Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

Ernie Accorsi on his drafting philosophy and DG

GFAN52 : 4/10/2018 10:28 pm
Quote:
Accorsi recently served as a consultant for Mara and co-owner Steve Tisch in the general manager search that brought Dave Gettleman back into the fold. Though Accorsi is not advising Gettleman on the most important draft-day decision for the franchise since Manning came aboard, with the Giants owning the No. 2 overall pick in this year’s draft, he certainly has a vested interest and also a warning.

If it is to be a quarterback, Accorsi cautioned, make sure the one you take is the one you love, deeply and unwaveringly.

“If you’re gonna pick a quarterback high, you’ve got to believe in your heart that he can win a championship,’’ Accorsi said. “You have all these checklists on measurables — there’s no question they’re important — but when it comes right down to it, you’ve got to feel it.

“If I don’t think this guy can win a championship, I’m not gonna have a conviction. You have to believe that. If you don’t believe that then don’t pick a quarterback high. Because if you’re wrong, it could set you back — this may sound like an exaggeration — it could set you back 8-10 years. Because you’re gonna play him, very rarely do they play well the first two or three years. You’re not gonna know, is he just adjusting or is he a bust? You’re gonna have to give him time.’’

This is what the Giants must consider when analyzing Sam Darnold, Josh Rosen, Josh Allen and Baker Mayfield. They are all intriguing, but will there be that conviction on any of them?

Accorsi said he believes the criteria Gettleman established for the No. 2 pick — you must be able to project the player as a future Hall of Famer and that he must be deemed worthy of the second-overall selection in any draft — are sound. Accorsi has watched the quarterback prospects in this draft but has not studied them the way the Giants have and continue to do.

“You can’t draft by the curve at quarterback,’’ Accorsi said. “If it happens to be one of those drafts where there’s only one great player, you can’t invent one if you’re picking 2. There may be a draft you do have that worry. This draft I don’t think you have that worry.

“Dave’s got more options than I had. He’s got a bunch of options. He can go a lot of different directions.’’

Running back Saquon Barkley, defensive end Bradley Chubb and guard Quenton Nelson are widely viewed as can’t-miss prospects. These riches were not available to Accorsi in 2004. If he had not been able to secure Manning or Roethlisberger, the next player he coveted was receiver Larry Fitzgerald, who went No. 3 to the Cardinals.

“There weren’t a lot of options after that,’’ Accorsi said.




Link - ( New Window )
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
That  
mattyblue : 4/11/2018 1:51 am : link
could also be very far fetched, however if everything you read in the news is to be believed. I don’t see why the Browns wouldn’t try and get nearly anything from the Giants, even an extra 3rd/4th it would really open up their 4th spot.
Spin however you want it now  
UberAlias : 4/11/2018 2:36 am : link
But at the end of the day DG is going to own his decision. If they pass up on a franchise QB or two for a good DE or very good OG but struggle to find an answer at QB, the NY press who are all on board now are going to turn on him like dogs watching they guy they should have taken winning games in green.
It is about conviction  
TrueBlue56 : 4/11/2018 2:54 am : link
Right or wrong. Accorsi had a conviction with manning. It did not mean he didn't like any of the other quarterbacks, but he had that conviction about manning. As far as him drafting rivers, he knew that they were going to swing that trade before he made the pick. Gloveone called what would happen before anything happened.

I won't criticize Gettleman if he takes a quarterback, but he has to have that conviction similar to what Accorsi had of Eli. If not, pass

The jets have been forcing quarterback picks and look where they are. The same can be said of the Broncos. Convincing yourself of a quarterback is a recipe for disaster
And the risks EA is cautioning  
UberAlias : 4/11/2018 2:55 am : link
Are not as severe under current CBA. And if the pick will not set you back 15 years. It’s not going to take that long to know you missed if you are honest with yourself and the financial commitment is not as crippling as it once was

So make the right choice. But talking like the only outcomes are selecting an NFL all time great he will be a franchise crippling failure is utter nonsense. That spin won’t help you if you blow the opportunity.

I think PS said it best when he said we know what a good quarterback looks like. Forget all this fear mongering. Do any of these guys look like good quarterbacks or not? It should be that simple.
RE: And the risks EA is cautioning  
Zepp : 4/11/2018 4:09 am : link
In comment 13908856 UberAlias said:
Quote:
Are not as severe under current CBA. And if the pick will not set you back 15 years. It’s not going to take that long to know you missed if you are honest with yourself and the financial commitment is not as crippling as it once was

So make the right choice. But talking like the only outcomes are selecting an NFL all time great he will be a franchise crippling failure is utter nonsense. That spin won’t help you if you blow the opportunity.

I think PS said it best when he said we know what a good quarterback looks like. Forget all this fear mongering. Do any of these guys look like good quarterbacks or not? It should be that simple.


Maybe it doesn't set you back 8 years but it will definitely set you back at least 5 years while playing losing or mediocre football in the process and possibly getting everyone fired as well. This is real life stuff. If DG misses he might not get a do over once the dust settles...same goes with Shurmur even though its not his ultimate decision.

In this situation lets say they take a risk on one of the QB's....he sits behind Manning for 1-2 years. He comes in to play. He has a honeymoon period of another 1-2 years. By year 3 if he hasn't put it together you start feeling he is a bust. Thats 4-5 years. Meanwhile guys like Barkley or Chubb are tearing up the league at their respective positions and the team has most likely at best been playing mediocre football.

This QB class is special because the red flags are unpredictable and enormous problems. Its not like the 2004 class where you had the typical questions of can his play translate to the NFL.

With Darnold its turnovers...will that continue? Maybe its correctable. Ok maybe you can fix it if you can pinpoint what his problem is. Is it just the way he grips the ball and is it coachable? Very possible which is why Darnold is the cleanest of the bunch.

Here is where the red flags show up on the others. Rosen, great physical tools, smart but he has durability and more importantly concussion issues. We live in an NFL with a concussion protocol where he could miss games if this is a continuing problem. There is no medical professional out there that can guarantee the Giants that he won't have a problem. None. No helmet you can wear that can stop them. Its a very individual type of injury and without knowing the future its impossible to predict. The only thing we do know is that studies have shown when you've had 2 or more, especially in a short amount of time, you are at a higher risk of having another, and another.

Allen's red flag is his inaccuracy. Something that everyone has said usually isn't a thing you can coach up. So it doesn't matter that his arm is awesome or hes big and can move. If he can't hit the open guy he's useless. Then theres Baker who has personality issues, etc.

Thats why there is HUUUUUUUUUUUUGE risk taking these QB's outside of Darnold. It isn't your typical, can I coach up his weaknesses in the NFL. They are red flags that you can't coach up and you can't predict.

DG would be risking his job, reputation and the franchise for the next 5 years one one of these high risk QBs. Which is why, IMO, the right choice is Barkley, Chubb, or trade down not out of the top 10.
IMHO  
Nomad Crow on the Madison : 4/11/2018 6:37 am : link
other than Mayfield, Darnold is the biggest risk. Small hands, can't hold onto the ball, plays almost exclusively from the shotgun, has some accuracy/arm strength issues. The only thing that is attractive is his attitude. His teammates love him. And he can scramble a little bit. He will probably be a decent QB, but I don't see greatness.
Most important paragraph in the article  
Peter from NH (formerly CT) : 4/11/2018 6:47 am : link
" Because if you’re wrong, it could set you back — this may sound like an exaggeration — it could set you back 8-10 years. Because you’re gonna play him, very rarely do they play well the first two or three years. You’re not gonna know, is he just adjusting or is he a bust? You’re gonna have to give him time.’’

It's why you don't take a QB unless you are absolutely convinced about them this high. It may be less risky to have a second development guy (in addition to Webb) in the system and see whether any of them rise.
You don't take any player unless you are convinced about him  
UberAlias : 4/11/2018 7:16 am : link
That applies to any position, not just QB. Blowing top 10 picks in Flowers and Apple were huge blows -this would be much worse. You are kidding yourself if you think Chubb or Barkley are sure things. Guys bust in those positions all the time.

Yes, you had better be right if you pull the trigger on one of these QBs. But you better be right if you pass on them too. These guys are going to be crucified if they miss out on a really good QB and have to watch a guy throwing TDs and winning games in green. No one is going to want to hear about the red flags at that point -that's their job to figure it out.

So they better get it right either way --let's not make any mistake about that.
This whole convinced argument is nonsense  
twostepgiants : 4/11/2018 7:26 am : link
Is a recipe for never drafting QB or overdrafting them

You will eventually be forced to draft and fool yourself into thinking you are convinced

Why is this argument not applying to the Browns or Jets or Denver or Bills?

Why dont they need to be convinced?

Because they need a QB. Thats why

No one is asking- what if Rosen & Darnold are gone? Are the Jets convinced on Mayfield or Allen? Everyone knows their taking whoever is the best of whats left.

This convinced nonsense also forces you to choose 1 of what may be 4 good options. All of these guys can be good. 3 of them may be. 2004 all were good. 1984 had 3 HoF QBs.

Its silly.
True, Accorsi could have stayed where he was and taken  
Bill L : 4/11/2018 7:47 am : link
a guy just as good as the player for whom he traded up.

But geez, those Lombardi trophies looked really good, didn't they?
RE: I’m not taking the bait.  
Bill L : 4/11/2018 7:49 am : link
In comment 13908835 Toastt34 said:
Quote:
It’s QB. It has to be QB especially in this draft. If it was a draft where it was one clear-cut QB locked into #1 and a huge drop off after that, I might feel differently but there’s 4 guys here you can easily make arguments for becoming franchise QBs. Teams willing to mortgage their future to take a shot at even one of them. The Giants have a 37 yo QB, who lets be honest, has been average at best recently and whose contract will come into play after this season.

Also, yeah picking the wrong QB will set you back, but not even taking a shot at one when a golden opportunity presents itself is even worse. If they pass here, when will this team really have a shot at another one? And when will they really be able to compete? Look at the QBs around the NFC, all fairly young and all studs. It’s loaded now and for the foreseeable future.
SO, you're saying that these 4 guys are equivalent and that over the next 2-3 years there won't be a single QB, by draft or FA, that is as good as any of them?

I'm really skeptical of that.
RE: You don't take any player unless you are convinced about him  
Bill L : 4/11/2018 7:51 am : link
In comment 13908896 UberAlias said:
Quote:
That applies to any position, not just QB. Blowing top 10 picks in Flowers and Apple were huge blows -this would be much worse. You are kidding yourself if you think Chubb or Barkley are sure things. Guys bust in those positions all the time.

Yes, you had better be right if you pull the trigger on one of these QBs. But you better be right if you pass on them too. These guys are going to be crucified if they miss out on a really good QB and have to watch a guy throwing TDs and winning games in green. No one is going to want to hear about the red flags at that point -that's their job to figure it out.

So they better get it right either way --let's not make any mistake about that.
But you get locked in with a QB. I think you can hide, compensate, or otherwise overcome picking a Flowers or an Apple (although I think that is pretty unfair and premature on Apple), but if your QB is Flowers, that's much harder to do.
I'm glad Toast34 isnt the GM.  
Victor in CT : 4/11/2018 7:58 am : link
You don't reach, no matter what position.
I mostly agree with  
section125 : 4/11/2018 8:03 am : link
twostep here.

The only questions in deciding to take a QB at #2 are:

1.) Is one or more of these QBs better than what you have in Davis Webb (Eli is gone shortly). Most important question.

2.) Is one or more of these QB likely to be more impactful than Barkley, Chubb or Nelson.

That is all. everything else is bullshit.

If the Giants feel that none of these QBs will be significantly better than Webb, than move on to Barkley or Chubb or trade. (and they have more info on Webb than they do on any of the draftees)

If none of the QBs will be more impactful than Barkley, Chubb or Nelson, take one of these three or trade down.

We, the press or experts haven't a clue as to what DG and Shurmur want in a QB. If Shurmur can turn Keenum into a playoff QB, it is likely he can turn other fairly talented QBs, also (Keenum was a pretty talented college QB). Look (begrudgingly, yuck) at what Pedersen did with Foles (another fairly talented QB).

If you put enough talent around a B/B+ QB, you can win in the playoffs. It may be easier to find and put that talent around the B+ QB, than find an A/A+ QB like an Elway, Rodgers, Brady, Aikman or Manning(s).
RE: RE: I’m not taking the bait.  
section125 : 4/11/2018 8:07 am : link
In comment 13908906 Bill L said:
Quote:
In comment 13908835 Toastt34 said:


Quote:


It’s QB. It has to be QB especially in this draft. If it was a draft where it was one clear-cut QB locked into #1 and a huge drop off after that, I might feel differently but there’s 4 guys here you can easily make arguments for becoming franchise QBs. Teams willing to mortgage their future to take a shot at even one of them. The Giants have a 37 yo QB, who lets be honest, has been average at best recently and whose contract will come into play after this season.

Also, yeah picking the wrong QB will set you back, but not even taking a shot at one when a golden opportunity presents itself is even worse. If they pass here, when will this team really have a shot at another one? And when will they really be able to compete? Look at the QBs around the NFC, all fairly young and all studs. It’s loaded now and for the foreseeable future.

SO, you're saying that these 4 guys are equivalent and that over the next 2-3 years there won't be a single QB, by draft or FA, that is as good as any of them?

I'm really skeptical of that.


As of now, no, the next group of QBs are not as good as this year. FA QB? Really? $30 mill for Cousins - that is all you will get in FA and where is that money coming from? Plus, they would need to be 2-14 to get a shot at the draft QBs and what are those chances?
RE: RE: I’m not taking the bait.  
Gatorade Dunk : 4/11/2018 8:26 am : link
In comment 13908906 Bill L said:
Quote:
In comment 13908835 Toastt34 said:


Quote:


It’s QB. It has to be QB especially in this draft. If it was a draft where it was one clear-cut QB locked into #1 and a huge drop off after that, I might feel differently but there’s 4 guys here you can easily make arguments for becoming franchise QBs. Teams willing to mortgage their future to take a shot at even one of them. The Giants have a 37 yo QB, who lets be honest, has been average at best recently and whose contract will come into play after this season.

Also, yeah picking the wrong QB will set you back, but not even taking a shot at one when a golden opportunity presents itself is even worse. If they pass here, when will this team really have a shot at another one? And when will they really be able to compete? Look at the QBs around the NFC, all fairly young and all studs. It’s loaded now and for the foreseeable future.

SO, you're saying that these 4 guys are equivalent and that over the next 2-3 years there won't be a single QB, by draft or FA, that is as good as any of them?

I'm really skeptical of that.

FA QBs are expensive, even the mediocre ones, so it's not really apples to apples. Building your team around a young, successful (and cheap) QB on his rookie contract is such an advantage in roster construction that it can't be dismissed - I don't think it's fair to lump in the possibility of bringing in a FA QB over the next couple of years. And in most years, it's typically a lot of Glennons, Fitzpatricks and McCowns out there.

As for the upcoming drafts, I think it's definitely conceivable that a) there may not be any prospects as good as the top prospects in this draft, and/or that b) the cost in draft capital to trade up for a top QB prospect is prohibitive relative to staying put and taking one at #2. This is not to say take a QB for the sake of taking a QB; rather, if you don't think DG and PS will have a conviction on a QB in this class, it's hard to imagine that they'll have a conviction on the QBs in the next couple of classes and simultaneously be in a position to draft him, barring another disastrous season like we just endured.

It's entirely possible that there will be a QB prospect in 2019 or 2020 that is every bit as good as the QBs in this year's draft, but the chances that there will be 3-4 of them? That's where the odds fall off, IMO. Which means that if there's only 1-2, the price to trade up is even greater, and could potentially be blocked by teams that also have a pressing need at the QB position.

I understand where you're coming from, in a vacuum. But the QB position is so vital to a team's success, the opportunity to have a smooth succession plan in place is so rare, that when circumstances align to potentially give you the chance to acquire that QB without having to also sacrifice additional current/future draft capital, it has to merit extremely strong consideration.

Said another way - if you don't think Sam Darnold or Josh Rosen are worth 1 first round pick this year, what makes you think Drew Lock or Ryan Finley (or whoever) will be worth 2+ first round picks (factoring for the cost to trade up) next year?
The bust factor..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 4/11/2018 8:28 am : link
is much more important when taking a QB:

Quote:
.....
Mdgiantsfan : 4/10/2018 11:28 pm : link : reply
So if you draft Chubb, Nelson, insert any other non-QB at #2, and they are a bust you feel better about the decision? They're all a risk to some degree. So this whole "he's got be a HoFer or you don't take him" talk is annoying


Look at what Accorsi said - you are definitely going to play the QB, and likely do it for a few years before wondering if he's a bust, a slow learner, or an eventual solid starter if he doesn't start out in year 1 with what looks to be that special something.

Miss on a DE, RB or other position, and you'll have a guy who will impact the tram, but on fewer plays and less directly and you can move along after a couple of years without much pain.

Continually miss on a QB and you end up like the Browns. and speaking of the Browns, they've gotten to the point where they don't even seem to give the QB time to develop. Deshon Kizer? McCown? Hoyer? Weeden? Manziel?
.....  
Micko : 4/11/2018 8:42 am : link
I can't think of a better situation than drafting Rosen or Darnold and then having a competition between Webb and the newbie to figure out who our QB for the next decade will be. Even if you draft a QB and Webb beats him out long term it's a winning situation. The worst case scenario is we mortgage the future for a year of being competitive by taking Barkley only to realize Eli is done and Webb isn't good enough. We'll be back to the Dave Brown / Kent Graham years. The goal here is to set the franchise up for the next 10-15 years. I can't imagine anyone will be upset if we're sitting here w/ 2 good options for the future.
RE: RE: RE: I’m not taking the bait.  
lax counsel : 4/11/2018 9:18 am : link
In comment 13908941 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 13908906 Bill L said:


Quote:


In comment 13908835 Toastt34 said:


Quote:


It’s QB. It has to be QB especially in this draft. If it was a draft where it was one clear-cut QB locked into #1 and a huge drop off after that, I might feel differently but there’s 4 guys here you can easily make arguments for becoming franchise QBs. Teams willing to mortgage their future to take a shot at even one of them. The Giants have a 37 yo QB, who lets be honest, has been average at best recently and whose contract will come into play after this season.

Also, yeah picking the wrong QB will set you back, but not even taking a shot at one when a golden opportunity presents itself is even worse. If they pass here, when will this team really have a shot at another one? And when will they really be able to compete? Look at the QBs around the NFC, all fairly young and all studs. It’s loaded now and for the foreseeable future.

SO, you're saying that these 4 guys are equivalent and that over the next 2-3 years there won't be a single QB, by draft or FA, that is as good as any of them?

I'm really skeptical of that.


FA QBs are expensive, even the mediocre ones, so it's not really apples to apples. Building your team around a young, successful (and cheap) QB on his rookie contract is such an advantage in roster construction that it can't be dismissed - I don't think it's fair to lump in the possibility of bringing in a FA QB over the next couple of years. And in most years, it's typically a lot of Glennons, Fitzpatricks and McCowns out there.

As for the upcoming drafts, I think it's definitely conceivable that a) there may not be any prospects as good as the top prospects in this draft, and/or that b) the cost in draft capital to trade up for a top QB prospect is prohibitive relative to staying put and taking one at #2. This is not to say take a QB for the sake of taking a QB; rather, if you don't think DG and PS will have a conviction on a QB in this class, it's hard to imagine that they'll have a conviction on the QBs in the next couple of classes and simultaneously be in a position to draft him, barring another disastrous season like we just endured.

It's entirely possible that there will be a QB prospect in 2019 or 2020 that is every bit as good as the QBs in this year's draft, but the chances that there will be 3-4 of them? That's where the odds fall off, IMO. Which means that if there's only 1-2, the price to trade up is even greater, and could potentially be blocked by teams that also have a pressing need at the QB position.

I understand where you're coming from, in a vacuum. But the QB position is so vital to a team's success, the opportunity to have a smooth succession plan in place is so rare, that when circumstances align to potentially give you the chance to acquire that QB without having to also sacrifice additional current/future draft capital, it has to merit extremely strong consideration.

Said another way - if you don't think Sam Darnold or Josh Rosen are worth 1 first round pick this year, what makes you think Drew Lock or Ryan Finley (or whoever) will be worth 2+ first round picks (factoring for the cost to trade up) next year?


Outstanding point. I've been saying this for a while now. What if there aren't any teams that are willing to trade with the Giants next year? Or what if the Giants are forced into a position that necessitates the team investing multiple first round picks in a qb who wouldn't have even been in consideration for that slot this year (Lock, Finley, Thornson)? Now you've essentially over invested and are further tied to that qb.
If we build up the surrounding cast  
Bill L : 4/11/2018 9:31 am : link
I am personally very comfortable with a McCown- type player.
It's an absolute f*cking travesty  
Coach Red Beaulieu : 4/11/2018 9:33 am : link
Ernie and his toupee aren't wearing gold jackets. His scouting report Eli reads like a work of prophecy that would make Nostradamus stand up and say "dayummm how dafuq!?!"
I think it's most important to have superlatives on the team  
Bill L : 4/11/2018 9:34 am : link
as opposed to a very good QB helming a lesser cast. SO that's where I would focus my strategy. Obviously, if there was a superlative QB, that would be ideal, but I think you can win with a less than ideal qb, la Peyton in Denver or Jim McMahon or Dilfer or a number of other people, if there is complementary excellence.
Assuming we do draft a QB...  
bw in dc : 4/11/2018 9:50 am : link
let's hope we draft the best QB this time. ;)
RE: Spin however you want it now  
WillVAB : 4/11/2018 9:54 am : link
In comment 13908851 UberAlias said:
Quote:
But at the end of the day DG is going to own his decision. If they pass up on a franchise QB or two for a good DE or very good OG but struggle to find an answer at QB, the NY press who are all on board now are going to turn on him like dogs watching they guy they should have taken winning games in green.


They will turn on him if he drafts a QB who ends up busting while running Eli out of town in the process. Even moreso if Eli has success with another team.

It’s a tough spot for DG but it’s easier to justify your scenario than mine. People will get fired in my scenario.
RE: Assuming we do draft a QB...  
Bill L : 4/11/2018 9:58 am : link
In comment 13909089 bw in dc said:
Quote:
let's hope we draft the best QB this time. ;)

I get that it's a joke, but I am not sure people appreciate how hard it is to win even one SB (the fact that someone does it every year notwithstanding). Nor am I sure that they value it all that much.
RE: Assuming we do draft a QB...  
Brown Recluse : 4/11/2018 9:59 am : link
In comment 13909089 bw in dc said:
Quote:
let's hope we draft the best QB this time. ;)


WHAT ARE YOU SAYING!??!? ELI IS THE BEST QB EVER!!!!
RE: It's an absolute f*cking travesty  
Greg from LI : 4/11/2018 10:04 am : link
In comment 13909070 Coach Red Beaulieu said:
Quote:
Ernie and his toupee aren't wearing gold jackets. His scouting report Eli reads like a work of prophecy that would make Nostradamus stand up and say "dayummm how dafuq!?!"


His overall track record in the draft was mixed at best. The 1998-2002 drafts were awful.
RE: RE: It's an absolute f*cking travesty  
GFAN52 : 4/11/2018 10:06 am : link
In comment 13909113 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 13909070 Coach Red Beaulieu said:


Quote:


Ernie and his toupee aren't wearing gold jackets. His scouting report Eli reads like a work of prophecy that would make Nostradamus stand up and say "dayummm how dafuq!?!"



His overall track record in the draft was mixed at best. The 1998-2002 drafts were awful.


Agree. Pre-Eli draft, Ernie was more miss than hit.
RE: RE: RE: It's an absolute f*cking travesty  
Coach Red Beaulieu : 4/11/2018 10:12 am : link
In comment 13909121 GFAN52 said:
Quote:
In comment 13909113 Greg from LI said:


Quote:


In comment 13909070 Coach Red Beaulieu said:


Quote:


Ernie and his toupee aren't wearing gold jackets. His scouting report Eli reads like a work of prophecy that would make Nostradamus stand up and say "dayummm how dafuq!?!"



His overall track record in the draft was mixed at best. The 1998-2002 drafts were awful.



Agree. Pre-Eli draft, Ernie was more miss than hit.
s

He bought us to the the SB with a racist drunken hick QB. Greatest FA signing of all time!
RE: RE: Spin however you want it now  
UberAlias : 4/11/2018 10:30 am : link
In comment 13909092 WillVAB said:
Quote:
In comment 13908851 UberAlias said:


Quote:


But at the end of the day DG is going to own his decision. If they pass up on a franchise QB or two for a good DE or very good OG but struggle to find an answer at QB, the NY press who are all on board now are going to turn on him like dogs watching they guy they should have taken winning games in green.



They will turn on him if he drafts a QB who ends up busting while running Eli out of town in the process. Even moreso if Eli has success with another team.

It’s a tough spot for DG but it’s easier to justify your scenario than mine. People will get fired in my scenario.
Perhaps, but you don't make decisions on opportunities such as this with a mindset of "what we can justify". You do what is right. This is a great opportunity here and the goal is to win superbowls, not just to justify your position or keep things respectable.
RE: If we build up the surrounding cast  
Gatorade Dunk : 4/11/2018 11:46 am : link
In comment 13909064 Bill L said:
Quote:
I am personally very comfortable with a McCown- type player.

That makes one of us. But I suppose it really does underscore the fundamental difference in our respective points of view.

I'd rather have a 25 year old Carson Wentz with a $7MM cap hit than a 38 year old Josh McCown with a $10MM cap hit (and on year-to-year deals at this point). You're paying McCown more for what is likely to be an inferior performance and will need to replace him within the next year or two anyway. The benefit of McCown over Wentz is what, exactly? Being able to use your #2 overall pick on a RB in a RB-rich draft (and I happen to really like Barkley)?

Sooner or later you end up having to pay the piper to get yourself a long-term solution at QB. How many teams have had sustained success using fungible JAG QBs?
If you go back..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 4/11/2018 12:01 pm : link
and look at the historical list of SB QB's, you come up with between 12-15 who would be considered non-franchise guys, and half of them benefitted from all-time strong defenses, whether it was Dilfer, Brad Johnson or Jim McMahon.

The overwhelming evidence points to needing a very strong, established QB, and in the absence of that, a unit that is absolutely world class to win a SB.

Using McCown as an example that would be a wise move not only ignores history, it seemingly ignores logic too.
RE: If you go back..  
lax counsel : 4/11/2018 1:20 pm : link
In comment 13909297 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
and look at the historical list of SB QB's, you come up with between 12-15 who would be considered non-franchise guys, and half of them benefitted from all-time strong defenses, whether it was Dilfer, Brad Johnson or Jim McMahon.

The overwhelming evidence points to needing a very strong, established QB, and in the absence of that, a unit that is absolutely world class to win a SB.

Using McCown as an example that would be a wise move not only ignores history, it seemingly ignores logic too.


I agree. You aren't winning anything with McCown at qb. The tried and true way to consistently stay in contention throughout the history of this league is with a franchise qb. The Trent Dilfer led Ravens and Brad Johnson led Bucaneers were never really in contention again, despite the efforts of a historically great defense. The mediocre qbs just couldn't catch lightening in a bottle again.

I'm surprised so many posters on this site are so quick to dismiss the impact of a truly franchise qb and having the opportunity to draft a blue chip talent at the position. This league always has been and always will be a qb led league.
There's two parts to that  
Bill L : 4/11/2018 1:54 pm : link
The first is that McCown might be substandard but my assumption is that all the the other elements would be outstanding. This would be by picking the very best players available at the time you can pick them. So, I am looking at it like a McMahon or even Peyton (and, if we focus on the Giants, I think Eli is better at this point than Peyton was) situation. And, if they do catch lightning but it's not sustained for a while, I'm okay with that.

The second part is that there is an assumption that just by picking a QB here we automatically have the franchise guy. I don't see it. And, it certainly isn't where the talent value is.
“There weren’t a lot of options after that’’...  
Torrag : 4/11/2018 2:58 pm : link
I think Ernie is forgetting Sean Taylor was in that draft class. So there was another elite blue chip prospect available to him.
RE: RE: RE: Spin however you want it now  
WillVAB : 4/11/2018 3:56 pm : link
In comment 13909157 UberAlias said:
Quote:
In comment 13909092 WillVAB said:


Quote:


In comment 13908851 UberAlias said:


Quote:


But at the end of the day DG is going to own his decision. If they pass up on a franchise QB or two for a good DE or very good OG but struggle to find an answer at QB, the NY press who are all on board now are going to turn on him like dogs watching they guy they should have taken winning games in green.



They will turn on him if he drafts a QB who ends up busting while running Eli out of town in the process. Even moreso if Eli has success with another team.

It’s a tough spot for DG but it’s easier to justify your scenario than mine. People will get fired in my scenario.

Perhaps, but you don't make decisions on opportunities such as this with a mindset of "what we can justify". You do what is right. This is a great opportunity here and the goal is to win superbowls, not just to justify your position or keep things respectable.


Both the GM and HC were fired the last time they were in their respective positions. They’re going to try to win now if they believe the framework is in place to win.

It doesn’t do them any good to draft a QB for the next GM/HC.
Will  
UberAlias : 4/11/2018 4:54 pm : link
If you think that than they hired the wrong men for the job and we have bigger troubles. These are successful confident men, not frightened children scared of failure.
And has nothing to do with the reasons they lost their prior  
UberAlias : 4/11/2018 4:56 pm : link
Jobs.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Spin however you want it now  
Gatorade Dunk : 4/11/2018 5:55 pm : link
In comment 13909715 WillVAB said:
Quote:
In comment 13909157 UberAlias said:


Quote:


In comment 13909092 WillVAB said:


Quote:


In comment 13908851 UberAlias said:


Quote:


But at the end of the day DG is going to own his decision. If they pass up on a franchise QB or two for a good DE or very good OG but struggle to find an answer at QB, the NY press who are all on board now are going to turn on him like dogs watching they guy they should have taken winning games in green.



They will turn on him if he drafts a QB who ends up busting while running Eli out of town in the process. Even moreso if Eli has success with another team.

It’s a tough spot for DG but it’s easier to justify your scenario than mine. People will get fired in my scenario.

Perhaps, but you don't make decisions on opportunities such as this with a mindset of "what we can justify". You do what is right. This is a great opportunity here and the goal is to win superbowls, not just to justify your position or keep things respectable.



Both the GM and HC were fired the last time they were in their respective positions. They’re going to try to win now if they believe the framework is in place to win.

It doesn’t do them any good to draft a QB for the next GM/HC.

By that logic, no GM/HC would ever draft a QB unless they were firmly established with their current franchise. Except that it would be almost impossible for them to reach that established status without a long-term solution at QB.

Your argument makes zero sense.
RE: If you go back..  
Go Terps : 4/11/2018 6:41 pm : link
In comment 13909297 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
and look at the historical list of SB QB's, you come up with between 12-15 who would be considered non-franchise guys, and half of them benefitted from all-time strong defenses, whether it was Dilfer, Brad Johnson or Jim McMahon.

The overwhelming evidence points to needing a very strong, established QB, and in the absence of that, a unit that is absolutely world class to win a SB.

Using McCown as an example that would be a wise move not only ignores history, it seemingly ignores logic too.


But is anyone actually trying to build a team in a different way? Recently some teams have won Super Bowls or come very close with a guy who would not have been considered a franchise QB at the time:

2017: Philly with Foles
2015: Denver with forked Manning
2013 & 2014: Seattle should have won both with Wilson only in his 2nd and 3rd seasons
2012: Flacco in rookie contract; Kaepernick (who would have won if Jim Harbaugh weren't a pussy) in his first year as starter

I'm all for drafting quarterbacks with premium picks if they merit it, just like any other position. The question, to me, comes when it comes time to pay them the huge contract. IMO this happens too often because teams force the issue at the position: paying a guy franchise money doesn't mean he's going to win you anything, or that he will win for you once he is no longer a high value commodity on a rookie contract.

The league is full of albatross quarterback contracts, and IMO they fall into two categories:

1) The team is hoping the quarterback will grow into someone who can carry a team to a title.

2) The team's excellent roster took a hit because it is paying a quarterback that is incapable of carrying the greater load required with the huge contract.

Some examples of category 1 would be Garoppolo ($37M), Stafford ($26.5M), Carr ($25M), and Cousins ($24M).

The two primary examples I can think of in category 2 would be Flacco ($24.7M) and Wilson ($24M). Their teams' fortunes turned for the worse the moment they paid those franchise quarterbacks.
RE: Assuming we do draft a QB...  
djm : 4/11/2018 7:30 pm : link
In comment 13909089 bw in dc said:
Quote:
let's hope we draft the best QB this time. ;)


Not funny!
RE: RE: If you go back..  
Ten Ton Hammer : 4/11/2018 7:50 pm : link
In comment 13909956 Go Terps said:
Quote:

The two primary examples I can think of in category 2 would be Flacco ($24.7M) and Wilson ($24M). Their teams' fortunes turned for the worse the moment they paid those franchise quarterbacks.


I think these two are opposites. Joe Flacco's been thoroughly mediocre and that contract was a blatant "thanks for the title/too scared to move on" type of deal. Russell Wilson is certainly earning his money. The offense around him was botched by a lack of competence on the OL that rivals the Giants approach. And parts of their awesome defense got old and injured.
RE: Will  
WillVAB : 4/11/2018 7:50 pm : link
In comment 13909824 UberAlias said:
Quote:
If you think that than they hired the wrong men for the job and we have bigger troubles. These are successful confident men, not frightened children scared of failure.


I think they’re fine, but their job is to win games — and the heat is on to win games sooner rather than later. It doesn’t make sense to draft the QB for 2-3 years from now if they could be on the hot seat before he even hits his stride.

It all comes down to what they truly think of Eli. If they really think he can still play well and win, they go in another direction on draft day. If the Eli rhetoric is false or smoke, they’ll go qb.
The job description of the GM is not to just do anything to win now  
Ten Ton Hammer : 4/11/2018 8:00 pm : link
He said it in his press conference. It's his responsibility to take the long term health of the franchise into account. Coaches worry about winning now, that's their job. Winning is always the goal for the franchise. The GM worries about today and the years to come. If he doesn't, nobody else is going to. It can't just be about now. That's how you screw yourself into cap problems and get into situations where you spend $200 million in one offseason to fix mistakes that could have been avoided with some better planning.
RE: RE: Will  
Gatorade Dunk : 4/11/2018 8:06 pm : link
In comment 13910045 WillVAB said:
Quote:
In comment 13909824 UberAlias said:


Quote:


If you think that than they hired the wrong men for the job and we have bigger troubles. These are successful confident men, not frightened children scared of failure.



I think they’re fine, but their job is to win games — and the heat is on to win games sooner rather than later. It doesn’t make sense to draft the QB for 2-3 years from now if they could be on the hot seat before he even hits his stride.

It all comes down to what they truly think of Eli. If they really think he can still play well and win, they go in another direction on draft day. If the Eli rhetoric is false or smoke, they’ll go qb.

The Giants have finished below .500 in 4 of the past 5 years, and have lost 10 or more games in 3 of the past 4. Some of that was the result of chasing a contender status that they just weren't fundamentally built to actually achieve.

I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, but we should hope like hell that the heat is not on. We should hope that this regime gets enough latitude and patience to actually build a consistent winning program, and taking shortcuts to churn out a winner in 2018 rather than building the foundation for the next era of Giants football would be a mistake, IMO.

Would anyone be dissatisfied with a 7 or 8 win season this year that shows promise by being in every game, playing exciting football, and - potentially - having Eli's successor on the roster? That's an outcome I'd be pretty excited about.
Ten Ton  
Go Terps : 4/11/2018 8:08 pm : link
I'm not saying that as a knock on Wilson; it's just an observation that that team was constructed a certain way, and the team got away from that approach when they paid him. Since they paid him they've tried to be something else, and they haven't been as successful.

It's interesting to note their pass/run ratios, points scored, and W-L since Wilson has been in the league:

2012: 405/536, 412 points, 11-5
2013: 420/509, 417, 13-3 (SB Champs)
2014: 454/525, 394, 12-4 (should have been SB Champs, but game was taken out of Lynch's hands and put in Wilson's)
***Wilson is paid 4 yr, $87.6M extension after playing 3 seasons on a 4 yr, $3M contract***
2015: 489/500, 423 10-6
2016: 567/403, 354 10-5-1
2017: 555/409, 366 9-7

In the three years since Wilson got paid, the offense has been placed on his shoulders to a greater degree. The result has been fewer points scored and fewer games won.

Sure there are many moving parts besides just Wilson, but surely this shift (both on the field and in the salary cap structure) has played a role.
Falling in love with Jimmy Graham is what I think tipped the cart  
Ten Ton Hammer : 4/11/2018 8:20 pm : link
. That's what enabled the floor to drop out from the OL.
RE: RE: RE: Will  
WillVAB : 4/11/2018 9:03 pm : link
In comment 13910068 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 13910045 WillVAB said:


Quote:


In comment 13909824 UberAlias said:


Quote:


If you think that than they hired the wrong men for the job and we have bigger troubles. These are successful confident men, not frightened children scared of failure.



I think they’re fine, but their job is to win games — and the heat is on to win games sooner rather than later. It doesn’t make sense to draft the QB for 2-3 years from now if they could be on the hot seat before he even hits his stride.

It all comes down to what they truly think of Eli. If they really think he can still play well and win, they go in another direction on draft day. If the Eli rhetoric is false or smoke, they’ll go qb.


The Giants have finished below .500 in 4 of the past 5 years, and have lost 10 or more games in 3 of the past 4. Some of that was the result of chasing a contender status that they just weren't fundamentally built to actually achieve.

I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, but we should hope like hell that the heat is not on. We should hope that this regime gets enough latitude and patience to actually build a consistent winning program, and taking shortcuts to churn out a winner in 2018 rather than building the foundation for the next era of Giants football would be a mistake, IMO.

Would anyone be dissatisfied with a 7 or 8 win season this year that shows promise by being in every game, playing exciting football, and - potentially - having Eli's successor on the roster? That's an outcome I'd be pretty excited about.


Yea and during that time the Giants have changed GMs once and HCs twice. Our current GM was fired before coming here and Shurmur was fired from his last HC gig. They know they aren’t going to have a 5 year leash to turn this around. Hell TC was on the hot seat in ‘07 in year 4 coming off two consecutive playoff appearances.

I don’t think ownership and management think this team is devoid of talent like many fans here think. That being the case, if the drafts don’t turn around quickly along w the performance on the field both DG and Shurmur could find themselves on the hot seat quicker than people think.
Think we're playing with history a bit  
Ten Ton Hammer : 4/11/2018 9:40 pm : link
2006 was a lousy year. That team had expectations coming off an 11-5 season. They were 6-2 at the bye and limped to an 8-8 finish with an ugly blowout loss or two mixed in to the end of the regular season, and then a mediocre playoff game appearance before getting bounced out. Criticism was deserved.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Will  
Gatorade Dunk : 4/11/2018 11:44 pm : link
In comment 13910182 WillVAB said:
Quote:
In comment 13910068 Gatorade Dunk said:


Quote:


In comment 13910045 WillVAB said:


Quote:


In comment 13909824 UberAlias said:


Quote:


If you think that than they hired the wrong men for the job and we have bigger troubles. These are successful confident men, not frightened children scared of failure.



I think they’re fine, but their job is to win games — and the heat is on to win games sooner rather than later. It doesn’t make sense to draft the QB for 2-3 years from now if they could be on the hot seat before he even hits his stride.

It all comes down to what they truly think of Eli. If they really think he can still play well and win, they go in another direction on draft day. If the Eli rhetoric is false or smoke, they’ll go qb.


The Giants have finished below .500 in 4 of the past 5 years, and have lost 10 or more games in 3 of the past 4. Some of that was the result of chasing a contender status that they just weren't fundamentally built to actually achieve.

I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, but we should hope like hell that the heat is not on. We should hope that this regime gets enough latitude and patience to actually build a consistent winning program, and taking shortcuts to churn out a winner in 2018 rather than building the foundation for the next era of Giants football would be a mistake, IMO.

Would anyone be dissatisfied with a 7 or 8 win season this year that shows promise by being in every game, playing exciting football, and - potentially - having Eli's successor on the roster? That's an outcome I'd be pretty excited about.



Yea and during that time the Giants have changed GMs once and HCs twice. Our current GM was fired before coming here and Shurmur was fired from his last HC gig. They know they aren’t going to have a 5 year leash to turn this around. Hell TC was on the hot seat in ‘07 in year 4 coming off two consecutive playoff appearances.

I don’t think ownership and management think this team is devoid of talent like many fans here think. That being the case, if the drafts don’t turn around quickly along w the performance on the field both DG and Shurmur could find themselves on the hot seat quicker than people think.

That five-year leash takes them 40% to Eli's 50th birthday. They'll take a QB.
Pages: 1 2 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner