Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

Now dust settled: Reflecting on thinking behind choice at #2

Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx : 5/8/2018 8:42 am
Giants more than most organizations are huge on character this is especially magnified in round 1 and then even moreso if you are picking top 5. In that range they want a guy who has it 'all': character, production, measurables, work ethic etc.

They also tend to prefer the high impact player/position which is why while we heard they liked Nelson alot, they werent going to pick an OG at 2. Which of the blue chip non QBs left Saquon or Chubb . RBs for the most part ARE a lower impact position until you find the rare game changing types with home run speed and playmaking ability and-or ones that are legitimate receiving threats out of the backfield.

Barkley is both those things and an extremely high character player to boot.

Now in regards to the QB position. I think multiple things were going on there which led to them going non QB. As we all know if you think there is a franchise QB AND your organization has decided it is an immediate (or almost immediate) need, that QB should trump everything else.

So breaking down those two factors: Was there a franchise QB in the Giants opinion? I beleive the answer is yes but it was only one of the 4 top options: Sam Darnold. We spoke about character earlier and its even more magnified when we are talking a face of the franchise player.

Right or wrong I believe that dropped Rosen and Mayfield out of the picture entirely. To take a QB at #2 for the Giants, he will need to be Eli squeaky clean. Look at their recent history of QB picks: Eli,Simms,Brown,Webb,Laulletta . All guys with squeaky clean character.

The two guys that fit that bill were Darnold and Allen. However in Allens case I think there was enough doubt about how raw he was and if he would be able to correct all his mechanical stuff more so than Darnold. Darnold showed tremendous accuracy despite some flaws , Allen was very inconsistent. Also Allen did not show a high level of anticipation and D reading ability while Darnold was much better in this department. With all that said, at the end of the day, I think the ONLY QB with a top of the draft franchise grade was Darnold.

Now to the second point and why the Giants didnt pick him: QB was NOT deemed an immediate need. All the quotes from Gettleman to Shurmur to Accorsi kept repeating one mantra; Eli has years left. Also despite being unproven, Webb is doing everything right. That did not sound like an organization ready to part with their 2 time Super Bowl winning MVP QB at the end of this year. And making the investment at #2 in the entire draft at QB usually means the kid is playing sometime year 1 or latest year 2.

Now we may or may not agree with ownerships logic/decision but this is very likely what happened. Sam Darnold being available at 2 and them passing on him was case in point. If you still doubt, ask yourself this question: If they truly thought Eli was done, in drastic decline, or right on the precipice of it, do you honestly think they bypass Sam Darnold at #2 ? Further, knowing this is also a very prideful organization that doesnt believe it will be picking at #2 anytime soon again?
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
Suggesting they picked SB over a QB strictly to go for it now  
JonC : 5/8/2018 11:53 am : link
doesn't take into account how they viewed the QB prospects at all ... while DG is on the record describing how you can't pick a kid you had to talk yourself into.

Believe what you will. I wanted Darnold to wear Blue, but they know better than me if he's going to be a better pro than SB.
Last opinion on this thread:  
Big Blue '56 : 5/8/2018 11:56 am : link
To those who believe that the top tier QBs were of franchise quality, the Giants say you WERE WRONG. There is no way ANY personnel guy/QB guru is going to pass on a genuine franchise QB that they saw live, on tape and with access to meticulous scouting reports to take a RB, even if that RB is one of a kind.

Could they be wrong and you right? Sure, it happens of course. But the odds of them being wrong and you right? Just sayiní/askiní.
The OP  
Jimmy Googs : 5/8/2018 12:01 pm : link
In comment 13957925 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:
Quote:


This is the crux of the Giants thinking. Eli has a window and we are going for it. If we win with Barkley playing a key role they made the right decision , if we don't then it can be questioned especially if one of Darnold,Rosen or Allen end up being franchise/super star Qbs.


You seem intent to push the idea that the Barkley decision was all about DG saying that Eli is his guy for some reason. Maybe he is...maybe he isn't but you don't know.

For all you know, DG just simply loved Barkley and Eli is going to be cut next year with the offense turned over to another QB on the roster (or player to be named later).

Or maybe even DG doesn't know but this was the least risky path in his new job.

You want me to keep going with other maybes?

And this, to me, is the crux of it all:  
Go Terps : 5/8/2018 12:12 pm : link
Quote:
Ross Tucker: If the Giants passed on a franchise QB for Barkley, it was shortsighted.

Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.


This has been the Giants' approach to team building since they traded for Eli Manning in 2004. If their organizational philosophy could be summed up in a phrase, it would be "make one more run with Eli." I believe that is once again the current approach.

I also believe that approach is flawed, and the biggest reason why the Giants are only 8 games over .500 (111-103) with Eli as their quarterback. That is a lower winning percentage than his draft contemporaries Ben Roethlisberger (135-63) and Phillip Rivers (106-86).

Because the plan (if it can even be called that) hasn't changed, I don't expect the results to change. We'll be a middling team whose success or failure will be determined by a few lucky or unlucky breaks here and there. What I don't expect to be repeated is Eli miracling our asses to a title. I think those days are behind him.

This is a reactive, unimaginative organization.
Think Shurmur and DG think  
TMS : 5/8/2018 12:27 pm : link
the potential of someone with Barkley's size, speed and skill set, are very rare. A chance to put together an offense different than those out there now. Think he will be used big in the passing game and force teams to double him because of his 'take it to the house" ability anytime". Opening everybody else up. Should be fun to watch.
RE: And this, to me, is the crux of it all:  
Bill L : 5/8/2018 12:28 pm : link
In comment 13957971 Go Terps said:
Quote:


Quote:


Ross Tucker: If the Giants passed on a franchise QB for Barkley, it was shortsighted.

Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.



This has been the Giants' approach to team building since they traded for Eli Manning in 2004. If their organizational philosophy could be summed up in a phrase, it would be "make one more run with Eli." I believe that is once again the current approach.

I also believe that approach is flawed, and the biggest reason why the Giants are only 8 games over .500 (111-103) with Eli as their quarterback. That is a lower winning percentage than his draft contemporaries Ben Roethlisberger (135-63) and Phillip Rivers (106-86).

Because the plan (if it can even be called that) hasn't changed, I don't expect the results to change. We'll be a middling team whose success or failure will be determined by a few lucky or unlucky breaks here and there. What I don't expect to be repeated is Eli miracling our asses to a title. I think those days are behind him.

This is a reactive, unimaginative organization.
The operative words in your post are "I believe..."

Very similar to the BoM song.
RE: At the end of the day, Joe  
Knee of Theismann : 5/8/2018 12:31 pm : link
In comment 13957646 JonC said:
Quote:
they picked the #1 player on their board.

The only QB talk I heard was Darnold was the only one they really liked, but it appears he was not any higher than #4 on their board, behind SB, Chubb, Nelson.

They stayed true to their board.


JonC,

Well-said and simply put. The only way they were picking a QB would have been Darnold, but they probably didn't think he was worth the #2 pick. However, they knew another team did think he was worth a very high pick, so it's not like they could trade down and still get him. Barkley was #1 on their board, but he would not have lasted past pick #4, I believe, so they stayed put and took him. When you can get the #1 player at the #2 pick, and that player also fills a glaring need, you trust your process and make the selection and never look back.
The QBís  
Phil in LA : 5/8/2018 12:35 pm : link
Were wildly overrated. Darnold should have stayed in school.
What's funny about this draft  
Go Terps : 5/8/2018 12:43 pm : link
I bet right now Baltimore wouldn't trade Lamar Jackson for Baker Mayfield straight up.

Lots of varying views of this draft. It will be interesting in 3 or 4 years to look back.
I think it would be funny as shit  
Bill L : 5/8/2018 12:48 pm : link
if the best QB, or maybe even the only superlative QB, that came out of this draft was Lauletta or Rudolph or some other mid/late round guy who didn't get much special consideration.
RE: Think Shurmur and DG think  
Knee of Theismann : 5/8/2018 1:00 pm : link
In comment 13957992 TMS said:
Quote:
the potential of someone with Barkley's size, speed and skill set, are very rare. A chance to put together an offense different than those out there now. Think he will be used big in the passing game and force teams to double him because of his 'take it to the house" ability anytime". Opening everybody else up. Should be fun to watch.


This is a great insight and one I hadn't really thought of: Beckham, Engram, and Barkley are all players that bring a combination of skills and physical gifts that almost no else has. They could possibly create a new type of offense that we've never even seen before. Imagine how hyped an offensive guru like Shurmur must be about that?
RE: The OP  
Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx : 5/8/2018 1:00 pm : link
In comment 13957951 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
In comment 13957925 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:


Quote:




This is the crux of the Giants thinking. Eli has a window and we are going for it. If we win with Barkley playing a key role they made the right decision , if we don't then it can be questioned especially if one of Darnold,Rosen or Allen end up being franchise/super star Qbs.



You seem intent to push the idea that the Barkley decision was all about DG saying that Eli is his guy for some reason. Maybe he is...maybe he isn't but you don't know.

For all you know, DG just simply loved Barkley and Eli is going to be cut next year with the offense turned over to another QB on the roster (or player to be named later).

Or maybe even DG doesn't know but this was the least risky path in his new job.

You want me to keep going with other maybes?


Don't doubt he loved Barkley. Not at all.

But so did the Browns and they went QB#1. Why?

Because they don't believe Tyrod Taylor is the answer at QB. Giants right or wrong believe Eli is STILL the answer at Qb for at least a few more years.
RE: Suggesting they picked SB over a QB strictly to go for it now  
Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx : 5/8/2018 1:04 pm : link
In comment 13957937 JonC said:
Quote:
doesn't take into account how they viewed the QB prospects at all ... while DG is on the record describing how you can't pick a kid you had to talk yourself into.

Believe what you will. I wanted Darnold to wear Blue, but they know better than me if he's going to be a better pro than SB.


As Daniel Jeremiah said you take the B+ Qb over the A non-QB every time if you deem it's an immediate (or near immediate need). Thats the importance of the position.

I find it hard to believe that Darnold was not at least a 'B+' guy on their board.

Bottomline it wasn't deemed an immediate need b/c basically all those with the biggest voices in the org basically all said Eli has 'years left'.
RE: And this, to me, is the crux of it all:  
Klaatu : 5/8/2018 1:13 pm : link
In comment 13957971 Go Terps said:
Quote:


Quote:


Ross Tucker: If the Giants passed on a franchise QB for Barkley, it was shortsighted.

Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.



This has been the Giants' approach to team building since they traded for Eli Manning in 2004. If their organizational philosophy could be summed up in a phrase, it would be "make one more run with Eli." I believe that is once again the current approach.

I also believe that approach is flawed, and the biggest reason why the Giants are only 8 games over .500 (111-103) with Eli as their quarterback. That is a lower winning percentage than his draft contemporaries Ben Roethlisberger (135-63) and Phillip Rivers (106-86).

Because the plan (if it can even be called that) hasn't changed, I don't expect the results to change. We'll be a middling team whose success or failure will be determined by a few lucky or unlucky breaks here and there. What I don't expect to be repeated is Eli miracling our asses to a title. I think those days are behind him.

This is a reactive, unimaginative organization.


Translation: The Giants didn't move on from Eli many years ago when I thought they should, and now they're doomed for all eternity.
That's your opinion, not necessarily based all on facts either  
JonC : 5/8/2018 1:17 pm : link
and while they have banked on Eli, they clearly picked their #1 prospect in the entire draft (fact) and are building around them (fact) trying to build the best team possible after the draft didn't deliver their franchise QB.

So be it.
Klaatu  
Go Terps : 5/8/2018 1:20 pm : link
You haven't read many of my posts over the years have you? I was here backing up Eli when 90% of this board wanted him run out of town.

Sometimes this place feels like the Twilight Zone.
RE: RE: The OP  
T-Bone : 5/8/2018 1:22 pm : link
In comment 13958030 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:
Quote:
In comment 13957951 Jimmy Googs said:


Quote:


In comment 13957925 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:


Quote:




This is the crux of the Giants thinking. Eli has a window and we are going for it. If we win with Barkley playing a key role they made the right decision , if we don't then it can be questioned especially if one of Darnold,Rosen or Allen end up being franchise/super star Qbs.



You seem intent to push the idea that the Barkley decision was all about DG saying that Eli is his guy for some reason. Maybe he is...maybe he isn't but you don't know.

For all you know, DG just simply loved Barkley and Eli is going to be cut next year with the offense turned over to another QB on the roster (or player to be named later).

Or maybe even DG doesn't know but this was the least risky path in his new job.

You want me to keep going with other maybes?




Don't doubt he loved Barkley. Not at all.

But so did the Browns and they went QB#1. Why?

Because they don't believe Tyrod Taylor is the answer at QB. Giants right or wrong believe Eli is STILL the answer at Qb for at least a few more years.


You keep repeating this over and over again like it's some revelation when the team has TOLD all of us that... nearly word for word... over the past few months.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to get out of this thread Joe. The Giants believing... rightly or wrongly... that Eli still has some years left could still mean they MIGHT HAVE gone with Barkley regardless if they didn't think he (Eli) had any years left for different reasons... from:

- Barkley being too good of a prospect to pass up (which is what they've said)

- faith that Eli has a few good year left (which is what they've also said)

- faith that either Webb is good enough to lead the team moving forward or another good QB could be acquired if need be (which although they didn't say could certainly be a possibility)

And maybe another one or two reasons I haven't thought of.

I just don't know what you're trying to get at with this thread Joe. You're either answering a lot of your own questions... or can simply choose to believe the various answers that have been given to you by not only various posters here have given you but the GM and coach themselves have given you. So what are you trying to figure out?

RE: Klaatu  
Klaatu : 5/8/2018 1:30 pm : link
In comment 13958057 Go Terps said:
Quote:
You haven't read many of my posts over the years have you? I was here backing up Eli when 90% of this board wanted him run out of town.

Sometimes this place feels like the Twilight Zone.


No way. With his salary? Well...color me shocked, and let me apologize.
RE: RE: And this, to me, is the crux of it all:  
YAJ2112 : 5/8/2018 1:31 pm : link
In comment 13958047 Klaatu said:
Quote:
In comment 13957971 Go Terps said:


Quote:




Quote:


Ross Tucker: If the Giants passed on a franchise QB for Barkley, it was shortsighted.

Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.



This has been the Giants' approach to team building since they traded for Eli Manning in 2004. If their organizational philosophy could be summed up in a phrase, it would be "make one more run with Eli." I believe that is once again the current approach.

I also believe that approach is flawed, and the biggest reason why the Giants are only 8 games over .500 (111-103) with Eli as their quarterback. That is a lower winning percentage than his draft contemporaries Ben Roethlisberger (135-63) and Phillip Rivers (106-86).

Because the plan (if it can even be called that) hasn't changed, I don't expect the results to change. We'll be a middling team whose success or failure will be determined by a few lucky or unlucky breaks here and there. What I don't expect to be repeated is Eli miracling our asses to a title. I think those days are behind him.

This is a reactive, unimaginative organization.



Translation: The Giants didn't move on from Eli many years ago when I thought they should, and now they're doomed for all eternity.


I love how Rivers is held in high esteem here, despite the fact that the Chargers have made the playoffs once in the last 8 seasons - even worse than the Giants. Why isn't Terps calling out the Chargers for not trying to replace Rivers at this point?
YAJ  
Go Terps : 5/8/2018 1:35 pm : link
Because I'm not a Chargers fan. If I were, I'd have wanted San Diego to get one of these quarterbacks and move on from Rivers.
RE: RE: RE: The OP  
Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx : 5/8/2018 1:39 pm : link
In comment 13958061 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 13958030 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:


Quote:


In comment 13957951 Jimmy Googs said:


Quote:


In comment 13957925 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:


Quote:




This is the crux of the Giants thinking. Eli has a window and we are going for it. If we win with Barkley playing a key role they made the right decision , if we don't then it can be questioned especially if one of Darnold,Rosen or Allen end up being franchise/super star Qbs.



You seem intent to push the idea that the Barkley decision was all about DG saying that Eli is his guy for some reason. Maybe he is...maybe he isn't but you don't know.

For all you know, DG just simply loved Barkley and Eli is going to be cut next year with the offense turned over to another QB on the roster (or player to be named later).

Or maybe even DG doesn't know but this was the least risky path in his new job.

You want me to keep going with other maybes?




Don't doubt he loved Barkley. Not at all.

But so did the Browns and they went QB#1. Why?

Because they don't believe Tyrod Taylor is the answer at QB. Giants right or wrong believe Eli is STILL the answer at Qb for at least a few more years.



You keep repeating this over and over again like it's some revelation when the team has TOLD all of us that... nearly word for word... over the past few months.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to get out of this thread Joe. The Giants believing... rightly or wrongly... that Eli still has some years left could still mean they MIGHT HAVE gone with Barkley regardless if they didn't think he (Eli) had any years left for different reasons... from:

- Barkley being too good of a prospect to pass up (which is what they've said)

- faith that Eli has a few good year left (which is what they've also said)

- faith that either Webb is good enough to lead the team moving forward or another good QB could be acquired if need be (which although they didn't say could certainly be a possibility)

And maybe another one or two reasons I haven't thought of.

I just don't know what you're trying to get at with this thread Joe. You're either answering a lot of your own questions... or can simply choose to believe the various answers that have been given to you by not only various posters here have given you but the GM and coach themselves have given you. So what are you trying to figure out?


Point is Barkley wasnt just picked because he was a great grade. Thats only part of the story. Darnold was bypassed because they didnt want to give up on Eli too soon. Darnold is likely our pick at #2 if they thought Eli was done. Darnold very likely had plenty a good enough grade if ownership considered QB a need.
I will repeat...you seem to want to push and have everybody agree  
Jimmy Googs : 5/8/2018 1:41 pm : link
that this pick was all about Eli having year(s) left. So much that you are now hypothesizing as to how the Browns GM is thinking and you are putting your own subjective grades against some of the players to help make this case. None of which could be true.

Not sure why, but I have now reached the moment when I say,

whatever...

T-Bone..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/8/2018 1:41 pm : link
this is exactly why JerseyJoe has to rinse and repeat every so often:

Quote:
You keep repeating this over and over again like it's some revelation when the team has TOLD all of us that... nearly word for word... over the past few months.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to get out of this thread Joe. The Giants believing... rightly or wrongly... that Eli still has some years left could still mean they MIGHT HAVE gone with Barkley regardless if they didn't think he (Eli) had any years left for different reasons... from:


He develops an assumption. Beats it to death no matter what the dissenting evidence is and pollutes the board with multiple threads on the same variation of his assumption.

He's not going to gain anything out of it and BBI is going to be littered with useless threads pretty much saying the same thing, all started by the same guy.

Look - he acts like he wants to be definitively told what the Giants were thinking, but he already thinks he knows what they were thinking. It's lunacy.
RE: And this, to me, is the crux of it all:  
T-Bone : 5/8/2018 1:42 pm : link
In comment 13957971 Go Terps said:
Quote:


Quote:


Ross Tucker: If the Giants passed on a franchise QB for Barkley, it was shortsighted.

Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.



This has been the Giants' approach to team building since they traded for Eli Manning in 2004. If their organizational philosophy could be summed up in a phrase, it would be "make one more run with Eli." I believe that is once again the current approach.

I also believe that approach is flawed, and the biggest reason why the Giants are only 8 games over .500 (111-103) with Eli as their quarterback. That is a lower winning percentage than his draft contemporaries Ben Roethlisberger (135-63) and Phillip Rivers (106-86).

Because the plan (if it can even be called that) hasn't changed, I don't expect the results to change. We'll be a middling team whose success or failure will be determined by a few lucky or unlucky breaks here and there. What I don't expect to be repeated is Eli miracling our asses to a title. I think those days are behind him.

This is a reactive, unimaginative organization.


At what point (what season?) do you think the Giants should've gone in a different direction Terps?

You say that the Giants have had this philosophy since Eli's been drafted... which has given the team two Super Bowl titles (the same amount as Ben and 2 more than Rivers... despite the records of the franchises with the respective QBs in charge)... meanwhile pointing out the winning percentages of the franchises. Which doesn't make much sense to me because I'm pretty sure you aren's suggesting that the team should've been looking to replace Eli after his rookie and/or fourth (after the first Super Bowl win) seasons. So are you suggesting that they should've been looking to go into a different directions after the second win? Two years after that? Two years ago? Last year? When?
RE: RE: RE: RE: The OP  
T-Bone : 5/8/2018 1:47 pm : link
In comment 13958093 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:
Quote:
In comment 13958061 T-Bone said:

Point is Barkley wasnt just picked because he was a great grade. Thats only part of the story. Darnold was bypassed because they didnt want to give up on Eli too soon. Darnold is likely our pick at #2 if they thought Eli was done. Darnold very likely had plenty a good enough grade if ownership considered QB a need.


You don't KNOW that though dude. Maybe he WAS picked simply because he was the best player on the board. I mean... I wouldn't be surprised if their belief that Eli has some years left played a role as well... but maybe it didn't play as much of a role as you seem to think and DG said 'Damn that... I got to get this kid (Barkley) on my team come hell or high water!' and decided to take him. AND, maybe DG didn't think that any of the other QBs were enough of a 'sure thing' to take over what most considered to be one of the few 'sure things' in the draft (that also hit a position of need).

I'm not sure why this matters to be honest.
LOL!  
T-Bone : 5/8/2018 1:49 pm : link
Quote:
Look - he acts like he wants to be definitively told what the Giants were thinking, but he already thinks he knows what they were thinking. It's lunacy.


I gotta be real with ya Joe... this seems to be the point of this thread in a nutshell.
T-Bone  
Go Terps : 5/8/2018 1:53 pm : link
The time to go in a different direction at quarterback was this past offseason: new GM, new coach, a draft that had 5 first round quarterback prospects, and we were picking second overall. Yeah it would have been better had those other elements lined up perfectly with Eli's retirement, but that type of serendipity rarely happens in life.

Yeah we've got two Super Bowls and I wouldn't trade them for anything, but can we really say those were great teams that were the result of a great team building model? Should we use those experiences to inform our decisions going forward?

We had the extremely rare good fortune of having probably the best quarterback in the history of the team healthy for 14 years straight. That is an incredible advantage over the rest of the league in that time period. And we're 8 games over .500 with him. We've won 12 games once in those 14 years. I think there's a failure there somewhere, and if I were running the team I'd want to identify that failure so I don't repeat it going forward.
Love you guys, but when we want to judge someone  
Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx : 5/8/2018 1:57 pm : link
badly enough we can always find a way.....
RE: What's funny about this draft  
arcarsenal : 5/8/2018 1:58 pm : link
In comment 13958013 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I bet right now Baltimore wouldn't trade Lamar Jackson for Baker Mayfield straight up.

Lots of varying views of this draft. It will be interesting in 3 or 4 years to look back.


I bet they would. Cleveland wouldn't.

Mayfield is a better prospect than Jackson. His biggest red flags are his height and personality. He can play. (And I'm someone who liked Jackson more than many here going into the draft)

Kind of a pointless hypothesis anyway - it's not like BAL would ever admit that.
Joe  
JonC : 5/8/2018 2:00 pm : link
You aren't being judged, but your positions certainly are being questioned.
RE: T-Bone  
T-Bone : 5/8/2018 2:20 pm : link
In comment 13958112 Go Terps said:
Quote:
The time to go in a different direction at quarterback was this past offseason: new GM, new coach, a draft that had 5 first round quarterback prospects, and we were picking second overall. Yeah it would have been better had those other elements lined up perfectly with Eli's retirement, but that type of serendipity rarely happens in life.

Yeah we've got two Super Bowls and I wouldn't trade them for anything, but can we really say those were great teams that were the result of a great team building model? Should we use those experiences to inform our decisions going forward?

We had the extremely rare good fortune of having probably the best quarterback in the history of the team healthy for 14 years straight. That is an incredible advantage over the rest of the league in that time period. And we're 8 games over .500 with him. We've won 12 games once in those 14 years. I think there's a failure there somewhere, and if I were running the team I'd want to identify that failure so I don't repeat it going forward.


Regarding your first paragraph... I gotta be honest with you... I felt similarly at the very end of last season and wouldn't have been mad (maybe a lil disappointed because I'm REALLY excited to see a Barkley/Beckham/Engram combo) had we gone QB in this draft because of that thought process. So I can't argue too much with your first paragraph. I just wanted to know when you thought he time to change was.

Regarding your second and third paragraphs though... I'm not sure I 100% agree with them. I mean... besides the Pats how many other teams have been able to keep the level of sustained success that you keep holding against the Giants as a franchise? And to a point it can be argued that the Pats sustained success can be attributed in one part having perhaps the greatest HC/QB duo in league history and the other being in a criminally pathetic division throughout that HC\QB's tenure. How many other division in the league can say that they've had the same team win it as often as the Pats have during the Belichick\Brady run? Meanwhile, most of the other divisions (except for perhaps the NFC West during the Seahawks' heydays a few years ago) had one team be so dominant within their division?

It seems to be you're somewhat holding the norm (no dominant teams in any division) against the Giants when it's the exception (the Pats) that's rare. In many of the winning Super Bowl team's seasons, it's been the team that 'got hot at the right time' that has won it, it seems to me.

Lastly, let's not forget that the QB deserves some of the blame for some of those bad seasons the team has had. It's not like Eli has consistently always played like a top 3-5 QB throughout his Giants career.
While no one was judging you before  
Jimmy Googs : 5/8/2018 2:21 pm : link
that probably had now changed...
RE: Love you guys, but when we want to judge someone  
T-Bone : 5/8/2018 2:23 pm : link
In comment 13958117 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:
Quote:
badly enough we can always find a way.....


I'm not trying to judge you Joe. I actually enjoy and appreciate some of your threads. It's just... like Fatman said... sometimes it seems you post these threads almost like you just want to see your name in lights. I have no beef with you Joe... I'm just saying, in THIS CASE... with THIS THREAD... I'm not really sure what your point is. No offense playa.
RE: RE: Love you guys, but when we want to judge someone  
Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx : 5/8/2018 2:38 pm : link
In comment 13958149 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 13958117 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:


Quote:


badly enough we can always find a way.....



I'm not trying to judge you Joe. I actually enjoy and appreciate some of your threads. It's just... like Fatman said... sometimes it seems you post these threads almost like you just want to see your name in lights. I have no beef with you Joe... I'm just saying, in THIS CASE... with THIS THREAD... I'm not really sure what your point is. No offense playa.


Its all good bro. I love and pray for everyone here. I was forgiven much through the blood of Christ so I dont judge others but Love them!
For a bible thumper  
JonC : 5/8/2018 3:05 pm : link
you tend to be one disingenuous football poster.
RE: RE: RE: Love you guys, but when we want to judge someone  
T-Bone : 5/8/2018 3:07 pm : link
In comment 13958170 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:
Quote:
In comment 13958149 T-Bone said:


Quote:


In comment 13958117 Big_Blue_in_the_Bronx said:


Quote:


badly enough we can always find a way.....



I'm not trying to judge you Joe. I actually enjoy and appreciate some of your threads. It's just... like Fatman said... sometimes it seems you post these threads almost like you just want to see your name in lights. I have no beef with you Joe... I'm just saying, in THIS CASE... with THIS THREAD... I'm not really sure what your point is. No offense playa.



Its all good bro. I love and pray for everyone here. I was forgiven much through the blood of Christ so I dont judge others but Love them!


Well that took a bit of an unexpected turn... but AMEN!
RE: And this, to me, is the crux of it all:  
WillVAB : 5/8/2018 3:24 pm : link
In comment 13957971 Go Terps said:
Quote:


Quote:


Ross Tucker: If the Giants passed on a franchise QB for Barkley, it was shortsighted.

Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.



This has been the Giants' approach to team building since they traded for Eli Manning in 2004. If their organizational philosophy could be summed up in a phrase, it would be "make one more run with Eli." I believe that is once again the current approach.

I also believe that approach is flawed, and the biggest reason why the Giants are only 8 games over .500 (111-103) with Eli as their quarterback. That is a lower winning percentage than his draft contemporaries Ben Roethlisberger (135-63) and Phillip Rivers (106-86).

Because the plan (if it can even be called that) hasn't changed, I don't expect the results to change. We'll be a middling team whose success or failure will be determined by a few lucky or unlucky breaks here and there. What I don't expect to be repeated is Eli miracling our asses to a title. I think those days are behind him.

This is a reactive, unimaginative organization.


This isnít about ďone more run with Eli.Ē DG has been pretty transparent regarding his philosophy to team building ó run the ball, stop the run, rush the passer. Every move heís made since stepping in as GM has been in line with that philosophy.

If you disagree thatís fine. But thereís nothing short sighted or reactive about his approach.
RE: Morning Drive yesterday.  
JOrthman : 5/8/2018 8:02 pm : link
In comment 13957918 Boy Cord said:
Quote:
Ross Tucker: If the Giants passed on a franchise QB for Barkley, it was shortsighted.

Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.

Both have strong arguments. Papaís has the lower chance of success IMO as I feel the odds are greater that Rosen or Darnold have a higher percentage chance of being franchise QBs than the Giants winning a Super Bowl in the next few years. Modern-day NFL wisdom says you go with the potential franchise QB.

Giants picked #2 in 1981 and got LT. I was a newly-minted teen when LT was drafted so I donít remember what the pre-draft chatter was before the 1981 draft. Were people calling for a QB?

The only two QBs hat has any NFL success out of that draft were Neil Lomax and Wade Wilson, and only one was drafted in the first round at #6.

Sounds like the decision to go non-QB was pretty damn easy compared to this year. What Iím rambling on about is I find myself on both sides of the fence: wanted a QB but damn excited to see SB on the field. It just is what it is.

The bottom line is, the dust hasnít settled and it wonít settle for a long time, if ever. This decision has the fodder that will last the playersí careers and becomes football lore that will be hotly debated for possibly decades.


To me there is a flaw in Ross's thinking. People seem to think the NFL is the NFL of the 80's before Free Agency. In the past you could draft a quarterback and build around them. That NFL is gone. You have to pick the best players now and not worry about 15 years from now. You have no idea what will happen year to year. We went from 11-5 to 3-13. You don't know when a player will retire, shoot off their hand or have a career threatening injury. You always have to get the best players now. It's not like we can take a QB now and we know for certain the rest of the team is going to stay the same and gradually improve each year. There are hundreds of variables in place so go with the best people now.
I have put this up on the board  
DonnieD89 : 5/8/2018 9:58 pm : link
last week. DG has all along pretty much said what he was looking for and what intended to do in the draft. He did not pull any punches or intended to be deceptive. Everything he said was basically what he wanted to do in the draft. He believed that Eli still had some juice in the tank. He stated he wanted to run the ball, stop the run and rush the passer. All reflective of this draft. He also said stay true to your board. He said don't get too cute with trading down when you have the #2 pick. He said if you are not in love with the QB, you can't force yourself to pick one. It seems still that some don't want to take him at face value.
RE: RE: Morning Drive yesterday.  
Ten Ton Hammer : 5/9/2018 2:05 am : link
In comment 13958478 JOrthman said:
Quote:


To me there is a flaw in Ross's thinking. People seem to think the NFL is the NFL of the 80's before Free Agency. In the past you could draft a quarterback and build around them. That NFL is gone. You have to pick the best players now and not worry about 15 years from now.


Teams still draft QBs and build around them. What do you mean by this? What team hasn't drafted a QB and then proceeded to build around them?
RE: RE: RE: Morning Drive yesterday.  
JOrthman : 5/9/2018 2:42 am : link
In comment 13958826 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
In comment 13958478 JOrthman said:


Quote:




To me there is a flaw in Ross's thinking. People seem to think the NFL is the NFL of the 80's before Free Agency. In the past you could draft a quarterback and build around them. That NFL is gone. You have to pick the best players now and not worry about 15 years from now.



Teams still draft QBs and build around them. What do you mean by this? What team hasn't drafted a QB and then proceeded to build around them?


I'm not saying they don't. I'm saying in this draft everyone seemed to say you always draft a QB first regardless of how you value or rate those QB's. And they advocated we do that based on needing a QB a year or two from now. It would of been one thing if we traded or cut Eli before the draft but with Eli on the team it is a different story.
RE: Think Shurmur and DG think  
Nomad Crow on the Madison : 5/9/2018 6:42 am : link
In comment 13957992 TMS said:
Quote:
the potential of someone with Barkley's size, speed and skill set, are very rare. A chance to put together an offense different than those out there now. Think he will be used big in the passing game and force teams to double him because of his 'take it to the house" ability anytime". Opening everybody else up. Should be fun to watch.


Everyone may be open, but if Eli can't get them the ball, it doesn't matter. And one more thing -- the word is "proud."
RE: That's your opinion, not necessarily based all on facts either  
UberAlias : 5/9/2018 6:53 am : link
In comment 13958052 JonC said:
Quote:
and while they have banked on Eli, they clearly picked their #1 prospect in the entire draft (fact) and are building around them (fact) trying to build the best team possible after the draft didn't deliver their franchise QB.

So be it.
This sums it up right here. If the loved a QB they would have taken him. They didnít, so they took the highest player on their board.

Time will tell if they made the right choice.
.  
Bill2 : 5/9/2018 8:09 am : link
Not picking a qb is not the same as going for it in Eli's window.

Yes you try every year.

But the downside risk plan could be a 3 year cap aware transition while tacking year by year.

Makes sense at the end of every qb career.

Too many variables last year for them to tell what Eli can do in the short term. And his hit on the cap meant you were going to pay him. Adding more cap space to the qb position in 2018 while robbing all the other positions is not a winning formula.

Nor is it a time in the evolving NFL to ignore that 3 of the last qb standing did not take up a lot of cap. And the other was NE who compared to the performance from the GOAT does not drain the team just to pay the QB.

Its the total paid the qb position relative to likely performance in 2018 that is the relevant for it can drain the rest of the resources required in a team sport.

Im going to suggest that the going forward nfl is going to find that if you dont get brady or peyton then finding another way to win is essential. This last era saw a lot of teams think paying Peyton or Brady light was the only way. That can work...but it relys on luck and getting hot at the right time.

Probability ( analytics applied to the cap and not just the game) favors spreading a fixed cap for talent.

Notice the difference between spending 12m verus 25m on one player....its three to four good players with creative contracts. In a game decided by 8 plays a game...thats a lot of difference.

In sum, there are ways to win without a franchise qb cap drain. Is it preferable? No i suspect 2 to 3 qbs are worth more than 3 good players. The issue is being a final four if you dont have one of the top 2 qbs.

We dont right now and into the future so Barkley and a broader team was a hedge until one shows up.

Lastly i point out that Eli's strength is reading a defense. A defense one step back and eyes on 3 to 4 players feeds into the great strength of an aging mobility limited qb. Dont think of Barkley in a position comparison...think of him as an asymetrical add to the overall strengths that are there.

He may not even show the stats of his impact.

" Make sure its not Nicks or Cruz."

3 threats and a very crafty ( and sunk cost in 2018) qb like eli is why the oft right arguement about rb and qb is weaker in this specific case.

Imo
don' you have homes??????  
Victor in CT : 5/9/2018 8:15 am : link
:-)
Caddyshack - ( New Window )
This change is an iceberg, and Saquon Barkley is just the tippy tip  
glowrider : 5/9/2018 11:34 am : link
The Giants have been in crisis mode since deciding to go with Reese over Coughlin, quietly or otherwise, culminating with the historically awful 2017 campaign. They brought in Gettleman to reset the culture, clear out the clubhouse, and build the future of the Giants before he retires from a very successful career (hopefully with one or two more rings). Gettleman would say it was bashert he got tossed out of Carolina and his old home needed someone with pretty much his exact resume. Same thing happened with TC.

Further, while DG is emphasizing old school football princples and sound roster fundamentals (we finally have some middle class depth coming), we have a new non-rookie HC that has been on the bleeding edge of offensive football, has proven he can polish the biggest of turds into pro-bowlers and SB champions, and is humble through it all. Now, he has an arsenal heís never had before (which will be needed to cover up warts on the defense).

In a league trending towards flag football, with major player safety concerns, special QB protective rules, and shit tons of fantasy $, more and more offense will be generated by more and more teams/QBs. In short I believe the requirement of having an elite QB is diminishing. This has already proven out as recently as this year with Nick Foles (second string) and Case Keenum (third string) being sufficient to get you to the dance, or even win it.

As for the pick, this team needs a leader in the clubhouse and a culture change just as much as a playmaker. There is a power vacuum that is being filled by OBJ and drama. Landon Collins seems to be a leader but also needs to figure out what to say and what not to say in public. As much as any other reason, Saquon is here to be The Franchise. He is expected to not only perform on the field but to be a leader off of it. Toxic clubhouses need airing out and he is sunlight and fresh air. The center of gravity shifts immediately.

Itís much easier to like the pick as Hernandez fell in our lap, as did Lauletta. I am confident that Saquon was not only the best player in the draft, but the best player for this team and our current and future needs. It is Coachís job to do what he does, put points on the board, minimize errors, and breed QBs. McNabb, Foles, and Keenum sounds like the set up to a miserable joke, but he had his hands on all of them, and all led teams at least to the Championship game, if not the Super Bowl, and should be funding the Shurmur family college fund for what he did for them. Heís also a TE guru.

This draft, more than any other in recent memory, was about reshaping the culture and direction of the team. The values of our GM, the strengths and system of our new coach, the toxicity of the clubhouse, in addition to league wide trends need be considered when evaluating the pick. And thatís why I think Barkley was the easy choice. He brings far more to the table than his game, and the team needs that desperately. They drafted Saquon the man as much as Saquon the football player.

Phil Simms said it just the other day that there are a handful of coordinators around the league that do nothing but get their players paid the big bucks via their development, and Shurmur is one of those guys. If the Coach pans out, then this draft fits in very neatly with a coordinated plan going forward into the future beyond the Eli years.

Win today, win tomorrow, win everyday.
Phil Simms sound bite re Coach being a money maker for QBs - ( New Window )
Well said, glowrider.  
Klaatu : 5/9/2018 11:38 am : link
....
I think the selection  
LakeGeorgeGiant : 5/9/2018 11:45 am : link
has more to do with the fact that they fell in love with Barkley than anything else.

He was the highest rated player on their board, and DG is a no-nonsense sort.

We have analyzed the shit out of this, but I don't think it necessarily means that they will hitch their wagon to Eli beyond his current contract. I don't think they necessarily had huge reservations about the QBs (even if they didn't become enamored with any of them). They have a couple young guys and Eli, they will see how it shakes out over the next 2 seasons. Although I still suspect they won't throw more cash at Eli in 2 years when he is 39.

They fell in love with Barkley. I think it's that simple.
glowrider  
JonC : 5/9/2018 11:48 am : link
Great post and good to see you.
good post glowrider  
Victor in CT : 5/9/2018 11:56 am : link
all time great post if it can stop BBitB from trying to force whatever his point is on us.
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner