how terrified people are of taking a QB who busts. You need a QB, the perfect one ain't coming out this year or next or the year after. Howie Roseman and Doug Pedersen had steel balls a couple of years back and gave up a ton and it paid off nicely. Now here we are and all we have to give up is one pick and people are whimpering like children. If the guy busts, he busts. Nelson or Chubb could bust. Barkley could be just ordinary. Hell, a guy could be HOF like for half a season and then wreck his knee. This is most likely our best chance to get a good QB prospect at a reasonable price. Don't pass just because the guy ain't a slam dunk.
If I wanted to find a QB, I would listen to my Head Coach, at least Â
TTH... We're talking about the #2 pick with a team that has six picks and has blown most of their drafts in recent years. The margin for error here is razor thin... especially if we have any hope of catching the Eagles anytime soon. If you think we can afford to blow this pick, we'll agree to disagree.
Mattblue.. there are not sure things. But there is a dramatic difference between taking more of a chance with a mid-round 1st rounder and the #2 pick in the draft. If you're not convinced a QB is going to be a stud, you can't take him with the #2 pick. You just can't. (and I've been an advocate of drafting a QB for months)
In 4 years the only difference between the Eagles and the Giants will be that they have Wentz and we will have ? if we decide to take a RB who by that time will be close to being done. 10 RB in this draft can provide similar performance and stats as SB. But we must take him at 2 because he was on Sports Center bench pressing and broad jumping?
Then you don't roll the dice on a guy you are not completely sold on. A Giants QB not only has to have the skills to be a QB in the NFL, he has to have the demeanor to be a NYG QB. Big Ben is probably a better all around QB than Eli...but I think the problems he had in Pittsburgh would have been magnified many times over if he was the QB of the Giants.
The Giants have a chance to get a really good player(s) in this draft. This pick needs to be a good one.
What teams in the league keep thinking their qb has years of top level performance when they have missed the playoffs 6 of 7 seasons....Most teams start to look elswhere
TTH... We're talking about the #2 pick with a team that has six picks and has blown most of their drafts in recent years. The margin for error here is razor thin... especially if we have any hope of catching the Eagles anytime soon. If you think we can afford to blow this pick, we'll agree to disagree.
Mattblue.. there are not sure things. But there is a dramatic difference between taking more of a chance with a mid-round 1st rounder and the #2 pick in the draft. If you're not convinced a QB is going to be a stud, you can't take him with the #2 pick. You just can't. (and I've been an advocate of drafting a QB for months)
Eric, you know what I do for a living. I may have liberal political leanings but tend to be conservative at times because I come from an occupational culture where one of the missions is to mitigate or limit the potential downside of decision-making. When I look at the Giants I agree with you and see a team that is starved for talent in key areas and can not afford to get this pick wrong. Perhaps it is playing not to lose, but I'd prefer to go with Barkley, Chubb or Nelson rather than the QBs. To me the potential reward is not worth the risk with these QBs. Just my opinion. I know others differ.
If the Giants blow this pick, you had better get used to have 3-5 win teams.
While this pick is very important, we need to hit on some from rounds 3 and later. Thats where Reese totally failed us as many of those picks were out of the league in 1-2 years.
I agree with DEP 100%, people keep harping on blowing the top pick but we need to hit on the other picks as well. Those are vital to structure of future team
You don't win the lottery without buying a ticket. Â
Unblemished QB prospects are very rare. There has arguably been exactly one in the past 20 years: Andrew Luck. Before him? Peyton Manning, maybe, though he had plenty of detractors - including soem who touted Ryan Leaf as the better pick.
Obviously, the Giants need to feel strongly about a QB to spend the #2 pick on him. That doesn't mean they can't perceive any possible weaknesses in his game or his makeup.
Personally, I'd be happy with any of the top 5-7 consensus prospects - QB or otherwise - especially if the Giants can add extra picks via a trade.
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
RE: You don't win the lottery without buying a ticket. Â
Unblemished QB prospects are very rare. There has arguably been exactly one in the past 20 years: Andrew Luck. Before him? Peyton Manning, maybe, though he had plenty of detractors - including soem who touted Ryan Leaf as the better pick.
Obviously, the Giants need to feel strongly about a QB to spend the #2 pick on him. That doesn't mean they can't perceive any possible weaknesses in his game or his makeup.
Personally, I'd be happy with any of the top 5-7 consensus prospects - QB or otherwise - especially if the Giants can add extra picks via a trade.
hmmmmm. so the #2 overall pick is akin to a lottery ticket?
Anyway, the Giants have been mostly awful since mid-2012. Â
Other than Odell Beckham and the 2016 defense, they have been utterly atrocious for nearly six seasons. It's not as though the team has far to fall. At worst, they stay bad. And nothing is forever. Look at the Jaguars: they took Bortles at #3, three years after blowing the 10th pick on Blaine Gabbert. Now they're a team on the rise.
I hear you, and we will find out soon enough, but I guess I'm just Â
much more optimistic about this years QB crop. Every year, teams are desperate for QB's, but they don't just go in the top 10. I think these guys are ranked high for a reason.
and as Gettleman has said, you can get in QB hell by reaching and Â
I'm merely pointing out there is indeed a reason not to.
I've said from the start that the Giants should draft a QB with the #2 pick IF they feel there is a true FRANCHISE quarterback there.
I don't know if there is one. There may be. Darnold may be a franchise QB. Rosen may be. I don't know. There are red flags for sure.
At the same time, those poking holes in the argument to draft Nelson, or Chubb, or Barkley have valid points too.
I know I'm being vague, but what I'm trying to say is that the Giants HAVE TO GET THIS RIGHT.
Three years from now, if we are bitching on BBI about the 2018 NFL Draft, we're probably going to be searching for another head coach.
Eric, i understand completely what you are saying. Its sometimes tough to navigate between opportunity and risk sometimes its better to be more cautious and risk averse. Not to make this political, but I worked with the NSC under Obama the debates on our approach to the Arab spring and Syria were extremely charged with numerous people highlighting the historical opportunity Syria presented to "reformat" the entire Middle East. Things haven't worked out to well. Its just my opinion that the Giants can't afford to miss here.
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
I understand your argument, but you can't force a pick in the short-term for fear of what the future MAY or MAY NOT offer.
For one, if you draft "just a guy" with the #2 pick, you've already blown the pick. Because you can get "just a guy" later in the draft.
Secondly, we have no idea what will happen in college football in 2018. Guys come out of nowhere all of the time. We don't know who may become available in free agency or via trade.
We're not talking about the #10, #15, or #20 pick in the draft. We're talking about the SECOND player... the guy has to be special.
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
No-one can predict with any certainty, but at this point, next years crop looks pretty week, and that can obviously change.
But, I'm gonna guess that if we draft Barkley, and stick with Manning for another year or 2(maybe more), our record should be significantly better, and we don't have this opportunity for a long time.
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
This suggestion is how you ruin teams long term. You don't reach today because their may not be anybody available in 2 years.
Gettleman seems like an open book to me. I didn't take his remarks to mean he won't take a QB. But I do believe him when he says (repeatedly) that if you blow a 1st-round QB selection, it will set your team back five years. He's gone onto explain why as well.
RE: RE: You don't win the lottery without buying a ticket. Â
hmmmmm. so the #2 overall pick is akin to a lottery ticket?
In a sense, yes. Maybe roulette is a better analogy for seeking a franchise QB in the draft. Either way, you have to be in the game to win it. The #2 pick is a stack of chips, and taking a QB is like placing the whole pile on one number. The Giants could opt to play it safe on red or black (Barkey/Chubb/Nelson), with a better chance of success but also a much smaller payoff; or they could spread their bets by trading down for multiple picks.
My point is, the risk of disaster comes with the selection of any QB - any player, really, but especially a QB. Fans of most teams are accustomed to that risk. We aren't, because the only QB the Giants have drafted high in the past 25 years has been the face of the franchise for 14 seasons.
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
This suggestion is how you ruin teams long term. You don't reach today because their may not be anybody available in 2 years.
that taking one of these guys at #2 means you are either getting a Peyton Manning, or a Ryan Leaf. There is a huge spectrum in between that may be even more likely. I think the higher likelihood is that we could take any one of these guys at #2 and they turn into a Donovan McNabb, Alex Smith, or Carson Palmer. Not a stud, but not a guy who washes out of the league in 3 years.
When we talk about "missing" on this pick I think you have to frame it a little more. The guy may not turn into a true franchise QB and be considered a "bust" by where he was taken, but not leave the team a smoldering pile of ashes for five years either.
If you pick a QB, the goal is to pick a guy you see winning championships for your franchise. If you pick the next Mcnabb/Palmer/Smith and the team is 7-9 to 10-6 the next 10 years with no rings, is the organization really in a better place?
Obviously I am not suggesting that the Giants TRY and land a mediocre/average QB at #2. What I am saying is that people seem to shy away from it because you are either getting Peyton Manning, or Ryan Leaf. The higher likelihood is that you are getting a very good QB, with a downside risk of getting an average to below average QB.
Every player in this draft can disappoint. Every single one of them. Drafting anyone is a risk, but you have to look at those risks realistically, not best-worst case scenario only.
If you trust your scouts and your scouts like a guy as a franchise QB, you take him and don't look back.
Only IF the the coaches think the right one is there for us. With Shula and Shurmur being quarterback "experts'you would hope that they can choose and coach up the right one. I think Eli is reaching the end I don't know that games other posters are looking at that say he still has some good years left? Eli has a good game here or there but there is no consistency in his play and you can't overlook that we have only one winning season in the last 6. In that time Eli has thrown for 89 interceptions. It's time to groom a new quarterback,IF there is one that they like. Otherwise,I would trade down as we have only 6 picks with plenty of holes on the roster.
There were people who made the same claims about all of the top-5 QB busts the last 30 years.
There are no sure things. You evaluate and do the best you can. But I guarantee you there are teams in the NFL that don't have Darnold and Rosen rated as highly as others.
Also note that the teams that tend to draft near the top of the draft every year keep making mistakes on "sure thing" QBs.
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
This suggestion is how you ruin teams long term. You don't reach today because their may not be anybody available in 2 years.
Darnold and/or Rosen at 2 isn’t a reach.
depends on who you ask. THey are all loved by some, not by others. No slam dunks here.
I think if it weren't for the concussion worry, a consensus would have solidified around Rosen by now.
There were people who made the same claims about all of the top-5 QB busts the last 30 years.
There are no sure things. You evaluate and do the best you can. But I guarantee you there are teams in the NFL that don't have Darnold and Rosen rated as highly as others.
Also note that the teams that tend to draft near the top of the draft every year keep making mistakes on "sure thing" QBs.
Browns have been picking near the top cause they have passed on them too.
We all know this isnt a perfect science. But if you can nab a franchise QB at 1 or 2, you got to pull the trigger. A lot of QBs who are picked high fail because the team fails them as much as their talents do.
I look at it this way. Hypothetically, lets say Darnold is the Giants number 1 QB. If he is drafted, he will have the luxury of having OBJ, EE, SS to throw the ball to start his career. Thats a luxury many QBs do not have since their teams are so bad.
Thats a really nice core to start with and build on from there.
Gettleman seems like an open book to me. I didn't take his remarks to mean he won't take a QB. But I do believe him when he says (repeatedly) that if you blow a 1st-round QB selection, it will set your team back five years. He's gone onto explain why as well.
Griffin only set the Redskins back two years
Ponder two years
Titans three years
Let's be frank. The Giants are in a lot of trouble. They have botched a series of drafts. If they blow this pick, we're going to be bad for a long time.
At the same time, you can't blow a once in decade opportunity by overreacting to prior mistakes. You can always play it safe but the goal is to win superbowls. No one is going to advocate taking foolish risks, but at the same time playing it safe and operating out of fear of failure is not a very good formula for reaching the top of the mountain.
is the problem for those - like me - who have said you have to draft a franchise QB if there is a franchise QB there. Fact is, all of these guys may be too risky to take at #2:
"Gettleman’s analogy about Ben & Jerry’s, while one he’s used before, is particularly apt this year; opinions and preferences about the top QBs vary widely. As teams have gathered for their pre-draft meetings the past few weeks, it hasn’t been uncommon for the top decision-makers on a team—owner, GM, head coach, college scouting director—to each rank the top QBs in a different order. One AFC personnel executive described the top four QBs—Allen, Darnold, Mayfield and Rosen—as legitimate top 15 players in any class because they have the skills to be starters in the NFL. On the other hand, two evaluators on teams with an incumbent franchise QB said they were glad they did not need to take a QB this year, because each of the top signal-callers has a substantial question mark."
Eric, to be honest, this doesn't mean a whole lot to me. Those with an incumbent QB are likely looking at each prospect very differently than those that want their next QB. Their interest would be a lot higher if they needed on, I'm guessing their tune would change greatly.
But Darnold could also continue to be a turnover machine in the NFL.
Not saying he will. But that's why they pay front office types to evaluate these players the best that they can.
I know its an unpopular opinion here and in the social media world.... but I can live with turnovers as long as he makes big time, money throws like he did at USC. Listen, we lived through one of the most turnover-proned QBs in history. And dont think for a second we werent better for it. I rather have a guy turn it over playing aggressive than check it down to prevent one. If not for EliÅ› risk taking - we still may have only 2 lombardiÅ›. We may have more, but the thing is we will never know.
Yes, turnover suck. But it happens. In a perfect world, we will draft the next rodgers/Brady. But the world isnt perfect. IMO, take Darnold if he is there. Let Shurmur mentor him on how to fumble less and let him rip it. He ripped it as a 19/20 year old and was very, very, very good at it.
I am high on Rosen as well, but the concussions worry me as well.
are paid a lot of money to figure out which one is the best. It’s a rick but it’s your job. What Gettleman never likes to say is how many years does passing on a franchise QB set you back? It could be a lot more than 5. You don’t know when you can get into position again.
Maybe one. Until the next off-season.
Like the teams who passed on Aaron Rodgers in 2005? Did those teams only have to wait one year until the next offseason? The top QBs in the 2006 draft were Vince Young, Matt Leinart, and Jay Cutler. Ok, maybe they had to wait two, right? Nope. The top QBs in the 2007 draft were JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn. They would have had to wait until 2008, when Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco entered the draft.
And if they didn't get one of those, there would only be one available in 2009 (Matt Stafford), with Mark Sanchez and Josh Freeman as the other top QBs in that draft. If they didn't get one of those, they'd be looking at Sam Bradford and Tim Tebow in 2010.
It's not a certainty that there will always be a solution to a QB problem every year. Of the 22 teams that passed on Aaron Rodgers in 2005 (not counting San Francisco who took Alex Smith), eight of them wound up drafting a QB in the 1st round at some point in the next five seasons. Only two (Detroit and Baltimore) could reasonably claim to have been satisfied with their choice (Atlanta chose after Green Bay in 2005, so Ryan doesn't apply), and none of them wound up with a QB nearly as good as Rodgers.
Right or wrong, Accorsi WAS CONVINCED Eli Manning was going to be a great quarterback. He knew it in his bones.
The Giants have to have that kind of conviction with this pick.
He was ready to take Ben though if he couldn't get Eli. So it's hard to say that he only had a strong enough conviction about one guy. I actually wanted the Giants to draft Ben--though at the time I was more enamored with pure physical talent than the all around package, and Ben had more pure physical talent, like Josh Allen to Josh Rosen comparison. If the Giants only liked one guy though, then I'd be all for trading up with Cleveland unless they're sure Cleveland won't take him--aka Josh Rosen.
I'd have to agree that the Giants shouldn't draft a QB if they don't feel very strongly about 1 or 2 of them, but I also fear that they're likely being too risk averse by passing on one or two of the QBs who by almost all accounts are going to be top 5 picks.
I don't think the need for QB talent is greater this year than it was last year, and Patrick Mahomes and Deshaun Watson went 10 and 12. The top crop of last year's non-QB players weren't much better than this year's either, so they likely didn't fall for that reason.
I just can't buy into the idea that Mitch Trubisky is a better prospect than Rosen or Darnold. Nor Jared Goff. Carson Wentz is hard to say, especially with hindsight being 20-20. The only guy from last year who maybe exceeded them as a pre-draft prospect was Watson, and that's mainly because the things the guy could do with his feet could make him a dynamic playmaker. Also, if you're going to talk about a QB having the "IT" factor (although I don't really like that cliche), it's Deshaun Watson. But bottom line, I think a couple of these guys are that good. None are an Andrew Luck prospect, but he's a once every 20 year prospect. Peyton Manning wasn't even an Andrew Luck prospect.
Gettleman seems like an open book to me. I didn't take his remarks to mean he won't take a QB. But I do believe him when he says (repeatedly) that if you blow a 1st-round QB selection, it will set your team back five years. He's gone onto explain why as well.
Griffin only set the Redskins back two years
Ponder two years
Titans three years
Rookie cap is a new world
RG3 only set them back 2 years?? They drafted him in 2012 and their record was as follows 10-6, 3-13, 4-12, 9-7, 8-7-1 , 7-9 And they just spent a 3rd round draft pick plus 94 million dollars for Alex Smith
Look at the jets with Mark sanchez. 9 years later and they are still looking for a quarterback
The titans took locker in 2011 and were set back until 2015 when they drafted mariota and were still set back in developing mariota
What set the Jet's back was missing on every QB decision they made in the last decade. Name one player taken after Mark Sanchez in the '09 draft that would have turned the Jets into a SB team. '09 draft: Not one.
Redskins had one good season with Griffin, two bad, got Cousins. Got Smith.
Titans hit on Marriota after missing on Locker
Min went deep into the playoffs and has been way more respectable a couple years after Ponder than the Giants have been.
You play to win the game, You take your shot. If you miss you move on. Take another shot. You don't draft for to be 8-8. You draft to win a fukn SB.
You're ignoring the opportunity cost of the players they passed on. And in the Redskins case, do you remember all of the draft picks they gave up for Griffin?
Except for the fact that he had concerns about his knee prior to entering the draft. When you take a player high with injury concerns, you can't really be surprised when they get injured..
It would be similar to drafting Rosen and then being surprised if he gets another concussion.
doesn't mean they won;t be good this year or next. It means they may struggle longer term. The team in '16 went 11-5 with worse personnel than last year's team - now we have a legit LT.
Better health and better coaching get's them in the conversation for the division, regardless of who the number 2 pick is. Damn, they should have beaten the Eagles twice last year.
they were a terrible team last year
I don't get this thought process. You can always get worse. You can become a perennial terrible team if you keep missing draft picks.
Mattblue.. there are not sure things. But there is a dramatic difference between taking more of a chance with a mid-round 1st rounder and the #2 pick in the draft. If you're not convinced a QB is going to be a stud, you can't take him with the #2 pick. You just can't. (and I've been an advocate of drafting a QB for months)
In 4 years the only difference between the Eagles and the Giants will be that they have Wentz and we will have ? if we decide to take a RB who by that time will be close to being done. 10 RB in this draft can provide similar performance and stats as SB. But we must take him at 2 because he was on Sports Center bench pressing and broad jumping?
The Giants have a chance to get a really good player(s) in this draft. This pick needs to be a good one.
What teams in the league keep thinking their qb has years of top level performance when they have missed the playoffs 6 of 7 seasons....Most teams start to look elswhere
Mattblue.. there are not sure things. But there is a dramatic difference between taking more of a chance with a mid-round 1st rounder and the #2 pick in the draft. If you're not convinced a QB is going to be a stud, you can't take him with the #2 pick. You just can't. (and I've been an advocate of drafting a QB for months)
Eric, you know what I do for a living. I may have liberal political leanings but tend to be conservative at times because I come from an occupational culture where one of the missions is to mitigate or limit the potential downside of decision-making. When I look at the Giants I agree with you and see a team that is starved for talent in key areas and can not afford to get this pick wrong. Perhaps it is playing not to lose, but I'd prefer to go with Barkley, Chubb or Nelson rather than the QBs. To me the potential reward is not worth the risk with these QBs. Just my opinion. I know others differ.
Quote:
If the Giants blow this pick, you had better get used to have 3-5 win teams.
While this pick is very important, we need to hit on some from rounds 3 and later. Thats where Reese totally failed us as many of those picks were out of the league in 1-2 years.
I agree with DEP 100%, people keep harping on blowing the top pick but we need to hit on the other picks as well. Those are vital to structure of future team
Obviously, the Giants need to feel strongly about a QB to spend the #2 pick on him. That doesn't mean they can't perceive any possible weaknesses in his game or his makeup.
Personally, I'd be happy with any of the top 5-7 consensus prospects - QB or otherwise - especially if the Giants can add extra picks via a trade.
I'm merely pointing out there is indeed a reason not to.
I've said from the start that the Giants should draft a QB with the #2 pick IF they feel there is a true FRANCHISE quarterback there.
I don't know if there is one. There may be. Darnold may be a franchise QB. Rosen may be. I don't know. There are red flags for sure.
At the same time, those poking holes in the argument to draft Nelson, or Chubb, or Barkley have valid points too.
I know I'm being vague, but what I'm trying to say is that the Giants HAVE TO GET THIS RIGHT.
Three years from now, if we are bitching on BBI about the 2018 NFL Draft, we're probably going to be searching for another head coach.
Eric, does the fear of being in QB purgatory for a while scare you? We take Barkley, and when Eli is gone at some point, what are we left with?
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Obviously, the Giants need to feel strongly about a QB to spend the #2 pick on him. That doesn't mean they can't perceive any possible weaknesses in his game or his makeup.
Personally, I'd be happy with any of the top 5-7 consensus prospects - QB or otherwise - especially if the Giants can add extra picks via a trade.
hmmmmm. so the #2 overall pick is akin to a lottery ticket?
I'm merely pointing out there is indeed a reason not to.
I've said from the start that the Giants should draft a QB with the #2 pick IF they feel there is a true FRANCHISE quarterback there.
I don't know if there is one. There may be. Darnold may be a franchise QB. Rosen may be. I don't know. There are red flags for sure.
At the same time, those poking holes in the argument to draft Nelson, or Chubb, or Barkley have valid points too.
I know I'm being vague, but what I'm trying to say is that the Giants HAVE TO GET THIS RIGHT.
Three years from now, if we are bitching on BBI about the 2018 NFL Draft, we're probably going to be searching for another head coach.
Eric, i understand completely what you are saying. Its sometimes tough to navigate between opportunity and risk sometimes its better to be more cautious and risk averse. Not to make this political, but I worked with the NSC under Obama the debates on our approach to the Arab spring and Syria were extremely charged with numerous people highlighting the historical opportunity Syria presented to "reformat" the entire Middle East. Things haven't worked out to well. Its just my opinion that the Giants can't afford to miss here.
"Holy cow, can you believe the Giants passed on ______ in the 2018 Draft! Wow!"
Again, you can't afford to think that way, but it will make for heated fan discussions.
The Giants have to have that kind of conviction with this pick.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
"Holy cow, can you believe the Giants passed on ______ in the 2018 Draft! Wow!"
Again, you can't afford to think that way, but it will make for heated fan discussions.
Especially if Rosen goes to the jets and becomes the player I think he does.
For one, if you draft "just a guy" with the #2 pick, you've already blown the pick. Because you can get "just a guy" later in the draft.
Secondly, we have no idea what will happen in college football in 2018. Guys come out of nowhere all of the time. We don't know who may become available in free agency or via trade.
We're not talking about the #10, #15, or #20 pick in the draft. We're talking about the SECOND player... the guy has to be special.
Ironically, the Giants current GM has said multiple times that he doesn't agree with you.
Does he not agree or is this just Exhibit 253 of their decidedly intentional smoke screen? No one knows.
Quote:
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
No-one can predict with any certainty, but at this point, next years crop looks pretty week, and that can obviously change.
But, I'm gonna guess that if we draft Barkley, and stick with Manning for another year or 2(maybe more), our record should be significantly better, and we don't have this opportunity for a long time.
But if Rosen is out of the NFL in two years because of his fourth concussion...
Quote:
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
This suggestion is how you ruin teams long term. You don't reach today because their may not be anybody available in 2 years.
My point is, the risk of disaster comes with the selection of any QB - any player, really, but especially a QB. Fans of most teams are accustomed to that risk. We aren't, because the only QB the Giants have drafted high in the past 25 years has been the face of the franchise for 14 seasons.
Quote:
In comment 13930232 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
This suggestion is how you ruin teams long term. You don't reach today because their may not be anybody available in 2 years.
Darnold and/or Rosen at 2 isn’t a reach.
Quote:
that taking one of these guys at #2 means you are either getting a Peyton Manning, or a Ryan Leaf. There is a huge spectrum in between that may be even more likely. I think the higher likelihood is that we could take any one of these guys at #2 and they turn into a Donovan McNabb, Alex Smith, or Carson Palmer. Not a stud, but not a guy who washes out of the league in 3 years.
When we talk about "missing" on this pick I think you have to frame it a little more. The guy may not turn into a true franchise QB and be considered a "bust" by where he was taken, but not leave the team a smoldering pile of ashes for five years either.
If you pick a QB, the goal is to pick a guy you see winning championships for your franchise. If you pick the next Mcnabb/Palmer/Smith and the team is 7-9 to 10-6 the next 10 years with no rings, is the organization really in a better place?
Obviously I am not suggesting that the Giants TRY and land a mediocre/average QB at #2. What I am saying is that people seem to shy away from it because you are either getting Peyton Manning, or Ryan Leaf. The higher likelihood is that you are getting a very good QB, with a downside risk of getting an average to below average QB.
Every player in this draft can disappoint. Every single one of them. Drafting anyone is a risk, but you have to look at those risks realistically, not best-worst case scenario only.
If you trust your scouts and your scouts like a guy as a franchise QB, you take him and don't look back.
There are no sure things. You evaluate and do the best you can. But I guarantee you there are teams in the NFL that don't have Darnold and Rosen rated as highly as others.
Also note that the teams that tend to draft near the top of the draft every year keep making mistakes on "sure thing" QBs.
Quote:
In comment 13930266 The_Boss said:
Quote:
In comment 13930232 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
Does the fear of being in QB purgatory scare me? Yes. It would hope it would be a concern for every Giants fan. It would mean we would have one winning season (2016) from 2012 to 2022. It would mean Gettleman botched the most important football decision of his entire career (no exaggeration). It would mean we would be hiring yet another head coach.
I've made myself as clear as I can. I prefer a QB. But you can't just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. That kind of thinking got us into trouble with the drafting of players like Flowers and Apple.
Have you seen the list of draft eligible QB’s next year? Assuming Webb isn’t the guy, do we wait until 2020? Go the FA approach, which makes me sick, and pay a middling QB franchise $$? We win 4-6 games the next 2 years and the Beckham starts bitching about having no QB.
This suggestion is how you ruin teams long term. You don't reach today because their may not be anybody available in 2 years.
Darnold and/or Rosen at 2 isn’t a reach.
depends on who you ask. THey are all loved by some, not by others. No slam dunks here.
I think if it weren't for the concussion worry, a consensus would have solidified around Rosen by now.
There are no sure things. You evaluate and do the best you can. But I guarantee you there are teams in the NFL that don't have Darnold and Rosen rated as highly as others.
Also note that the teams that tend to draft near the top of the draft every year keep making mistakes on "sure thing" QBs.
Browns have been picking near the top cause they have passed on them too.
We all know this isnt a perfect science. But if you can nab a franchise QB at 1 or 2, you got to pull the trigger. A lot of QBs who are picked high fail because the team fails them as much as their talents do.
I look at it this way. Hypothetically, lets say Darnold is the Giants number 1 QB. If he is drafted, he will have the luxury of having OBJ, EE, SS to throw the ball to start his career. Thats a luxury many QBs do not have since their teams are so bad.
Thats a really nice core to start with and build on from there.
Griffin only set the Redskins back two years
Ponder two years
Titans three years
Rookie cap is a new world
But Darnold could also continue to be a turnover machine in the NFL.
Not saying he will. But that's why they pay front office types to evaluate these players the best that they can.
Quote:
in previous years.
But that's no defense of rolling the dice.
Let's be frank. The Giants are in a lot of trouble. They have botched a series of drafts. If they blow this pick, we're going to be bad for a long time.
"Gettleman’s analogy about Ben & Jerry’s, while one he’s used before, is particularly apt this year; opinions and preferences about the top QBs vary widely. As teams have gathered for their pre-draft meetings the past few weeks, it hasn’t been uncommon for the top decision-makers on a team—owner, GM, head coach, college scouting director—to each rank the top QBs in a different order. One AFC personnel executive described the top four QBs—Allen, Darnold, Mayfield and Rosen—as legitimate top 15 players in any class because they have the skills to be starters in the NFL. On the other hand, two evaluators on teams with an incumbent franchise QB said they were glad they did not need to take a QB this year, because each of the top signal-callers has a substantial question mark."
Eric, to be honest, this doesn't mean a whole lot to me. Those with an incumbent QB are likely looking at each prospect very differently than those that want their next QB. Their interest would be a lot higher if they needed on, I'm guessing their tune would change greatly.
But heaven help them if they botch this.
But Darnold could also continue to be a turnover machine in the NFL.
Not saying he will. But that's why they pay front office types to evaluate these players the best that they can.
I know its an unpopular opinion here and in the social media world.... but I can live with turnovers as long as he makes big time, money throws like he did at USC. Listen, we lived through one of the most turnover-proned QBs in history. And dont think for a second we werent better for it. I rather have a guy turn it over playing aggressive than check it down to prevent one. If not for EliÅ› risk taking - we still may have only 2 lombardiÅ›. We may have more, but the thing is we will never know.
Yes, turnover suck. But it happens. In a perfect world, we will draft the next rodgers/Brady. But the world isnt perfect. IMO, take Darnold if he is there. Let Shurmur mentor him on how to fumble less and let him rip it. He ripped it as a 19/20 year old and was very, very, very good at it.
I am high on Rosen as well, but the concussions worry me as well.
Quote:
are paid a lot of money to figure out which one is the best. It’s a rick but it’s your job. What Gettleman never likes to say is how many years does passing on a franchise QB set you back? It could be a lot more than 5. You don’t know when you can get into position again.
Maybe one. Until the next off-season.
Like the teams who passed on Aaron Rodgers in 2005? Did those teams only have to wait one year until the next offseason? The top QBs in the 2006 draft were Vince Young, Matt Leinart, and Jay Cutler. Ok, maybe they had to wait two, right? Nope. The top QBs in the 2007 draft were JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn. They would have had to wait until 2008, when Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco entered the draft.
And if they didn't get one of those, there would only be one available in 2009 (Matt Stafford), with Mark Sanchez and Josh Freeman as the other top QBs in that draft. If they didn't get one of those, they'd be looking at Sam Bradford and Tim Tebow in 2010.
It's not a certainty that there will always be a solution to a QB problem every year. Of the 22 teams that passed on Aaron Rodgers in 2005 (not counting San Francisco who took Alex Smith), eight of them wound up drafting a QB in the 1st round at some point in the next five seasons. Only two (Detroit and Baltimore) could reasonably claim to have been satisfied with their choice (Atlanta chose after Green Bay in 2005, so Ryan doesn't apply), and none of them wound up with a QB nearly as good as Rodgers.
The Giants have to have that kind of conviction with this pick.
He was ready to take Ben though if he couldn't get Eli. So it's hard to say that he only had a strong enough conviction about one guy. I actually wanted the Giants to draft Ben--though at the time I was more enamored with pure physical talent than the all around package, and Ben had more pure physical talent, like Josh Allen to Josh Rosen comparison. If the Giants only liked one guy though, then I'd be all for trading up with Cleveland unless they're sure Cleveland won't take him--aka Josh Rosen.
I'd have to agree that the Giants shouldn't draft a QB if they don't feel very strongly about 1 or 2 of them, but I also fear that they're likely being too risk averse by passing on one or two of the QBs who by almost all accounts are going to be top 5 picks.
I don't think the need for QB talent is greater this year than it was last year, and Patrick Mahomes and Deshaun Watson went 10 and 12. The top crop of last year's non-QB players weren't much better than this year's either, so they likely didn't fall for that reason.
I just can't buy into the idea that Mitch Trubisky is a better prospect than Rosen or Darnold. Nor Jared Goff. Carson Wentz is hard to say, especially with hindsight being 20-20. The only guy from last year who maybe exceeded them as a pre-draft prospect was Watson, and that's mainly because the things the guy could do with his feet could make him a dynamic playmaker. Also, if you're going to talk about a QB having the "IT" factor (although I don't really like that cliche), it's Deshaun Watson. But bottom line, I think a couple of these guys are that good. None are an Andrew Luck prospect, but he's a once every 20 year prospect. Peyton Manning wasn't even an Andrew Luck prospect.
Quote:
Gettleman seems like an open book to me. I didn't take his remarks to mean he won't take a QB. But I do believe him when he says (repeatedly) that if you blow a 1st-round QB selection, it will set your team back five years. He's gone onto explain why as well.
Griffin only set the Redskins back two years
Ponder two years
Titans three years
Rookie cap is a new world
RG3 only set them back 2 years?? They drafted him in 2012 and their record was as follows 10-6, 3-13, 4-12, 9-7, 8-7-1 , 7-9 And they just spent a 3rd round draft pick plus 94 million dollars for Alex Smith
Look at the jets with Mark sanchez. 9 years later and they are still looking for a quarterback
The titans took locker in 2011 and were set back until 2015 when they drafted mariota and were still set back in developing mariota
Redskins had one good season with Griffin, two bad, got Cousins. Got Smith.
Titans hit on Marriota after missing on Locker
Min went deep into the playoffs and has been way more respectable a couple years after Ponder than the Giants have been.
You play to win the game, You take your shot. If you miss you move on. Take another shot. You don't draft for to be 8-8. You draft to win a fukn SB.
There are reasons why bad teams are bad.
Sign up in a sec. Take a shot.
Except for the fact that he had concerns about his knee prior to entering the draft. When you take a player high with injury concerns, you can't really be surprised when they get injured..
It would be similar to drafting Rosen and then being surprised if he gets another concussion.
Better health and better coaching get's them in the conversation for the division, regardless of who the number 2 pick is. Damn, they should have beaten the Eagles twice last year.