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."
We've seen far riskier players be taken at the same point Â
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.
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.
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.
Ernie Accorsi blew many first round picks, and they weren't bad for a long time.
There's always risk in picking players. Everyone wants the comfort of a guarantee when there never is one.
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.
He's also getting paid a lot of money to determine IF there is a "franchise" QB available and, based on the wildly divergent opinions on this class, it certainly isn't unreasonable to suggest he may not think there is one.
skills that can make them successful in the NFL. Yes, they have flaws - but what player doesnt? It doesnt matter what position you play, you are not going to be perfect.
If Shurmur is the QB guru that everyone claims to be, he can fix Darnolds turnovers, AllenÅ› accuracy, Mayfields fixation on a receiver, etc.
Paralysis by analysis. All 4 of these QBs would have been the number 1 QB last year and next year as well. They are all just out in the same year which is causing them to be under the microsope even more.
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.
Wrong. The job is to find the best player at # 2, not the best QB and take him there regardless of whether or not he is worthy of that pick. Reaching leads to disaster.
I want the Giants to pick whoever John and Chris Mara don't want Â
the GM to pick. Kidding sort of. I don't buy the whole thing about if they miss on this pick they'll be bad for 5 years. Why? It's a year to year league and if they're 4-12 in 2018 they'll have a top 5-7 pick next year.
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."
Every quarterback has warts coming out of college. I think every year, as the draft gets closer, all people hear about are the negatives, but who's to say any of these guys can't be HOF quarterbacks? Not many people were praising Carson Wentz before the draft, and there were plenty of people knocking Andrew Luck down a bunch over his lack of arm strength.
I guess what I'm saying is, if the QB's go in the top 5, it's usually for a reason.
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)
That's the job of an nfl gm. Working with his coaches, Â
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.
I've seen a number of well written comparisons between this class and the QB class of 1999. There were 5 QB's taken in the 1st, 1 in the 2nd, and 1 in the 3rd. Really only 1 of the QB's panned out to be worth the pick, however all were "highly rated franchise guys". It was a case of teams over reaching just because these guys were QB's.
#1 Tim Couch - bust (unanimous top QB)
#2 McNabb - worth it
#3 Akili Smith - bust
#11 Culpepper - ok and got hurt
#12 Cade McCown - career backup
skills that can make them successful in the NFL. Yes, they have flaws - but what player doesnt? It doesnt matter what position you play, you are not going to be perfect.
If Shurmur is the QB guru that everyone claims to be, he can fix Darnolds turnovers, AllenÅ› accuracy, Mayfields fixation on a receiver, etc.
Paralysis by analysis. All 4 of these QBs would have been the number 1 QB last year and next year as well. They are all just out in the same year which is causing them to be under the microsope even more.
Very well said. This amount of time leads to over analyzing.
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.
Wrong. The job is to find the best player at # 2, not the best QB and take him there regardless of whether or not he is worthy of that pick. Reaching leads to disaster.
I agree. I am firmly entrenched in the view that you should always try to get the best players on your team. Invariably, the teams that have the most talent across the board win the most games, whereas if you strive for mediocrity, you generally don't end up being very successful in what counts.
To pick a "hopeful" so called franchise QB. Many teams have what could be called second teir QBs that can manage a game good enough to go deep into the playoffs or even a SB that are backups now or lower than first round picks. I remember one called hostetler, or Brady to name two. But if you miss on that so called franchise QB of which there are many examples...you are indeed screwed for many years. The Giants aren't taking a QB as their first pick.
"All 4 of these QBs would have been the number 1 QB last year and next year as well."
I'm not sure that is true.
Trubinsky came in with a huge amount of question marks last year. One year starter. Reading defenses. Could he throw within a pocket, etc. It didnt hesitate the Bears in trading up one spot to secure him. Deshaun Waton looked great, but had injury issues prior to being drafted and was deemed to have a weak arm. Mahommes came from a spread offense and his reading of defenses was very scrutinized.
Next years class as of right now, is not very good at all. With all of the experts needing to be right, you are going to see over analyzation to its highest. These QBs are very good. It doesnt mean they are going to be amazing, but if put in the right position, the ycan be very good - and thats all you can ask.
The Giants traded back a couple of time for a ton of picks. Cleveland gave them 2+ to move back to 2 and Buffalo down to 4.... and they end up drafting Lamar Jackson....as Shurmur is convinced he could turn him into a QB.
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.
I've seen a number of well written comparisons between this class and the QB class of 1999. There were 5 QB's taken in the 1st, 1 in the 2nd, and 1 in the 3rd. Really only 1 of the QB's panned out to be worth the pick, however all were "highly rated franchise guys". It was a case of teams over reaching just because these guys were QB's.
#1 Tim Couch - bust (unanimous top QB)
#2 McNabb - worth it
#3 Akili Smith - bust
#11 Culpepper - ok and got hurt
#12 Cade McCown - career backup
and who can forget Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, Ryan Tannehill, Johnny Manziel, EJ Manuel, Brandon Weedon, Blaine Gabbert, Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman,. All guys who had no business going even in the 1st round, some taken in the top 10, because "you have to get a QB". Reaching is an organizational death sentence.
I heard a lot of people say Ereck Flowers had a lot of physical ability and that a good coaching staff could turn him into a really good player. Flowers is now on his third head coach.
The Giants traded back a couple of time for a ton of picks. Cleveland gave them 2+ to move back to 2 and Buffalo down to 4.... and they end up drafting Lamar Jackson....as Shurmur is convinced he could turn him into a QB.
I'd love to be able to trade down and still get a guy who the coaching staff loves.
I heard a lot of people say Ereck Flowers had a lot of physical ability and that a good coaching staff could turn him into a really good player. Flowers is now on his third head coach.
I dont know if the comparison works, because Flowers wasnt a dominant player in college. From everything coming in about FLowers people were worried about work ethic and attitude. These QBs seem to have strong work ethics, and yeah Rosen/Mayfield seem to have attitudes, but it has to do with winning more so than coaching.
I know everyone is using DGÅ› line if you take a QB and he fails, it sets you back 5 years. But what if Eli is done AND Webb is not the answer. Then what? You are risking taking fliers on QBs who may be viewed worse than this years crop. There is 2 side to every coin.
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.
That would have had to have said that 2-3 years about Eli for it to be at all true.
with the idea that they have a good enough coaching staff to fix the issues which is why you see so many dumb decisions in taking a qb
rosen checks every single box with the exception of missing games
if he stays healthy it'll be a great pick and if he busts, the organization is probably in a better spot to bottom out and get another high pick as opposed to taking barkley and potentially be a middling team stuck in the picks 8-17 mediocrity
I've advocated for a QB at #2 (if the Giants feel there is a true franchise QB there) because I think Eli is done. I don't think he has 2-3 years left of playing high-quality football.
But even if that is true, you can't force the pick at #2. If the Giants draft a QB at #2 who ends up being a 10-year NFL starter but who always is just a middle-of-the-pack QB, then it's a bad pick.
Again, I want them to draft Eli's replacement. But I'm not convinced that guy is there. Everyone of these guys has a significant question mark... it's not just cherry-picking over over-analyzing.
In any case, it does not matter so much what the fans think...it matters what the front office and coaching staff think. Can they put Eli in a position to successfully QB this team for a few more years? Or do they think his window has effectively closed and they need to find a replacement now. It makes a difference on how much risk the franchise is willing to take when drafting a QB.
ps. I am not saying that Eli has 2-3 years left...because I don't know.
I've seen a number of well written comparisons between this class and the QB class of 1999. There were 5 QB's taken in the 1st, 1 in the 2nd, and 1 in the 3rd. Really only 1 of the QB's panned out to be worth the pick, however all were "highly rated franchise guys". It was a case of teams over reaching just because these guys were QB's.
#1 Tim Couch - bust (unanimous top QB)
#2 McNabb - worth it
#3 Akili Smith - bust
#11 Culpepper - ok and got hurt
#12 Cade McCown - career backup
And as you can see by your example, the team picking second got it right.
RE: RE: These QB's are not slam dunks to be good Â
I've advocated for a QB at #2 (if the Giants feel there is a true franchise QB there) because I think Eli is done. I don't think he has 2-3 years left of playing high-quality football.
But even if that is true, you can't force the pick at #2. If the Giants draft a QB at #2 who ends up being a 10-year NFL starter but who always is just a middle-of-the-pack QB, then it's a bad pick.
Again, I want them to draft Eli's replacement. But I'm not convinced that guy is there. Everyone of these guys has a significant question mark... it's not just cherry-picking over over-analyzing.
We will have to wait and see. QBs are scrutinized to the highest, and I would sure hate to pass on a guy who becomes a really, really good QB cause he had a few too many TOs, or cause he was too short, or cause he is outspoken.
Its not slam dunk Chubb, Barkley, or Nelson is a guarantee superstar either. Give me Darnold or ROsen at the precious age of 20 and 21, and let them grow.
there was a quote from someone inside the Giants organization saying that they couldn't imagine Rosen making it through an NFL 16 game schedule without getting hurt. I think that is indicative of this draft. To me, Rosen is the only QB in the draft who, on talent, you can feel really good about. The problem is that a hurt QB is not having a QB.
the whole argument that your franchise is set back 5 years is less relevant today with the rookie cap.
-If your probability is 50% of having a stud, but you had to make him one of your top paid guys on the roster, that's risky.
-If it's 50% chance of a stud on the rookie cap, you go for it 100% of the time, every time, full stop.
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.
that there are thinking people (presumably) on this site that have no problem rolling the dice with the #2 overall pick. Sure, they'll argue that any draft pick is a roll of the dice but I don't necessarily believe that to be the case. You can't take a flyer on a QB just because you're in a position to do so especially when you consider the many holes on this team. And for those that think Webb does not somehow factor into the decision as to who the pick is, I think you're sadly mistaken.
What if it’s apparent Eli’s decline is further along than we think and by Columbus Day we are essentially out of playoff contention and his play is that of a bottom tiered player? Webb gets reps in the 2nd half and struggles mightily. Knowing the QB crop appears to pretty much suck next draft do we sit on our hands next spring hoping the 2020 draft has better options at QB? Or are we going to pony up and pay a middling QB franchise QB money (think Kirk Cousins).
but you also have to recall that the same professionals that you're quoting are saying things like "there's no carson wentz in this draft" also didn't know carson wentz was in his draft.
The only time there's a universally loved prospect is when he comes from a major program that did a lot of winning. And that's simply not the formula for projecting pro QBs.
I've advocated for a QB at #2 (if the Giants feel there is a true franchise QB there) because I think Eli is done. I don't think he has 2-3 years left of playing high-quality football.
But even if that is true, you can't force the pick at #2. If the Giants draft a QB at #2 who ends up being a 10-year NFL starter but who always is just a middle-of-the-pack QB, then it's a bad pick.
Again, I want them to draft Eli's replacement. But I'm not convinced that guy is there. Everyone of these guys has a significant question mark... it's not just cherry-picking over over-analyzing.
We will have to wait and see. QBs are scrutinized to the highest, and I would sure hate to pass on a guy who becomes a really, really good QB cause he had a few too many TOs, or cause he was too short, or cause he is outspoken.
Its not slam dunk Chubb, Barkley, or Nelson is a guarantee superstar either. Give me Darnold or ROsen at the precious age of 20 and 21, and let them grow.
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...
They can't be much worse than 3 wins. There's no cliff to drop off from. Even in the worse case scenario they get another very high pick next year. I guess I'm just not seeing how it would get worse than what it is now? They don't trade off draft picks and they do spend money, so they'll always have the means to get better.
is correct. the personality of the qb is vital too. ny would of eaten ben alive. thats what makes me weary of rosen and mayfield--who i cant see them taking anyways. if shurmur can make keenum a pretty decent qb, he should be able to improve darnold even more, if he is even there. barkley is a beast and could give eli another year or two. dont forget the injuries on offense last year when considering eli. and that joke of an o-line. all i do know is these next two days will be interesting.
I've advocated for a QB at #2 (if the Giants feel there is a true franchise QB there) because I think Eli is done. I don't think he has 2-3 years left of playing high-quality football.
But even if that is true, you can't force the pick at #2. If the Giants draft a QB at #2 who ends up being a 10-year NFL starter but who always is just a middle-of-the-pack QB, then it's a bad pick.
Again, I want them to draft Eli's replacement. But I'm not convinced that guy is there. Everyone of these guys has a significant question mark... it's not just cherry-picking over over-analyzing.
We will have to wait and see. QBs are scrutinized to the highest, and I would sure hate to pass on a guy who becomes a really, really good QB cause he had a few too many TOs, or cause he was too short, or cause he is outspoken.
Its not slam dunk Chubb, Barkley, or Nelson is a guarantee superstar either. Give me Darnold or ROsen at the precious age of 20 and 21, and let them grow.
the whole argument that your franchise is set back 5 years is less relevant today with the rookie cap.
-If your probability is 50% of having a stud, but you had to make him one of your top paid guys on the roster, that's risky.
-If it's 50% chance of a stud on the rookie cap, you go for it 100% of the time, every time, full stop.
Ironically, the Giants current GM has said multiple times that he doesn't agree with you.
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.
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.
the whole argument that your franchise is set back 5 years is less relevant today with the rookie cap.
-If your probability is 50% of having a stud, but you had to make him one of your top paid guys on the roster, that's risky.
-If it's 50% chance of a stud on the rookie cap, you go for it 100% of the time, every time, full stop.
Ironically, the Giants current GM has said multiple times that he doesn't agree with you.
You have to have a GM that is willing to take some risks. It seems all this “Eli has years left” since the day he was hired seems to indicate what they will do. Just look at the Philly game? If I did I would take the QB on the other team. I get what Eric is saying and it’s pragmatic. I just don’t think Barkley is gonna take a 3-13 team to contenders with Eli still playing. I get people believe otherwise and I hope I am wrong, but Eli has looked bad. Not average, bad. At least to me.
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?
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.
"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."
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.
nfl-draft-qb-rankings-execs - ( New Window )
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.
Ernie Accorsi blew many first round picks, and they weren't bad for a long time.
There's always risk in picking players. Everyone wants the comfort of a guarantee when there never is one.
He's also getting paid a lot of money to determine IF there is a "franchise" QB available and, based on the wildly divergent opinions on this class, it certainly isn't unreasonable to suggest he may not think there is one.
If Shurmur is the QB guru that everyone claims to be, he can fix Darnolds turnovers, AllenÅ› accuracy, Mayfields fixation on a receiver, etc.
Paralysis by analysis. All 4 of these QBs would have been the number 1 QB last year and next year as well. They are all just out in the same year which is causing them to be under the microsope even more.
Wrong. The job is to find the best player at # 2, not the best QB and take him there regardless of whether or not he is worthy of that pick. Reaching leads to disaster.
"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."
Every quarterback has warts coming out of college. I think every year, as the draft gets closer, all people hear about are the negatives, but who's to say any of these guys can't be HOF quarterbacks? Not many people were praising Carson Wentz before the draft, and there were plenty of people knocking Andrew Luck down a bunch over his lack of arm strength.
I guess what I'm saying is, if the QB's go in the top 5, it's usually for a reason.
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)
I'm not sure that is true.
#1 Tim Couch - bust (unanimous top QB)
#2 McNabb - worth it
#3 Akili Smith - bust
#11 Culpepper - ok and got hurt
#12 Cade McCown - career backup
If Shurmur is the QB guru that everyone claims to be, he can fix Darnolds turnovers, AllenÅ› accuracy, Mayfields fixation on a receiver, etc.
Paralysis by analysis. All 4 of these QBs would have been the number 1 QB last year and next year as well. They are all just out in the same year which is causing them to be under the microsope even more.
Very well said. This amount of time leads to over analyzing.
My strong preference is to come out of this draft with Eli's replacement. But is there a sure-bet here at QB? I don't know.
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.
Wrong. The job is to find the best player at # 2, not the best QB and take him there regardless of whether or not he is worthy of that pick. Reaching leads to disaster.
I agree. I am firmly entrenched in the view that you should always try to get the best players on your team. Invariably, the teams that have the most talent across the board win the most games, whereas if you strive for mediocrity, you generally don't end up being very successful in what counts.
I'm not sure that is true.
Trubinsky came in with a huge amount of question marks last year. One year starter. Reading defenses. Could he throw within a pocket, etc. It didnt hesitate the Bears in trading up one spot to secure him. Deshaun Waton looked great, but had injury issues prior to being drafted and was deemed to have a weak arm. Mahommes came from a spread offense and his reading of defenses was very scrutinized.
Next years class as of right now, is not very good at all. With all of the experts needing to be right, you are going to see over analyzation to its highest. These QBs are very good. It doesnt mean they are going to be amazing, but if put in the right position, the ycan be very good - and thats all you can ask.
The Giants have a chance to get a really good player(s) in this draft. This pick needs to be a good one.
#1 Tim Couch - bust (unanimous top QB)
#2 McNabb - worth it
#3 Akili Smith - bust
#11 Culpepper - ok and got hurt
#12 Cade McCown - career backup
and who can forget Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, Ryan Tannehill, Johnny Manziel, EJ Manuel, Brandon Weedon, Blaine Gabbert, Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman,. All guys who had no business going even in the 1st round, some taken in the top 10, because "you have to get a QB". Reaching is an organizational death sentence.
I'd love to be able to trade down and still get a guy who the coaching staff loves.
I dont know if the comparison works, because Flowers wasnt a dominant player in college. From everything coming in about FLowers people were worried about work ethic and attitude. These QBs seem to have strong work ethics, and yeah Rosen/Mayfield seem to have attitudes, but it has to do with winning more so than coaching.
I know everyone is using DGÅ› line if you take a QB and he fails, it sets you back 5 years. But what if Eli is done AND Webb is not the answer. Then what? You are risking taking fliers on QBs who may be viewed worse than this years crop. There is 2 side to every coin.
The Giants have a chance to get a really good player(s) in this draft. This pick needs to be a good one.
That would have had to have said that 2-3 years about Eli for it to be at all true.
rosen checks every single box with the exception of missing games
if he stays healthy it'll be a great pick and if he busts, the organization is probably in a better spot to bottom out and get another high pick as opposed to taking barkley and potentially be a middling team stuck in the picks 8-17 mediocrity
But even if that is true, you can't force the pick at #2. If the Giants draft a QB at #2 who ends up being a 10-year NFL starter but who always is just a middle-of-the-pack QB, then it's a bad pick.
Again, I want them to draft Eli's replacement. But I'm not convinced that guy is there. Everyone of these guys has a significant question mark... it's not just cherry-picking over over-analyzing.
ps. I am not saying that Eli has 2-3 years left...because I don't know.
#1 Tim Couch - bust (unanimous top QB)
#2 McNabb - worth it
#3 Akili Smith - bust
#11 Culpepper - ok and got hurt
#12 Cade McCown - career backup
And as you can see by your example, the team picking second got it right.
How many Super Bowls did McNabb win again?
But even if that is true, you can't force the pick at #2. If the Giants draft a QB at #2 who ends up being a 10-year NFL starter but who always is just a middle-of-the-pack QB, then it's a bad pick.
Again, I want them to draft Eli's replacement. But I'm not convinced that guy is there. Everyone of these guys has a significant question mark... it's not just cherry-picking over over-analyzing.
We will have to wait and see. QBs are scrutinized to the highest, and I would sure hate to pass on a guy who becomes a really, really good QB cause he had a few too many TOs, or cause he was too short, or cause he is outspoken.
Its not slam dunk Chubb, Barkley, or Nelson is a guarantee superstar either. Give me Darnold or ROsen at the precious age of 20 and 21, and let them grow.
This is a very weird year.
-If your probability is 50% of having a stud, but you had to make him one of your top paid guys on the roster, that's risky.
-If it's 50% chance of a stud on the rookie cap, you go for it 100% of the time, every time, full stop.
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.
The only time there's a universally loved prospect is when he comes from a major program that did a lot of winning. And that's simply not the formula for projecting pro QBs.
Quote:
I've advocated for a QB at #2 (if the Giants feel there is a true franchise QB there) because I think Eli is done. I don't think he has 2-3 years left of playing high-quality football.
But even if that is true, you can't force the pick at #2. If the Giants draft a QB at #2 who ends up being a 10-year NFL starter but who always is just a middle-of-the-pack QB, then it's a bad pick.
Again, I want them to draft Eli's replacement. But I'm not convinced that guy is there. Everyone of these guys has a significant question mark... it's not just cherry-picking over over-analyzing.
We will have to wait and see. QBs are scrutinized to the highest, and I would sure hate to pass on a guy who becomes a really, really good QB cause he had a few too many TOs, or cause he was too short, or cause he is outspoken.
Its not slam dunk Chubb, Barkley, or Nelson is a guarantee superstar either. Give me Darnold or ROsen at the precious age of 20 and 21, and let them grow.
+1
They can't be much worse than 3 wins. There's no cliff to drop off from. Even in the worse case scenario they get another very high pick next year. I guess I'm just not seeing how it would get worse than what it is now? They don't trade off draft picks and they do spend money, so they'll always have the means to get better.
#1 Tim Couch - bust (unanimous top QB)
#2 McNabb - worth it
#3 Akili Smith - bust
#11 Culpepper - ok and got hurt
#12 Cade McCown - career backup
Culpepper was better than good. Before the injury he was a top 5 QB and probably should have won MFL MVP in 2004.
Quote:
I've advocated for a QB at #2 (if the Giants feel there is a true franchise QB there) because I think Eli is done. I don't think he has 2-3 years left of playing high-quality football.
But even if that is true, you can't force the pick at #2. If the Giants draft a QB at #2 who ends up being a 10-year NFL starter but who always is just a middle-of-the-pack QB, then it's a bad pick.
Again, I want them to draft Eli's replacement. But I'm not convinced that guy is there. Everyone of these guys has a significant question mark... it's not just cherry-picking over over-analyzing.
We will have to wait and see. QBs are scrutinized to the highest, and I would sure hate to pass on a guy who becomes a really, really good QB cause he had a few too many TOs, or cause he was too short, or cause he is outspoken.
Its not slam dunk Chubb, Barkley, or Nelson is a guarantee superstar either. Give me Darnold or ROsen at the precious age of 20 and 21, and let them grow.
Completely agree.
-If your probability is 50% of having a stud, but you had to make him one of your top paid guys on the roster, that's risky.
-If it's 50% chance of a stud on the rookie cap, you go for it 100% of the time, every time, full stop.
Ironically, the Giants current GM has said multiple times that he doesn't agree with you.
It's actually pretty difficult to be consistently bad in this league.
They might have a 3-5 win team next year even if they hit on it.
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.
But it can get worse. And you are fooling yourself if you think it can't.
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.
Agreed, that is where depth is built
they were a terrible team last year
Quote:
the whole argument that your franchise is set back 5 years is less relevant today with the rookie cap.
-If your probability is 50% of having a stud, but you had to make him one of your top paid guys on the roster, that's risky.
-If it's 50% chance of a stud on the rookie cap, you go for it 100% of the time, every time, full stop.
Ironically, the Giants current GM has said multiple times that he doesn't agree with you.
You have to have a GM that is willing to take some risks. It seems all this “Eli has years left” since the day he was hired seems to indicate what they will do. Just look at the Philly game? If I did I would take the QB on the other team. I get what Eric is saying and it’s pragmatic. I just don’t think Barkley is gonna take a 3-13 team to contenders with Eli still playing. I get people believe otherwise and I hope I am wrong, but Eli has looked bad. Not average, bad. At least to me.
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?
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.