Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
RE: I think the article really means that you better not be wrong.
Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
Barkley can be the best player at a skill position in the league or Nelson the best guard - getting a QB of Ryan/Stafford caliber (top seven or so, but not top three - IMV, of course) is more valuable, in my view.
And I'm fine with the Giants passing on the QBs if they think they'll just be average - but they better be right.
RE: RE: I think the article really means that you better not be wrong.
Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
True, but maybe they have this in Webb. How much better are they than Webb. It's difficult to assess. Do you take another QB to complete or are you confident enough to say Webb is going to be a good QB and add another non-QB talent?
Anyone that has been following him on NFL Network-- he said beforehand to draft Nelson if you are the Giants.
YET just yesterday he is saying he wasn't as impressed with Nelson.
Yet eh is saying take him 2nd? It took the Pro day to change his mind?
A final point-- QB is the most important position. Look at Dallas. When they are losing by more than a TD - they are screwed.
Anyone that doesn't value a QB more than any other position just is soooo wrong. This BPA nonsense vs a QB is just so wrong. It has to be very clear that you don't take the potential elite QB. __ It is possible this draft.
But-- if you don't -- you better not be wrong with your other picks. The QB makes up for a lot of errors.
RE: RE: I think the article really means that you better not be wrong.
Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
Matt Ryan. The poster child of "not a bad franchise QB, but nothing to get excited about".
RE: RE: RE: I think the article really means that you better not be wrong.
Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
Matt Ryan. The poster child of "not a bad franchise QB, but nothing to get excited about".
Yet this guy's emphasis is on individual accolades.
The OG is NOT much of an influence come playoff time for a number 2 pick. If your tackle is getting crushed what good is Nelson?
What the article fails to accept is that the QB position IS most important. That mean's - the best idea is to grab it when you can. His minimizing Cam Newton's impact is laughable.
Jason Smith LT - #2 overall - in 2009
Aaron Curry LB - #4 overall - 2009
Darius Heyward-Bey - #7 overall - 2009
Aaron Maybin - #10 overall - 2009
Or how about the most famous one, Robert Gallery in 2004 #2 overall ahead of Larry Fitzgerald, Phil Rivers, Sean Taylor (RIP), and Big Ben.
I'll stop there but the point is obvious - there's no such thing as a risk-less pick. Do your homework, minimize the odds of fucking this up, but it happens - and non-QBs carry much higher career ending injury risk tags too... you cant draft scared, but that should absolutely factor into the equation.
RE: RE: RE: I think the article really means that you better not be wrong.
Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
Matt Ryan. The poster child of "not a bad franchise QB, but nothing to get excited about".
Compare Matt Ryan's career stats and MVP award to Eli's career stats and get back to me. Ryan is the better QB, yet plenty of folks here treat him like he's mediocre and treat Eli like he's actually elite.
So if it makes you feel better, just change my previous post to "as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "ELI MANNING-Type" career. Then you can be happy if the Giants go QB @ 2.
Rosen and Darnold, to me, are the 2 guys most likely to succeed.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
And I'm fine with the Giants passing on the QBs if they think they'll just be average - but they better be right.
Quote:
Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
True, but maybe they have this in Webb. How much better are they than Webb. It's difficult to assess. Do you take another QB to complete or are you confident enough to say Webb is going to be a good QB and add another non-QB talent?
This QB class has a few studs.
YET just yesterday he is saying he wasn't as impressed with Nelson.
Yet eh is saying take him 2nd? It took the Pro day to change his mind?
A final point-- QB is the most important position. Look at Dallas. When they are losing by more than a TD - they are screwed.
Anyone that doesn't value a QB more than any other position just is soooo wrong. This BPA nonsense vs a QB is just so wrong. It has to be very clear that you don't take the potential elite QB. __ It is possible this draft.
But-- if you don't -- you better not be wrong with your other picks. The QB makes up for a lot of errors.
Quote:
Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
Matt Ryan. The poster child of "not a bad franchise QB, but nothing to get excited about".
Quote:
In comment 13882844 BrettNYG10 said:
Quote:
Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
Matt Ryan. The poster child of "not a bad franchise QB, but nothing to get excited about".
yep. I always thought he got too much love.
Yet this guy's emphasis is on individual accolades.
The OG is NOT much of an influence come playoff time for a number 2 pick. If your tackle is getting crushed what good is Nelson?
What the article fails to accept is that the QB position IS most important. That mean's - the best idea is to grab it when you can. His minimizing Cam Newton's impact is laughable.
Jake Locker at #8 was definitely a bust.
So was Rolando McLain (MLB) in 2010
Jason Smith LT - #2 overall - in 2009
Aaron Curry LB - #4 overall - 2009
Darius Heyward-Bey - #7 overall - 2009
Aaron Maybin - #10 overall - 2009
Or how about the most famous one, Robert Gallery in 2004 #2 overall ahead of Larry Fitzgerald, Phil Rivers, Sean Taylor (RIP), and Big Ben.
I'll stop there but the point is obvious - there's no such thing as a risk-less pick. Do your homework, minimize the odds of fucking this up, but it happens - and non-QBs carry much higher career ending injury risk tags too... you cant draft scared, but that should absolutely factor into the equation.
Quote:
In comment 13882844 BrettNYG10 said:
Quote:
Fitzgerald was a better player at his position than any of the QBs in 04, but the AZ franchise probably would have been better served with either Rivers/Roethlisberger.
This times 10,000!
It doesn't matter if the Giants pass on Barkley and he turns out to be the better player, as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "Matt Ryan-type" of career, then the QB would be the far better choice.
Matt Ryan. The poster child of "not a bad franchise QB, but nothing to get excited about".
Compare Matt Ryan's career stats and MVP award to Eli's career stats and get back to me. Ryan is the better QB, yet plenty of folks here treat him like he's mediocre and treat Eli like he's actually elite.
So if it makes you feel better, just change my previous post to "as long as the QB chosen has a long, productive "ELI MANNING-Type" career. Then you can be happy if the Giants go QB @ 2.
And Eli elevates play in January - matt seizes up. 'Get back to me' when Ryan wins two.