position on the field. More than a RB or a pass rusher. If people here doubt that, all you need to do is look at the leagues top salaries and see how many RBs or pass rushers are paid more than the top QBs in this league. I also mentioned that while L Bell is considered possibly the best RB in the game, the Steelers scored as many points per game without him as they did with him because they had a QB who could run the offense regardless. So, getting picks from the Bills is a nice idea but what is the point? In a year or two when you NEED that next QB where will we be selecting? We probably will have to deal just as many (if not more) picks back to get to the top of the draft to select a top QB in what MAY also be a thin QB class.... and unwilling teams to trade with because they may want the guy as well. If we do not select our QB with this pick, in a year or two we will be giving up way too much, or we will be just another one of those average teams with an average QB that is destined to just have an average season with no shot at a championship. You aren't wrong with any of that. But you HAVE to be convinced one of the quarterbacks is THE guy. You can't take one just because...

I'm not convinced.

I wonder how he would fit in Bettcher's scheme.

In comment 13877254 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

I do not think Nelson is a blue chip prospect, nor do I feel that way about Chubb. Blue chip to me...only Barkley and Rosen if he checks ALL of the medical boxes.

Wow! Only 2 blue chippers?

In comment 13877329 Capt. Don said:

Quote:

I wonder how he would fit in Bettcher's scheme.

Yes, he is. But he's also a terrific talent.

I still think Webb is a big piece to this. If he's not on the roster or they weren't high on him, I think they'd draft a quarterback. If they don't draft a QB, that signals to me that they really like this kid a lot.

In comment 13877262 Sammo85 said:

Quote:

is giving me nightmares of Ki Jana Carter, Curtis Enis, Blair Thomas.

I’m no scout, but I think Barkley is a very different player than those guys. His skills out of the backfield in the passing game are better than any of those guys IMO, and make him an ideal fit for today’s NFL...and Schurmur could have a field day using him in combo with OBJ and Engram

are MUCH higher then success rates of lower first rounders which are MUCH MUCH higher then success rates of 2nd and 3rd round picks. With all that said, the teams that are considered successful at drafting are teams that get a lot of picks in round 2 and 3 because they players that do work out in those rounds tend to be impactful players. This is a long way of saying that if the Giants aren't taking a QB, I think they should look to trade with the Broncos at 5 and pick up an extra 2nd and 3rd.

However, I will be shocked if the Giants trade out of 2 and I'll be shocked if they don't take Barkley.

In comment 13877329 Capt. Don said:

Quote:

I wonder how he would fit in Bettcher's scheme.

From what I have seen in my ARI tape studies, they are going to run a hybrid where half the defense will have a 4-3 look and the other half will have a 3-4 look. Chubb can be a fit.

This week I'm on the Barkley wagon. I see him as both an immediate and future difference maker. He'll be good for Eli and should be even better for Webb. They obviously think Eli's got a couple more years.

In comment 13877340 AcidTest said:

Quote:

In comment 13877329 Capt. Don said: Quote: I wonder how he would fit in Bettcher's scheme. Yes, he is. But he's also a terrific talent.

So is Saquan Barkley but I dont think I would draft him #2 overall if I ran a run and shoot offense.

I am sure he would be really good in any scheme but would his talents be best utilized in what we will run?

Is there any chance that this is the greatest smokescreen of all time?

In comment 13877348 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

In comment 13877329 Capt. Don said: Quote: I wonder how he would fit in Bettcher's scheme. From what I have seen in my ARI tape studies, they are going to run a hybrid where half the defense will have a 4-3 look and the other half will have a 3-4 look. Chubb can be a fit.

Chandler Jones did really well under Bettcher.

In comment 13877352 Capt. Don said:

Quote:

In comment 13877340 AcidTest said: Quote: In comment 13877329 Capt. Don said: Quote: I wonder how he would fit in Bettcher's scheme. Yes, he is. But he's also a terrific talent. So is Saquan Barkley but I dont think I would draft him #2 overall if I ran a run and shoot offense. I am sure he would be really good in any scheme but would his talents be best utilized in what we will run?

Barkley is such an all around talent, he'll fit into any scheme. Even Reese/McAdoo would have been hard pressed to mis-utilize him in their bizarro 2 Elis-WCO-multiple JPPs hot mess scheme.

Totally respect your opinion but couldn't disagree more on Rosen or Nelson. Rosens body type, imo, will never hold up in nfl. He couldn't make it through a college season. I also don't think he's anywhere near the prospect Darnold is. I give you credit for going out on a limb on Nelson but, to me, he's absolutely blue chip. He will be a stud in this league for many years to come. That said, as I always say, That's why we love the draft. Its an inexact science w no right or wrong answers.

because I'm really starting to believe Jints Central is stupid enough to take Barkley.

You can just write the script...Barkley will have some spectacular moments, will be up some gaudy stats here and there, may make a few Pro Bowls, etc. And maybe we'll be a solid .500 team...

But we won't get over the hump because teams will start stacking the box and making Barkley's life miserable. Oh, sure - he'll beat it once in a while, but not enough. Because when we pushed all the chips into the middle of the table on Webb, the hope was he would the guy.

But Webb just doesn't seem to get it. He's inconsistent from week to week, can't make key third down conversions, over throws too much, etc, etc. For crissakes, it's like watching Kent Graham all over again...

And the conversations will center on the obvious - we don't have the right trigger man. Why didn't we draft Rosen instead? Or Allen?

Oh, and guess what else? The other RBs from the Barkley draft are pretty good too - Johnson, Michel, Jones, etc.
They are putting up some excellent numbers...

But let's be optimistic. We have the 16th pick again! Maybe we can get one of these good Gs and that will make Barkley's life easier!

In comment 13877393 bw in dc said:

Quote:

because I'm really starting to believe Jints Central is stupid enough to take Barkley.

Well then anyone who works, coaches, or scouts for the NFL must be pretty stupid too.

Everything is pointing towards the the Giants being able to get serious haul from that pick. There's legitimately 4 teams that could move up to that spot, with one team appearing to be desperate to get there.

The rumored Bills offer (I understand the source is trash) is two firsts, two seconds and a third. As an exercise, look at our last picks in those rounds, oddly enough they kind of line up where those picks would be. That's Eli Apple, Sterling Sheppard, Evan Engram, Dalvin Tomlinson and Davis Webb. You don't take that haul for one player? Good, bad and unknown in that group, but I take it in a heartbeat unless there's a franchise QB sitting at our pick.

pretty much as close to a guarantee of not being a bust as you can have. Eli Manning, Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck, Matthew Stafford. Rosen and Darnold are up there, but I just don't see them as can't miss. Darnold is the closest thing to me but he looked downright awful at times this season.

In comment 13877278 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

the Giants supposedly love Chubb. And they have a good history of drafting DE's. So we're all missing something with him.

Chubb would be the BIGGEST disappointment in a pick at #2 for me. I just don't see his value there based on the $ we already are spending at that position and the supposed move to a hybrid 3-4....

possible scenario in which Giants stay at 2 and take Chubb.

Was talking about the Giants draft Barkley vs. QB. The host had brought up a good point IMO. She was talking about how much better Eli is in playaction and how she could see the Giants positioning themselves to play to Eli's strengths instead of the old regime's forcing an entirely different offense on him that he was never comfortable running. She went on about the running game and Barkley but it did make me think back to Bradshaw and Jacobs and how good Eli was when he could run that playaction... Just something to think about.

the problem at DE/LB (sounds like they will be hybrids) is WHAT we are spending on those two. The Giants need to replace them soon because their contracts are ridiculous.

Teams have been consistently shutting us down with a simple rush 4 2-deep strategy, daring us to run the ball. We couldn't, and therefore we were shut down easily. Get a guy like Barkley and an improved OL, and that strategy won't work. Stack the box and Eli, Beckham, Engram and Sheppard will make you pay. Cover 2 and Barkley will kill you.

Eli has 2 good years left. Webb is an unknown but it's possible he could be our future. Without a run game and improved OL, Rosen or whoever will face the same problems we have faced over the past years. If Webb steps in, he doesn't have to do it all. He'll have a strong run game to setup an easier pass game. Hedge your bets with a later round QB if you want, this year and/or next year. I think this strategy is better for us. Just my 2 cents

The thing that always gets mean evaluating prospective draft choices is that we are skeptical when a guy faces a lower level of competition, but not many people mention it when a guy has other great players around them.

I remember when Clowney was drafted that many people were high on one of his defensive line mates, a DT I believe, and now I can't remember that guy's name because he did nothing in the NFL. When it comes to a guy like Nelson or a guy like Chubb it should be a consideration that they both had a lot of talent around them.

I argue with others when they say that so and so would probably be a lot better with better talent next to them. I don't buy it, but then again I can admit that I don't always understand the big picture of what teams are trying to accomplish on every play. With the QB's everyone is talking about how many drops their receivers committed so I find it difficult to evaluate prospects who might look better or worse because of the fact that this is a team sport.

I am no scout, but I do know that Nelson has McGlinchey next to him so he likely was freed up to take on another defender or help the Center. MM probably didn't need much help.... And when it comes to Chubb I am aware that his three other defensive line mates will all likely be drafted with one of the DTs, I think his name is Hill, is slated to go in the 2nd round.

When it comes to Barkley, I don't believe that PSU has a great passing game and I know that people say their OL sucks. I believe that with a better supporting cast he could really blossom in the NFL. I believe that the best is yet to come.

In comment 13877393 bw in dc said:

Quote:

because I'm really starting to believe Jints Central is stupid enough to take Barkley. You can just write the script...Barkley will have some spectacular moments, will be up some gaudy stats here and there, may make a few Pro Bowls, etc. And maybe we'll be a solid .500 team... But we won't get over the hump because teams will start stacking the box and making Barkley's life miserable. Oh, sure - he'll beat it once in a while, but not enough. Because when we pushed all the chips into the middle of the table on Webb, the hope was he would the guy. But Webb just doesn't seem to get it. He's inconsistent from week to week, can't make key third down conversions, over throws too much, etc, etc. For crissakes, it's like watching Kent Graham all over again... And the conversations will center on the obvious - we don't have the right trigger man. Why didn't we draft Rosen instead? Or Allen? Oh, and guess what else? The other RBs from the Barkley draft are pretty good too - Johnson, Michel, Jones, etc. They are putting up some excellent numbers... But let's be optimistic. We have the 16th pick again! Maybe we can get one of these good Gs and that will make Barkley's life easier!

I still think we go QB. Why is it that it appears that the Bills, Jets, Browns, Broncos and possibly other teams think these QB's are good enough to draft? I'm just not buying that the Giants dont. I think this is them making sure nobody knows their intentions, but I just don't see how all the QB hungry teams are fighting to move to the top of the draft for a QB, but the Giants don't think any fit the bill.

absolutely all-important consideration here is what does Gettleman actually think about the quarterbacks in this draft?

If he has grades on them that would put them in mid- to late-1st round territory in other drafts, then not taking the QB now makes more sense. So what matters is what kind of grade does he have on them?

If Papa, King, Schwartz, etc. are correct, it suggests they simply don't have the same grade on these quarterbacks as other teams - right or wrong.

Now if they do have an extremely high grade on one or two of them, and pass on that guy, I would be very disappointed because teams rarely have the opportunity to nab a franchise QB without giving away the store.

but you will never know what grade we had on them if we pass up on them.

Sure there is.

The Giants love him and they don't get a reasonable trade offer for pick #2.

and I fear it is going to feel like an eternity! Let me say to start that I have no idea who the Giants are going to select at #2. And for the record I don't much care who they take. I consider my job is to analyze and if you start hoping for something to happen then it becomes tough not to analyze your hopes coming true. In fact, the fun of the process is to try and play along with the Giants and try and figure out what they are thinking. However, because there is a new regime in town we have almost no track record to base things on; plus DG and company haven't said much to date that goes beyond cliches. True he did say he wants a HOFer and 'don't get too cute', but he also said one never wants to end up in 'QB hell'.

In the past, one could read a fair amount into what the Giants were thinking given what they were doing with pro days etc. Again because this a new regime (which doesn't want to look at all like the old one) one doesn't want to read too much into this stuff until we see a trend. At the same time, though, its basically all the evidence we have to date.

And so far, the Giants have almost totally passed on Barkley. They sent only the DB coach to his pro day. One could interpret that as maybe trying to hide their interest, but what was weird is that almost nobody sent anybody to the PSU pro day to see Barkley. There were no head coaches there, there were no RB coaches at all so much so that Barkley who had intended to do positional drills sat out the whole business. In addition, it does not appear as if Barkley has any private workouts or even visits scheduled so far. And that's just weird!

At the same time, the Giants sent a pretty big contingent to the Rosen and Mayfield pro days including QB coach Mike Shula. They also had another big group at a private workout for Rosen yesterday and will have the same group at both Darnold's pro day and a private workout later today. That same group will then go to a private workout with Mayfield and Allen's pro day at Wyoming later in the week.

Again one never wants to dismiss the possibility that this is one 'giant' smoke screen, although its not really what teams do, but the evidence we have suggests that what the Giants are seriously looking at are the QBs. The fact also is that NFL teams generally don't really spend a lot of time at this time of the year scouting out players they don't already have a pretty good grade on.

In comment 13877452 totowa_gman said:

Quote:

Was talking about the Giants draft Barkley vs. QB. The host had brought up a good point IMO. She was talking about how much better Eli is in playaction and how she could see the Giants positioning themselves to play to Eli's strengths instead of the old regime's forcing an entirely different offense on him that he was never comfortable running. She went on about the running game and Barkley but it did make me think back to Bradshaw and Jacobs and how good Eli was when he could run that playaction... Just something to think about.

if we are using the #2 to work with Eli that is 100% a disaster scenario...eli has 1 maybe 2 more years. Taking barkley is fine but it needs to be under the assumption the Giants have believe in Webb.

You don't take Barkley to help Eli because he is a good play action passer. That would be so short sighted.

In comment 13877475 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

absolutely all-important consideration here is what does Gettleman actually think about the quarterbacks in this draft? If he has grades on them that would put them in mid- to late-1st round territory in other drafts, then not taking the QB now makes more sense. So what matters is what kind of grade does he have on them? If Papa, King, Schwartz, etc. are correct, it suggests they simply don't have the same grade on these quarterbacks as other teams - right or wrong. Now if they do have an extremely high grade on one or two of them, and pass on that guy, I would be very disappointed because teams rarely have the opportunity to nab a franchise QB without giving away the store.

If NYG trades out of the pick, I guarantee you they may be in the same spot as Buffalo next year- frantically trying to trade up to nab a QB.

can't take one just because."

This says it all. Thanks Sy.

Very curious about that Barkley scenario. Why wouldn't teams send someone? Is it possible that teams already know everythign they need to know about him?

He didn't really play it safe there. Christian McCaffrey wasn't exactly a safe choice in the top 10. Shaq Thompson and Kelvin Benjamin weren't either. This gives me some hope that he will go with a QB when all is said and done.

In comment 13877452 totowa_gman said:

Quote:

Was talking about the Giants draft Barkley vs. QB. The host had brought up a good point IMO. She was talking about how much better Eli is in playaction and how she could see the Giants positioning themselves to play to Eli's strengths instead of the old regime's forcing an entirely different offense on him that he was never comfortable running. She went on about the running game and Barkley but it did make me think back to Bradshaw and Jacobs and how good Eli was when he could run that playaction... Just something to think about.

But but but WCO is bright and shiny and a lot of other teams is running it!

Eli throws a good deep ball, best at the intermediate balls (absolutely beautiful throws like Manningham pass in SB) and is the worst at short passes and reads. Derp let's bring in the WCO!

Is it possible that the Giants didn't send anyone besides a defensive coach to Barkley's pro day because they were alerted that he was going to sit on his combine numbers? I hope that this means they are going to take a QB but I personally don't think the Giants not sending many to Barkley's pro day because they already have done all their homework on him.

In comment 13877314 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

In comment 13877287 EricJ said: Quote: and what I said aligns with your point that more picks does not = more wins. The Browns collected a lot of picks of the last couple of years and that got then a winless season. Why? Because they do not have a franchise QB. That is the most important position on the field. More than a RB or a pass rusher. If people here doubt that, all you need to do is look at the leagues top salaries and see how many RBs or pass rushers are paid more than the top QBs in this league. I also mentioned that while L Bell is considered possibly the best RB in the game, the Steelers scored as many points per game without him as they did with him because they had a QB who could run the offense regardless. So, getting picks from the Bills is a nice idea but what is the point? In a year or two when you NEED that next QB where will we be selecting? We probably will have to deal just as many (if not more) picks back to get to the top of the draft to select a top QB in what MAY also be a thin QB class.... and unwilling teams to trade with because they may want the guy as well. If we do not select our QB with this pick, in a year or two we will be giving up way too much, or we will be just another one of those average teams with an average QB that is destined to just have an average season with no shot at a championship. You aren't wrong with any of that. But you HAVE to be convinced one of the quarterbacks is THE guy. You can't take one just because...

Yes I agree with not taking a guy "just because". That should be something you never to at any position and at any point in the draft. However, this is a deep QB class and if you cannot find someone that you like in this bunch then I am not sure what they would be looking for. You have about 4 -5 guys who have varying skill sets with varying strengths/weaknesses. That PERFECT QB may never be there for them to even select.

So, we could end up with Kent Graham in two years.

In comment 13877475 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

If Papa, King, Schwartz, etc. are correct, it suggests they simply don't have the same grade on these quarterbacks as other teams - right or wrong.

That would be conjecture. They know nothing. All speculation and I have to say that we should kill Papa and the other two for suggesting that just like we would kill someone like Ranaan or Gary Myers for doing the same thing.

are bringing up Kent Graham a lot recently. Even comparing him to Webb. Graham was an 8th round pick and wasn't even really that good in college.

The only significance I see to that is that there are fewer questions about Barkley than any other draft pick -- the most attention is paid to the players who have the most questions

so if anything -- the extra attention being paid to the QBs is indicative of just how many questions surround those guys

In comment 13877512 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

Is it possible that the Giants didn't send anyone besides a defensive coach to Barkley's pro day because they were alerted that he was going to sit on his combine numbers? I hope that this means they are going to take a QB but I personally don't think the Giants not sending many to Barkley's pro day because they already have done all their homework on him.

It means nothing. Stop looking for smoke signals. The reality is this. The guy blew away everyone at the combine. What would you expect to see in a workout this week that would be different?

You have all you need to know about the guy. You are better off sending people to look at guys who are 2nd 3rd round opportunities. Those are harder to figure out and may need another look.

In comment 13877520 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

are bringing up Kent Graham a lot recently. Even comparing him to Webb. Graham was an 8th round pick and wasn't even really that good in college.

yeah I mentioned him at least once but not as it relates to Webb. Just that we could end up with a JAG at QB in a couple of years and Graham was a good example.

or Russell Wilson.

You can wind up with Peyton Manning, or Jamarcus Russell.

We know

In comment 13877513 EricJ said:

Quote:

In comment 13877314 Sy'56 said: Quote: In comment 13877287 EricJ said: Quote: and what I said aligns with your point that more picks does not = more wins. The Browns collected a lot of picks of the last couple of years and that got then a winless season. Why? Because they do not have a franchise QB. That is the most important position on the field. More than a RB or a pass rusher. If people here doubt that, all you need to do is look at the leagues top salaries and see how many RBs or pass rushers are paid more than the top QBs in this league. I also mentioned that while L Bell is considered possibly the best RB in the game, the Steelers scored as many points per game without him as they did with him because they had a QB who could run the offense regardless. So, getting picks from the Bills is a nice idea but what is the point? In a year or two when you NEED that next QB where will we be selecting? We probably will have to deal just as many (if not more) picks back to get to the top of the draft to select a top QB in what MAY also be a thin QB class.... and unwilling teams to trade with because they may want the guy as well. If we do not select our QB with this pick, in a year or two we will be giving up way too much, or we will be just another one of those average teams with an average QB that is destined to just have an average season with no shot at a championship. You aren't wrong with any of that. But you HAVE to be convinced one of the quarterbacks is THE guy. You can't take one just because... Yes I agree with not taking a guy "just because". That should be something you never to at any position and at any point in the draft. However, this is a deep QB class and if you cannot find someone that you like in this bunch then I am not sure what they would be looking for. You have about 4 -5 guys who have varying skill sets with varying strengths/weaknesses. That PERFECT QB may never be there for them to even select. So, we could end up with Kent Graham in two years.

that was after they thought Dave Brown was "the guy" and gave up their # 1 in 1993 to take him in the supplemental draft.

In comment 13877529 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

or Russell Wilson. You can wind up with Peyton Manning, or Jamarcus Russell. We know

Or Ryan Leaf..

inlcuded reaching too high for the wrong guy and setting your program back even further. Dave Brown is a perfect example.

In comment 13877484 Sean said:

Quote:

In comment 13877475 Eric from BBI said: Quote: absolutely all-important consideration here is what does Gettleman actually think about the quarterbacks in this draft? If he has grades on them that would put them in mid- to late-1st round territory in other drafts, then not taking the QB now makes more sense. So what matters is what kind of grade does he have on them? If Papa, King, Schwartz, etc. are correct, it suggests they simply don't have the same grade on these quarterbacks as other teams - right or wrong. Now if they do have an extremely high grade on one or two of them, and pass on that guy, I would be very disappointed because teams rarely have the opportunity to nab a franchise QB without giving away the store. If NYG trades out of the pick, I guarantee you they may be in the same spot as Buffalo next year- frantically trying to trade up to nab a QB.

Not really going out on a limb there are you? Guaranteeing they "may be"?

I dont get what exactly you're saying or guaranteeing. Saying they "may be" kind of cancels out the guarantee, no?

If his medicals check out, he has to be the pick. His tools and mechanics are top 25% in the NFL right now.

that Shurmur and Shula will have a say in a Gettlemans ear in terms of evaluating the QBs.

I don’t think the Giants will make up their minds on their board for at least another 2-3 weeks.

medicals, but it doesn't really make sense. He had a minor shoulder issue that was corrected and should not have any long term effects. How can his concussions "check out"? Either it scares you off or it doesn't because you can't really test his brain. Nothing else about his injury history needs to be checked out.

In comment 13877529 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

or Russell Wilson. You can wind up with Peyton Manning, or Jamarcus Russell. We know

I agree and disagree on some of these. The Jamarcus Russell's, Akili Smith, David Klingler's etc were one year or two year tops, unique offense types without any real substantial PRO style work. They ran up gawdy numbers in non competitive or non defensive games.

Ryan Leaf was a tough one because he played in a good conference and put up good numbers. Nobody could really get inside his head and see his wiring wasn't designed to handle the stress and expectations of being a high draft pick in the NFL.

Right now the 4 QB's coming out (at the top) all have pluses and minuses. Rosen's are health and potential "commitment". Mayfield's is more attitude and off the field, along with height and the offense he played in. Allen is lower level comp %, offense he played in and winning %. Darnold is a turnover machine and has not played a ton of CFB. However there do not appear to be any J.Rissells, Smith's or Klinglers here.

In comment 13877482 Colin@gbn said:

Quote:

....., but he also said one never wants to end up in 'QB hell'.

In comment 13877571 Keith said:

Quote:

medicals, but it doesn't really make sense. He had a minor shoulder issue that was corrected and should not have any long term effects. How can his concussions "check out"? Either it scares you off or it doesn't because you can't really test his brain. Nothing else about his injury history needs to be checked out.

Pretty sure he had a knee injury as well. Maybe not a major one but one worth looking into,IMO.

My biggest concern is he seems to get injured easily or at least too often for my liking. I can't imagine that gets better on the Pro level.

agree on the "Rosen's medicals" becoming so ridiculous at this point. People are acting like he's had multiple serious injuries, or a knee injury or something. He basically had a bruised shoulder. I'm sure Eli Manning has had multiple concussions in his career, even in college.

I have no idea what to make of the business with Barkley; in fact it is entirely possible that everyone, the Giants included, feels that have all the info on him that they need. Still it is WEIRD that almost nobody showed at his pro day and that he does not appear to have any private workouts or visits. And for the record, Barkley had every intention of doing positional drills when he woke up that morning and only backed off when nobody showed. Plus I have heard from several sources around the league that they wouldn't be surprised to see Barkley drop out of the top 5, not because he's not a talented player, but that the positional multiplier for the QBs and at least Chubb and even maybe 1-2 other edge rushers could push him down.

What nobody can dispute is that the Giants are all in right now checking out the QBs and in fact they are the only players that the Giants appear to be seriously checking out. And as a general rule the guys that NFL teams are seriously checking out barely a month from the draft are guys that they already have a good grade on those guys. That's all we can really say at this time.

I think that's a legitimate concern. My whole point was just that none of his injuries should be lingering or even show up on any medical report now. Either you are scared off by how injury prone he appears to be or you aren't. I don't think there is anything to "check out". It's not like a guy that had major knee reconstruction and you need ot run MRI's to see if it healed correctly.

Rosen has never suffered a knee injury. He suffered a "leg injury" against ASU but then came back into the game. He basically was beat up and needed a breather.

In comment 13877583 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

agree on the "Rosen's medicals" becoming so ridiculous at this point. People are acting like he's had multiple serious injuries, or a knee injury or something. He basically had a bruised shoulder. I'm sure Eli Manning has had multiple concussions in his career, even in college.

I haven't watched a bunch of UCLA's games but I've read articles saying he either didn't play in or didn't finish 12 of his last 20 games at UCLA.

That's a big red flag and a major concern for me. Especially potentially going from an every snap every game Eli, to him. I know I don't want to be holding my breath every time he drops back to pass.

In comment 13877587 Colin@gbn said:

Quote:

I have no idea what to make of the business with Barkley; in fact it is entirely possible that everyone, the Giants included, feels that have all the info on him that they need. Still it is WEIRD that almost nobody showed at his pro day and that he does not appear to have any private workouts or visits. And for the record, Barkley had every intention of doing positional drills when he woke up that morning and only backed off when nobody showed. Plus I have heard from several sources around the league that they wouldn't be surprised to see Barkley drop out of the top 5, not because he's not a talented player, but that the positional multiplier for the QBs and at least Chubb and even maybe 1-2 other edge rushers could push him down. What nobody can dispute is that the Giants are all in right now checking out the QBs and in fact they are the only players that the Giants appear to be seriously checking out. And as a general rule the guys that NFL teams are seriously checking out barely a month from the draft are guys that they already have a good grade on those guys. That's all we can really say at this time.

Thoughts on the QB's Colin. The top 4 guys, what order do you have them in right now? Not where they will be picked but how you rank the 4 QB's.

I can see them taking Barkley, but all things being equal, I think they would prefer QB. The QBs need to prove to the organization that they are legit franchise guys. Any franchise level QB could be a perennial pro bowler.

In comment 13877406 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

Well then anyone who works, coaches, or scouts for the NFL must be pretty stupid too.

It's the value of the pick - not Barkley as a prospect. At the #2 slot, which Jints Central has, it is not good value to take a RB. RBs grow on trees. They are everywhere, practically every year. So it's not financially practical to spend #2 slot dollars on a commodity.

In comment 13877406 ryanmkeane said:

Quote:

In comment 13877393 bw in dc said: Quote: because I'm really starting to believe Jints Central is stupid enough to take Barkley. Well then anyone who works, coaches, or scouts for the NFL must be pretty stupid too.

A lot of teams honestly are very stupid.

"Stupid" is strong term.

Thrill will rephrase. A lot of the GMs and head coaches are extremely egotistical and their hubris creates an unbelievable amount of bias and backward thinking. Traditionalism.

Every team will rightfully have a top-5 grade on Barkley. He's awesome.
Smart teams, however, will recognize the opportunity cost of picking a running back so high. In the case of NYG, that means potentially forfeiting a long-term solution at QB. Or turning down a transformative package of picks from Cleveland or Denver to drop down to 4th or 5th.

We can forgive Gettleman and Jints Central if Darnold was their only QB and Cleveland picked him. Taking Barkley instead of making a similar deal to the Jets-Colts (presuming such an offer exists, of course)? It would be an egregiously short-sighted uneconomical backward-thinking reductionist populist move.

Chasing a win-now window that doesn't actually exist. Coming off a 13-loss season.

Thrilly Mays Hayes doesn't always agree with Bw Webb in DC, but the Mssr. bw painted a good picture of what life with Barkley would look like. He'd be routinely awesome and yet we'd be wondering why NYG isn't winning more games.

Nevermind all the data about the shorter lifespans of RBs (based on the brutality of the position) and the economics of the position itself (high supply of talent).

Saquon Barkley would have to be historically great and have historically great longevity to justify the opportunity cost of picking him at #2. But a lot of GMs would be foolish enough to pull the triggers because ...hey highlights.

JVM: I don't normally say who I'd like at any position. Fact nobody should care much what I or any other analyst thinks on these things. Fact is all I really care about is how NFL teams generally - and the Giants in particular - are thinking. I go back and forth on these guys suggesting that there isn't a lot of room between them. If I had to be pinned down I'd say 1) Rosen; 2) Darnold; 3) Allen and 4) Mayfield. What I think people are underplaying to some degree is that they are all very good prospects each of whom has something of that WOW factor although in somewhat different ways. Of course they also each have at least one major issue.

are convinced Barkley is the second coming of a marshall faulk barry sanders or LDT, I hope they go in a different direction. There have been a number of top 5 overall pick running backs who have been complete busts, got injured (much higher potential at running back than other positions because of the wear and tear) or not even close to living up the their perceived potential - including penn state alum Curtis ennis, ki jana carter and garrison hearst. throw in other top 3 picks like reggie bush and Darren McFadden, there are a lot of successful college running backs who have not been able to make that leap to the pros.

I hope the Giants see a potential future hall of famer QB or DE at #2 and if not, either take nelson and/or trade down if the price is right.

Cherry Pickin' quotes from Gettleman to fit with what you want to happen or to add credence to your opinion.. While ignoring that he said just about everything to cover all his angles. He's well schooled, nothing was said to give a hint towards anything.

So need for me to dig up a DG quote to fit my agenda, I don't think any one opinion is wrong here.. as it's said, "There are many ways to skin a cat".

In comment 13877632 One Man Thrill Ride said:

Quote:

Saquon Barkley would have to be historically great and have historically great longevity to justify the opportunity cost of picking him at #2. But a lot of GMs would be foolish enough to pull the triggers because ...hey highlights.

We posted at the same time. See above.

In comment 13877643 Les in TO said:

Quote:

are convinced Barkley is the second coming of a marshall faulk barry sanders or LDT,

I think they do think that. Faulk and Tomlinson are good comparisons for him.

To me logically, since QB is the most important,vital position on the field, and there are 4 legit prospects here, you assess them ad nauseam and ONLY go with a Barkley or trade down if necessary. Eli being 37 mandates this. Webb is the wild card. DG talks about QB hell and there are 1 types:
1. Picking the wrong guy
2. Having Eli retire and literally having NO successor.
To me #2 is worse. When all is said and done, I’m betting Gettleman sees it that way.

Pick is the key we are not trading for it so it’s a QB or HB for the Browns by all accounts with a 90% QB at this point. Should someone trade up into the number one position then is a QB 100%. Teams are desperate to draft their franchise QB our number 2, pick will only increase in value as the draft approaches. I would move no further back than # 7, but would make two trades if QB is not the preferred choice. That should bring you in the end two or three number ones this year, two number twos and one first, one second and one fourth next year. The value is all about the position and the number of franchise QB available in this draft.

In comment 13877254 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

I do not think Nelson is a blue chip prospect, nor do I feel that way about Chubb. Blue chip to me...only Barkley and Rosen if he checks ALL of the medical boxes.

Sy,

I hear you loud and clear and totally agree. It's Barkley or Bust. He is the only sure bet in the draft at #2. Barkley helps both offense and defense!

Nelson is also a sure bet. But no OG should be a top 3 pick.
Barkley is the only one; not Darnold, not Rosen, not Chubb!!!!

And Gettleman makes it quite clear where his preferences are. Moreover, check past drafts: Gettleman is correct. There are very few who become All-Pros in each year. And the chances of hitting on several extraordinary players in the first three rounds is not good.

Look at the Giants past drafts. How many 2nd and 3rd's have been successful picks over the past 10 years.
We only have two picks left on the roster from 2010-14. Some of that can be blamed on the Reese/Ross regime. They missed on a lot of picks. But in a few drafts during those years, there were few franchise-changing talents among the almost 500 players drafted in Rds 1-3 between 2010-14.

Consequently, if Getty loves Barkley or another player on his board at #2, that's who the Giants should select (unless the Browns usurp our intentions).

In comment 13877664 bw in dc said:
[quote] In comment 13877632 One Man Thrill Ride said:


Quote:



Saquon Barkley would have to be historically great and have historically great longevity to justify the opportunity cost of picking him at #2. But a lot of GMs would be foolish enough to pull the triggers because ...hey highlights.

Historically great longevity?

Are you more confident that Rosen will have greater durability and longevity than Barkley?

In comment 13877712 Dave on the UWS said:

Quote:

To me logically, since QB is the most important,vital position on the field, and there are 4 legit prospects here, you assess them ad nauseam and ONLY go with a Barkley or trade down if necessary. Eli being 37 mandates this. Webb is the wild card. DG talks about QB hell and there are 1 types: 1. Picking the wrong guy 2. Having Eli retire and literally having NO successor. To me #2 is worse. When all is said and done, I’m betting Gettleman sees it that way.

Phila. won a Super Bowl with a backup QB (Foles).

Although, I won't downplay the significance of the QB position, you have to surround your QB with other talent.
Surround Eli with an offensive line and a running game and we just might see a different offense and a much more productive Eli.

Moreover, is Davis Webb potentially that terrible a QB; are Rosen, Darnold, Mayfield or Allen that much better than Webb is?
Nobody can answer that as yet. But several things that we do know: Webb is as diligent as they come; he is smart; he is a willing learner and a practice demon!

Are we certain that we are going to see the same dedication and drive from the fabulous(?) 4 QBs?

In comment 13877472 Keith said:

Quote:

In comment 13877393 bw in dc said: Quote: because I'm really starting to believe Jints Central is stupid enough to take Barkley. You can just write the script...Barkley will have some spectacular moments, will be up some gaudy stats here and there, may make a few Pro Bowls, etc. And maybe we'll be a solid .500 team... But we won't get over the hump because teams will start stacking the box and making Barkley's life miserable. Oh, sure - he'll beat it once in a while, but not enough. Because when we pushed all the chips into the middle of the table on Webb, the hope was he would the guy. But Webb just doesn't seem to get it. He's inconsistent from week to week, can't make key third down conversions, over throws too much, etc, etc. For crissakes, it's like watching Kent Graham all over again... And the conversations will center on the obvious - we don't have the right trigger man. Why didn't we draft Rosen instead? Or Allen? Oh, and guess what else? The other RBs from the Barkley draft are pretty good too - Johnson, Michel, Jones, etc. They are putting up some excellent numbers... But let's be optimistic. We have the 16th pick again! Maybe we can get one of these good Gs and that will make Barkley's life easier! I still think we go QB. Why is it that it appears that the Bills, Jets, Browns, Broncos and possibly other teams think these QB's are good enough to draft? I'm just not buying that the Giants dont. I think this is them making sure nobody knows their intentions, but I just don't see how all the QB hungry teams are fighting to move to the top of the draft for a QB, but the Giants don't think any fit the bill.

It seems that some of you are more familiar with Webb than Coach Shurmur is?
Yeah, the Giants have to be crazy to draft a generational back like Barkley.
Just as crazy as the Rams were to draft Gurley; the Cowboys to draft Elliott and the Jaguars to draft Fournette.

And none of those teams benefited, right?

In comment 13877782 royhobbs7 said:

Quote:

In comment 13877664 bw in dc said: [quote] In comment 13877632 One Man Thrill Ride said: Quote: Saquon Barkley would have to be historically great and have historically great longevity to justify the opportunity cost of picking him at #2. But a lot of GMs would be foolish enough to pull the triggers because ...hey highlights. Historically great longevity? Are you more confident that Rosen will have greater durability and longevity than Barkley?

Rosen? No.

Thrill fears that another concussion could motivate Rosen to retire early. And that will cause The Org to pass on him at #2.

Some really good information in your posts - thanks for sharing!

In comment 13877254 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

I do not think Nelson is a blue chip prospect, nor do I feel that way about Chubb. Blue chip to me...only Barkley and Rosen if he checks ALL of the medical boxes.

Sy, I agree with you. It's Rosen or bust!!;).

In comment 13877799 royhobbs7 said:

Quote:

I Phila. won a Super Bowl with a backup QB (Foles). Although, I won't downplay the significance of the QB position, you have to surround your QB with other talent.

yeah and what you did not mention was that Philly made about 15 off season moves in where virtually every one of them worked out for them. It was actually like hitting the power ball. So, what you saw in Philly was the exception and not the rule.

Having a top franchise QB means you have a chance every year and especially when you have a couple of key players go down. Jordy goes down with Rodgers in the lineup and they can still win games. Sub par OL? Rodgers can still win games. No RB? He can still win games.

NYG often don't spend much time on 'clean' prospects

He sure wasn't a "generational back" at Pedo State.

In comment 13878255 Greg from LI said:

Quote:

He sure wasn't a "generational back" at Pedo State.

People really latch on to buzzwords they hear like a dog with a steak bone.

How do the QBs grade out for you?

In comment 13878559 TommytheElephant said:

Quote:

How do the QBs grade out for you?

Grades will be out in 4 weeks.

really wrong with this organization. I would throw Johnson in that decision because he was a QB and has been around Eli and Webb.

Who else do they have who can evaluate QBs? I don’t think anyone else in the organization either played or coached the position!

Webb and Barkley, Webb and a trade down, or Darnold, Rosen, Allen or Mayfield.