Just look at his reaction when someone in the media asks if they are releasing Brandon Marshall, and he is caught off guard. It is the one moment in the press conference where he pauses and then admits it.
During this whole process, Gettleman has allowed the media to hear what he wants them to hear. What does he have to gain by screaming Barkley's praises unless it is as a smokescreen? Could the lone smokescreen be to get Cleveland to take Barkley at one? Sure. But is it also possible that he is touting Barkley so highly for another reason - one that Colin suggested.
I don't know what will happen. I don't think anyone here really does. But I can say this with certainty: if we pick a RB at 2, it will be a franchise altering mistake.
It is absolutely the right move.
Either way I cannot wait until Thursday!
Either way I cannot wait until Thursday!
100% agree...
you take the best player avail and barkley would be it. all the QBs are solid but all have blemishes, barkley is clean as it gets. id take him and not look back. if we ended up winning a super bowl this year or next, nobody would bitch then.
if its me, im taking barkley and going Int OL round 2...alot of talent will be on the board at 34
See, this is the stuff I'm talking about. How can you speak with such certainty. I don't want Barkley with the 2 pick, but at least I'm not sitting here going there is no way it's happening. How do you know the Giants are drafting Barkley with the 2 pick, for sure? I mean, I just want some insight into your line of thinking.
Quote:
If Saquan is there he is taking him. And it’s the right move.
It is absolutely the right move.
How is taking a running back at 2 ever the right move. You can get 85 or 90% of what you all claim is barkleys production in round 2 or later or even off the street in an undrafred free agent. Also, consider this, if Barkley is drafted at 2, he immediately becomes a top 5 paid back in the league without ever touching the field. Why do you think a rookie running back would be atop 5 paid running back in the nfl? Because allocating large amounts of resources to that position is not prudent in the current NFL landscape. There is no need for a top running back in this league, it is a complete luxury and not a necessity.
Gettleman has set the standard for what he is looking for. He wants an impact player. It does not matter if it's a quarterback, a running back, an offensive lineman or whatever. Impact blue chip player.
If Gettleman does not believe in a quarterback that is available, then he won't draft him. If he believes a player is that good and dynamic, he will take them.
Taking a running back is not a franchise altering mistake. Taking a quarterback for the sake of taking one is.
I don't know what the giants will do. They have done an incredible job of keeping all of the players part of the conversation. You can disect his words and interpret it to mean anything you want, but in the end he will make the best decision for the team going forward.
We have some really smart people who know a thing about evaluating talent, so let's leave what they think isn't franchise altering mistakes to them.
The QB's are all talented but are all different and all have things they need to work on. There is no Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck or Carson Wentz. No clear top QB. So, all this clamoring to take a QB because of where you are picking sounds good but you wouldn't be taking the best player available.
I would be very happy with Barkley.
Exactly, I’m sure the Cowboys are thinking that they killed their franchise drafting Elliott right now.
I want Barkley and I can tell you 20 things that point to him being the pick.
Just as anyone can do the same with 3 other prospects.
70 hrs to go.
..
The QB's are all talented but are all different and all have things they need to work on. There is no Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck or Carson Wentz. No clear top QB. So, all this clamoring to take a QB because of where you are picking sounds good but you wouldn't be taking the best player available.
I would be very happy with Barkley.
Good post, sums up the situation very succinctly.
Barkley is the guy, but at running back. It's the opposite from the QBs. They're the QBs, but who's the guy?
The QB's are all talented but are all different and all have things they need to work on. There is no Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck or Carson Wentz. No clear top QB. So, all this clamoring to take a QB because of where you are picking sounds good but you wouldn't be taking the best player available.
I would be very happy with Barkley.
Funny, no one thought Wentz was Wentz when he came out. He was considered to have warts and potentially a reach at 2. But I guess revisionist history is easy when it works out.
There's plenty of consensus. The three best QBs are Rosen, Darnold, and Mayfield, and they're all predicted to go somewhere in the top 5. The Jets and bills have been climbing over each other to get into the top 5.
Quote:
Both on offense and both start from day one and make your team instantly better: Barkley and Nelson. If you take Barkley at 2 he will be worth the pick. Trade down and get Nelson in the 4-6 range.
The QB's are all talented but are all different and all have things they need to work on. There is no Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck or Carson Wentz. No clear top QB. So, all this clamoring to take a QB because of where you are picking sounds good but you wouldn't be taking the best player available.
I would be very happy with Barkley.
Funny, no one thought Wentz was Wentz when he came out. He was considered to have warts and potentially a reach at 2. But I guess revisionist history is easy when it works out.
We will see how long Wentz lasts. He seems to be a little bit dumb in terms of avoiding contact. What QB in today’s NFL runs into a LB instead of sliding on a broken play?
I’ll take Mayfield over the other guys, at least he has a winning track record.
Funny, no one thought Wentz was Wentz when he came out. He was considered to have warts and potentially a reach at 2. But I guess revisionist history is easy when it works out.
Great point. People like to act like he was a sure thing but he was coming out of North Dakota State and there were quite a few fans that mocked the Eagles for trading up.
Quote:
Its the QBs. There is no consensus with them. Not with any experts, front offices or any fan base. There is no conviction, almost no talk about any of the teams picking towards the top & in need of a QB trying to move to #1 to get "the guy". Giants pick 2nd and nobody has mentioned them trying to move to #1 for "the guy".
There's plenty of consensus. The three best QBs are Rosen, Darnold, and Mayfield, and they're all predicted to go somewhere in the top 5. The Jets and bills have been climbing over each other to get into the top 5.
Who is the best?
Why not climb to #1 for them?
Exactly 🤔🤔
Quote:
In comment 13927350 Motley Two said:
Quote:
Its the QBs. There is no consensus with them. Not with any experts, front offices or any fan base. There is no conviction, almost no talk about any of the teams picking towards the top & in need of a QB trying to move to #1 to get "the guy". Giants pick 2nd and nobody has mentioned them trying to move to #1 for "the guy".
There's plenty of consensus. The three best QBs are Rosen, Darnold, and Mayfield, and they're all predicted to go somewhere in the top 5. The Jets and bills have been climbing over each other to get into the top 5.
Who is the best?
Why not climb to #1 for them?
Well, the draft hasn't happened yet. Last year the Bears made a huge trade to do the same thing you're waiting to see: identify a guy at QB and go trade up for him.
It's a lot of chatter to fill airtime while nothing is going on. Draft season is lying season.
Anyone convinced that zeke Elliot will be gone in 2 more years? Can I get that guaranteed? I guess Gurley will be done after 2018 am I right? David Johnson won’t come back from this injury? Promise? What about Jonathan Stewart? He’s 30. Or frank gore who’s older than 30 and still kicking. Or legarious Blount? Or leveon bell? Is this his last season? Doubt it. What about recently retired Matt forte who had a terrific 10 year career? Shall I go on? How about Adrian Peterson? Did he play long enough to dispel the myth? Is that enough names? Carlos Hyde just signed a second contract. I guess he’s done too.
Even if five years is all we get it’s likely to be a great ride. And it doesn’t have to be only five.
JT: When I say it cripples a franchise, I am stating my belief. What I take objection to is people stating with certainty that the pick will not be a QB. I guess we will see if your sources are wrong.
By the way, how many playoff games have the Cowboys won since they drafted Zeke? I'll give you a hint, it's less than 1.
My problem with Barkley isn't so much with taking a RB at #2 in general, it's taking a #2 back in the Giants current situation and also my concerns about Barkley in general.
If the Giants had their future QB in place or if Eli were a few years younger, taking a top running back, someone like Todd Gurley, made perfect sense to me. I've always felt, going back to the '90s Cowboys days, that to get the most out of a good RB, you should have a WR, QB and OL in place already and in or close their primes. RBs reach their primes almost immediately and, for the most part, their careers are far shorter. So in order to maximize the RB's value vis-a-vis having a winning team, it is best to have all the other pieces in place first. That is, a RB will almost never be the first piece to the puzzle of a great team -- at least not in today's NFL -- but he often can be one of the last missing pieces. Gurley was drafted when the Rams traded Sam Bradford for Nick Foles, who they thought would be their heir apparent. The Cowboys still had Tony Romo who they thought had a good number of years left until he got injured. And the Jags have Blake Bortles who they hadn't given up on yet, as well as the making of a dominant defense. It was nearly the perfect time to capitalize on drafting a RB. The Giants are far from that perfect situation.
As for Barkley, I just get scared by a big back who plays more like a scat back. It often doesn't translate to the next level as well as it did in college. I'd rather see a grind it out back with some wiggle and a top gear--unless the RB is actually Barry Sanders or Marshall Faulk--and I have a hard time seeing that in Barkley.
Quote:
You say with certainty taking Barkley is a mistake. Fine. I disagree but your opinion. The issue I have w you is someone responds its the right move and you get mad saying how can he say that. Its his opinion. I was told today what I've heard all along. Barkly/Chubb. Only way we trade down is top 6. Is what I heard right? Well see.
JT: When I say it cripples a franchise, I am stating my belief. What I take objection to is people stating with certainty that the pick will not be a QB. I guess we will see if your sources are wrong.
By the way, how many playoff games have the Cowboys won since they drafted Zeke? I'll give you a hint, it's less than 1.
And what is the cowboys record with and without Elliott? How many playoff games did the jaguars win with fournette?
Quote:
In comment 13927369 jtgiants said:
Quote:
You say with certainty taking Barkley is a mistake. Fine. I disagree but your opinion. The issue I have w you is someone responds its the right move and you get mad saying how can he say that. Its his opinion. I was told today what I've heard all along. Barkly/Chubb. Only way we trade down is top 6. Is what I heard right? Well see.
JT: When I say it cripples a franchise, I am stating my belief. What I take objection to is people stating with certainty that the pick will not be a QB. I guess we will see if your sources are wrong.
By the way, how many playoff games have the Cowboys won since they drafted Zeke? I'll give you a hint, it's less than 1.
And what is the cowboys record with and without Elliott? How many playoff games did the jaguars win with fournette?
Alfred Morris killed it when Zeke was out. Zeke's time out coincided with Tyron Smith missing time. His being out was far more important than Zeke missing time.
it is about science. it is about math.
40 years ago there was a revolution in our understanding of baseball. Bill James put many of our sacred cows on trial: the importance of a walk, the myth of clutch hitting etc. People who understood this revolution knew from this point on that high batting average hitters with low obp were not good leadoff hitters even if they were a little bit speedy. The naysayers stuck to their old ideas but eventually were proved wrong. Now we all look at obp when we decide who is a good leadoff hitter.
This is a similar situation. The math, the science, the numbers, the analytics (which is now invading football) tells us that drafting a RB (even one as good as Barkley) is a terrible allocation of draft capital.
Why?
QBs have longer and more productive careers. Even average QBs are more valuable than elite RBs. RBs are often replaceable by a mediocre committee. RBs suffer injuries at higher rates. The game is trending toward QBs more and more with precision schemes and offenses. etc etc etc.
The people who are excited by Barkley don't want to hear it. They want to stick to the notion that a great running back really matters most. They don't want to hear that Michel, Guice, Jones, Penney, etc etc are highly likely to be 90% of Barkley or even better than Barkley. Whereas there is a very low probability that any QB you select late will be a tenth as good as an elite selection or a quarter as good as an average selection.
Barkley may seem like a safe pick but it is a cowardly pick and not the kind of pick that distinguishes great franchises. The upside is limited. If we hit on Rosen (or Mayfield), however, we can be the Patriots. We need bold leadership that understands the analytics and makes dynamic proactive moves that can catapult this franchise.
Another thing we know, is that there is an analytics guy in DG's ear, telling him this, if he doesn't already know it. We think DG is smart and has the best info and good judgement. We think he is bold enough to know that he has to figure out which of these qbs can be a franchise leader, after Darnold is off the board. And we are afraid that if DG picks the RB in this situation rather than making the affirmative move to win the jackpot that we have found an old school mind. The kind of mind that would bat the .300 hitter with the .310 obp in the leadoff spot just because he is speedy.
Gettleman has set the standard for what he is looking for. He wants an impact player. It does not matter if it's a quarterback, a running back, an offensive lineman or whatever. Impact blue chip player.
If Gettleman does not believe in a quarterback that is available, then he won't draft him. If he believes a player is that good and dynamic, he will take them.
Taking a running back is not a franchise altering mistake. Taking a quarterback for the sake of taking one is.
I don't know what the giants will do. They have done an incredible job of keeping all of the players part of the conversation. You can disect his words and interpret it to mean anything you want, but in the end he will make the best decision for the team going forward.
We have some really smart people who know a thing about evaluating talent, so let's leave what they think isn't franchise altering mistakes to them.
+1
it is about science. it is about math.
40 years ago there was a revolution in our understanding of baseball. Bill James put many of our sacred cows on trial: the importance of a walk, the myth of clutch hitting etc. People who understood this revolution knew from this point on that high batting average hitters with low obp were not good leadoff hitters even if they were a little bit speedy. The naysayers stuck to their old ideas but eventually were proved wrong. Now we all look at obp when we decide who is a good leadoff hitter.
This is a similar situation. The math, the science, the numbers, the analytics (which is now invading football) tells us that drafting a RB (even one as good as Barkley) is a terrible allocation of draft capital.
Why?
QBs have longer and more productive careers. Even average QBs are more valuable than elite RBs. RBs are often replaceable by a mediocre committee. RBs suffer injuries at higher rates. The game is trending toward QBs more and more with precision schemes and offenses. etc etc etc.
The people who are excited by Barkley don't want to hear it. They want to stick to the notion that a great running back really matters most. They don't want to hear that Michel, Guice, Jones, Penney, etc etc are highly likely to be 90% of Barkley or even better than Barkley. Whereas there is a very low probability that any QB you select late will be a tenth as good as an elite selection or a quarter as good as an average selection.
Barkley may seem like a safe pick but it is a cowardly pick and not the kind of pick that distinguishes great franchises. The upside is limited. If we hit on Rosen (or Mayfield), however, we can be the Patriots. We need bold leadership that understands the analytics and makes dynamic proactive moves that can catapult this franchise.
Another thing we know, is that there is an analytics guy in DG's ear, telling him this, if he doesn't already know it. We think DG is smart and has the best info and good judgement. We think he is bold enough to know that he has to figure out which of these qbs can be a franchise leader, after Darnold is off the board. And we are afraid that if DG picks the RB in this situation rather than making the affirmative move to win the jackpot that we have found an old school mind. The kind of mind that would bat the .300 hitter with the .310 obp in the leadoff spot just because he is speedy.
Perfectly said.
1. Of the Qbs that remain at 2, do the Giants have a franchise grade on any?
2. How firm are their convictions on Webb being the heir apparent?
3. With this draft potentially being extremely even historically deep at the QB position, how high a grade do they have on others that can be had after #2? (Like Lauletta)
4. Do they behind closed doors truly feel Eli has a mimumum of 2-3 years left? (as theyve been saying publicly)
5. How close do they feel they are to being competitive again? (It sounds like they want to take advantage of Eli's remaining window of championship level football as Ernie Accorsi put it)
Depending on the answer to the above questions a potential instant impact transformational player like Barkley may not be a bad play at all.
Obviolusy if Dg goes away from the QB I'm going to hope he is right. ANd I do think Barkley can be an exciting "get."
But I'm highly skeptical and believe it to be the wrong decision. If he does make the move with Barkley - I expect it will be the wrong move. So for those who say Barkley is the right or safe choice, please don't try to change the narrative several years later if for the many of that knew he should have taken the QB want him fired for blundering the pick IF the team is unsuccessful. I expect it to be but hopeful it won't.
The right move here is either Rosen or Mayfield. We'll just have to accept that the scouts know what they're doing if they pass on these 2 players. I hope they know. Because I don't want to have to be part of the mob ripping into DG a few years from now.
Obviolusy if Dg goes away from the QB I'm going to hope he is right. ANd I do think Barkley can be an exciting "get."
But I'm highly skeptical and believe it to be the wrong decision. If he does make the move with Barkley - I expect it will be the wrong move. So for those who say Barkley is the right or safe choice, please don't try to change the narrative several years later if for the many of that knew he should have taken the QB want him fired for blundering the pick IF the team is unsuccessful. I expect it to be but hopeful it won't.
The right move here is either Rosen or Mayfield. We'll just have to accept that the scouts know what they're doing if they pass on these 2 players. I hope they know. Because I don't want to have to be part of the mob ripping into DG a few years from now.
What if we win a SuperBowl with Eli in the next 2-3 years with Barkley playing a big role but then find out Rosen was the real deal for 10 years. Still worth it? For a Supe I say yes.
Quote:
IS that many fans don't understand or dont' want to understand positional value. Thus they make up "red flags" yet every Qb in the history of the game has had them.
Obviolusy if Dg goes away from the QB I'm going to hope he is right. ANd I do think Barkley can be an exciting "get."
But I'm highly skeptical and believe it to be the wrong decision. If he does make the move with Barkley - I expect it will be the wrong move. So for those who say Barkley is the right or safe choice, please don't try to change the narrative several years later if for the many of that knew he should have taken the QB want him fired for blundering the pick IF the team is unsuccessful. I expect it to be but hopeful it won't.
The right move here is either Rosen or Mayfield. We'll just have to accept that the scouts know what they're doing if they pass on these 2 players. I hope they know. Because I don't want to have to be part of the mob ripping into DG a few years from now.
What if we win a SuperBowl with Eli in the next 2-3 years with Barkley playing a big role but then find out Rosen was the real deal for 10 years. Still worth it? For a Supe I say yes.
maybe, but the problem with your hypothetical is that the giants are terrible and Eli has been awful for two years. Now is the time to rebuild. Adding a RB doesn't make this team a Super Bowl winner it just prolongs the inevitable and fumbles an opportunity to begin the hard work. I don't see how anybody can think adding Barkley to this team will get us a championship in three years.
1. Of the Qbs that remain at 2, do the Giants have a franchise grade on any?
2. How firm are their convictions on Webb being the heir apparent?
3. With this draft potentially being extremely even historically deep at the QB position, how high a grade do they have on others that can be had after #2? (Like Lauletta)
4. Do they behind closed doors truly feel Eli has a mimumum of 2-3 years left? (as theyve been saying publicly)
5. How close do they feel they are to being competitive again? (It sounds like they want to take advantage of Eli's remaining window of championship level football as Ernie Accorsi put it)
Depending on the answer to the above questions a potential instant impact transformational player like Barkley may not be a bad play at all.
Here are my answers:
1. Many teams do value all 4 qbs as they are falling over themselves to get one, including the Jets, Bills, Dolphins, Cards and Patriots. The Patriots, a pretty smart organization, wants Josh Rosen. If the Giants can't find a possible starting qb among the remaining 3 maybe the problem is the Giants, not the qbs.
2. Webb couldn't sniff the practice field on a bumbling 3-13 team. Webb is not an NFL starting QB. Let's stop pretending he is anything more.
3. Why do we want to get a deeply flawed qb when we can get a premium prospect? Kyle Lauletta for instance does not have an NFL arm.Rosen and MAyfield are ten times the prospect that Lauletta is.
4. No, I think they are lying and being nice. I think behind closed doors they know that Eli is close to done and they need to prepare for a succession as the Patriots have done with Tom Brady.
5. If they think they can be competitive with this team they are seriously delusional and we have really big problems.