Watching "Rookie, welcome to the NFL" last night they showed inside the green room when the draft started.
Once Baker Mayfield got drafted, Barkley said "This might actually be not good for me."
He then specifically said because "NY would take Darnold."
He didn't mention Rosen, Allen or Chubb, just that he thought Darnold would go to the Giants. So either he had some conviction that Darnold was the other top choice or his agent did. Take it for what you will, thought it was a clue into who the Giants were interested in.
That's sort of stupid to say for the #2 pick isn't it?
So then it would be Barkley or Chubb if it's the #2 pick right?
Darnold could never be the pick.
Quote:
The #2 pick would be Barkley, Chubb, Darnold in that order.
That's sort of stupid to say for the #2 pick isn't it?
So then it would be Barkley or Chubb if it's the #2 pick right?
Darnold could never be the pick.
Was just about to say. Why not have Jerry Seinfeld as your third option at pick 2?
Outside of the injury issues, just not the right personality for NY.
Maybe I should quit my job and play Powerball. Or a better analogy might be banking retirement on winning the lottery. If I hit on the Powerball, quitting my job will look like a no brainer. In the more unlikely event that I do not win, it will look pretty stupid.
Do the Giants have a better chance of hitting on Webb or Lauletta than Powerball odds? Sure. But the odds are stacked against Webb or Lauletta becoming a long term starting QB, let alone a franchise QB. So if that is what the Giants are aiming for, it's tantamount to playing the lottery with the QB position rather than planning for the future with a coherent strategy. And, because we have talent on this team, we aren't going to bottom out completely the way other teams have. So we are going to end up in a perpetual state of mediocrity, which will prevent us from landing at the top of the draft or getting the franchise QB we need. Sure, one could fall in our laps, but that would again be the exception rather than the rule.
Quote:
it's clear that the Giants have a strategy to maximize the roster for the next 2-3 seasons and see if Webb or Lauletta can develop into a really good QB. If one of them does, the Barley pick will be a no brainer.
Maybe I should quit my job and play Powerball. Or a better analogy might be banking retirement on winning the lottery. If I hit on the Powerball, quitting my job will look like a no brainer. In the more unlikely event that I do not win, it will look pretty stupid.
Do the Giants have a better chance of hitting on Webb or Lauletta than Powerball odds? Sure. But the odds are stacked against Webb or Lauletta becoming a long term starting QB, let alone a franchise QB. So if that is what the Giants are aiming for, it's tantamount to playing the lottery with the QB position rather than planning for the future with a coherent strategy. And, because we have talent on this team, we aren't going to bottom out completely the way other teams have. So we are going to end up in a perpetual state of mediocrity, which will prevent us from landing at the top of the draft or getting the franchise QB we need. Sure, one could fall in our laps, but that would again be the exception rather than the rule.
Get a grip. Perpetual state of mediocrity? You mean kind of like the Detroit Lions? There are a lot of times that ended up that way after using premium picks on QBs. The important thing is to get it right. Sam Darnold (and I'm a fan of his) is not a guarantee to pan out to be a perennial playoff QB. It might as well be us with a stout defense, the game's best WR, and one of the best RBs in the game. Stop the run and run the ball...has worked for a long time.
Quote:
In comment 13951488 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
it's clear that the Giants have a strategy to maximize the roster for the next 2-3 seasons and see if Webb or Lauletta can develop into a really good QB. If one of them does, the Barley pick will be a no brainer.
Maybe I should quit my job and play Powerball. Or a better analogy might be banking retirement on winning the lottery. If I hit on the Powerball, quitting my job will look like a no brainer. In the more unlikely event that I do not win, it will look pretty stupid.
Do the Giants have a better chance of hitting on Webb or Lauletta than Powerball odds? Sure. But the odds are stacked against Webb or Lauletta becoming a long term starting QB, let alone a franchise QB. So if that is what the Giants are aiming for, it's tantamount to playing the lottery with the QB position rather than planning for the future with a coherent strategy. And, because we have talent on this team, we aren't going to bottom out completely the way other teams have. So we are going to end up in a perpetual state of mediocrity, which will prevent us from landing at the top of the draft or getting the franchise QB we need. Sure, one could fall in our laps, but that would again be the exception rather than the rule.
Get a grip. Perpetual state of mediocrity? You mean kind of like the Detroit Lions? There are a lot of times that ended up that way after using premium picks on QBs. The important thing is to get it right. Sam Darnold (and I'm a fan of his) is not a guarantee to pan out to be a perennial playoff QB. It might as well be us with a stout defense, the game's best WR, and one of the best RBs in the game. Stop the run and run the ball...has worked for a long time.
The important thing is to not put all the pressure on a QB and make sure you have a complete team.. You do that by not passing up superior talent to reach for positional needs.
QB is the hardest position to fill. It just is. It supersedes all other positions, especially RBs. If the grades were remotely close - and I bet Darnold was in the vicinity - you should always err on the side of the QB.
There is a reason QBs get taken high in the draft year after year - and that is because of their particular importance to the success of NFL teams. If you don't have one, you need one. There is simply no way around it.
Doofus Darnold? Let The Jets deal with Sanchez 2.0.
Barkley and then Chubb was constant from the first word back in early March, Nelson would've been a target only after a trade down.
I think the strategy is to put together the best roster possible every year. This is a year to year league. You assemble the best team you can every year without putting yourself in future year cap hell.
Those who look at Saquon as merely a running back grossly misunderstand his value in terms of raising the excellence of everyone on the team. Just as LT did in 1981, everyone becomes a better version of themselves when they are joined and inspired by transformational people like LT and Saquon.
No doubt and it is just potential at this point... but I wouldn't bet against it. I am as awed by Barkley as I was in 1981 when I saw that first pre-season game and what we had on the field with Taylor...
Fitting and Ironic that we open our pre-season with Cleveland...
Quote:
grade, why would you take your #1 or #2 before him.
QB is the hardest position to fill. It just is. It supersedes all other positions, especially RBs. If the grades were remotely close - and I bet Darnold was in the vicinity - you should always err on the side of the QB.
There is a reason QBs get taken high in the draft year after year - and that is because of their particular importance to the success of NFL teams. If you don't have one, you need one. There is simply no way around it.
Blah blah blah. Broken record. Beaten drum. Dead horse.
I am getting the vibe that Rosen is Jeff George for better or worse. Will see how that plays out.