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?
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.
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.
So Jon, if they truly thought Eli was done you think they bypass Sam Darnold at #2?
Clearly, they believe Eli's got something left AND they didn't believe in a QB over SB. Time will tell if they were right.
But the fact of the matter is, they chose a possible great running back over a possible franchise quarterback.
If they win another Super Bowl with Eli or go on to win Super Bowl(s) with Webb or Lauletta, then they were right.
If not and either if Darnold, Allen or Rosen go on to stardom, then it is one if the biggest blunders in the history of the organization.
Barkley - top RB prospect in years and that's saying a lot with Gurley, Fournette, Elliott coming out recently. But he's more than just a RB as he is exceptional out of the backfield, something some of his detractors like to overlook when they point out his (relatively) low rushing totals from last year. Shurmur has shown he can be very creative offensively and with the Vikes did an excellent job maximizing the talent and finding mismatches. DG also drafted a similar (but far less explosive) player in Christian McCaffrey #8 overall last year. Like CM, Barkley won't be expected to run the ball 20-25 times/game, but could easily see 20+ touches per game as they look to get him the ball in open space and move him around to create mismatches.
Normally, dump-offs are extremely reliable (I say *normally* because the Giants RBs were awful last year) and if you have an explosive player like Barkley they can even lead to big plays and a much more efficient offense. How many times will Barkley need to beat a LB in the flat before teams start covering him with a safety or extra DB? And the second the safeties start cheating up a little or hesitate, Beckham is blowing past them or Engram is getting behind them down the seam.
Clearly, they believe Eli's got something left AND they didn't believe in a QB over SB. Time will tell if they were right.
I think JonC is on target here. Gettleman himself said it fairly simply "you have the #2 pick, don't over think it". The most significant thing I think Gettleman said on draft night was that if you have to talk yourself into a pick, especially that high, you don't make the pick because you have to live with it.
He's pretty clearly talking about the QBs, and Sam Darnold specifically. If you have Barkley so highly rated, and there are no good trade down options, and you aren't sold on the QBs, I'd imagine this wasn't that hard a decision for Gettleman to make once Mayfield went #1.
Clearly, they believe Eli's got something left AND they didn't believe in a QB over SB. Time will tell if they were right.
He was their target partially b/c they believe Eli has 'years' left as many involved in the decision making put it.
1) They emphatically believe that Eli has AT LEAST 2 more years left of above average play. They probably believe his downfall was due to a horrible supporting cast and system, like many on this site believe.
or
2) They really think they have something in Webb. The Lauletta pick fell to them late and they couldn't pass on getting some competition, but they are obviously liking what they are seeing and hearing out of Webb.
We will/should 100% know the answer to #1 after this season, as this should be the best supporting cast Eli has had in 5+ years. The answer to #2 comes shortly thereafter.
You don't force the pick. I was very vocal about preferring a QB if they believed one was the guy to takeover for Eli. They decided that prospect was not present.
Quote:
then SB was their target, end of story.
Clearly, they believe Eli's got something left AND they didn't believe in a QB over SB. Time will tell if they were right.
I think JonC is on target here. Gettleman himself said it fairly simply "you have the #2 pick, don't over think it". The most significant thing I think Gettleman said on draft night was that if you have to talk yourself into a pick, especially that high, you don't make the pick because you have to live with it.
He's pretty clearly talking about the QBs, and Sam Darnold specifically. If you have Barkley so highly rated, and there are no good trade down options, and you aren't sold on the QBs, I'd imagine this wasn't that hard a decision for Gettleman to make once Mayfield went #1.
I still haven't seen anyone answer this question: Does DG pass up Darnold if they thought Eli was 'done' or very nearly finished?
Yes Barkley carried a rare grade, I certainly agree with this. However I just see no way we pass on Darnold if they thought Eli was done.
You don't force the pick. I was very vocal about preferring a QB if they believed one was the guy to takeover for Eli. They decided that prospect was not present.
This is where we disagree then. I think the prospect was present but they didn't deem their to be enough of a 'current need' to take him.
1) They emphatically believe that Eli has AT LEAST 2 more years left of above average play. They probably believe his downfall was due to a horrible supporting cast and system, like many on this site believe.
or
2) They really think they have something in Webb. The Lauletta pick fell to them late and they couldn't pass on getting some competition, but they are obviously liking what they are seeing and hearing out of Webb.
We will/should 100% know the answer to #1 after this season, as this should be the best supporting cast Eli has had in 5+ years. The answer to #2 comes shortly thereafter.
EXACTLY. Or even a combination of the two and they further hedged their bets on Webb by taking a second tier QB in Lauletta. Taking him in the fourth meant no where near the commitment of taking a QB #2 overall (which would have likely meant moving on from Eli at the end of the year-which they obviously weren't ready to commit to do.)
Barkley helps your running game.
He helps your passing game.
He helps create defensive mismatches.
He helps putting the play action back in the Giants offense.
He helps protect your QB.
He helps your 4 minute offense.
He helps your time of possession.
He helps your defense.
Its simple he helps many phases of the game and he helps NOW and in the future..
Like I said right or wrong, Darnold was very high on their board. They weren't ready to part with Eli whom they believe has 'years' left AND while feeling strongly they can win now in his remaining 'championship' window.
We will see in a couple years just how wise a decision this is. If we win a championship or close to it before Eli retires, that makes this is a sound decision even if one of Darnold or Rosen become a franchise QB.
Or of course if Webb or Lauletta turn out to be legitimate upper level Qbs.
Quote:
DG's point about talking yourself into a prospect looms large.
You don't force the pick. I was very vocal about preferring a QB if they believed one was the guy to takeover for Eli. They decided that prospect was not present.
This is where we disagree then. I think the prospect was present but they didn't deem their to be enough of a 'current need' to take him.
dammit man how dense are you??? I wasn't abot need! it was about getting the player they most believed in!
They stuck to their draft board.
I honestly believe that Eli (warts and all) is a better QB in 2018 and 2019 than any of 5 QBs we can possibly be discussing.
Factor in the relative position of SB's football player evaluation grade compared to the QBs' evaluation as players.
Wildcard factor: It is possible, not likely but not ludicrous, that Webb is better than any of the 5 in 2020.
It should have taken DG about 2 seconds to make this decision.
Barkley and a good (great?) running game makes any QB look a whole lot better. And it will for Eli too.
~Take the best player in the draft
~Get a player that helps your franchise QB be a better player
~Bring in a high quality, hard working player
~Take one of the best lineman in the draft with the 2nd round pick
It is damn tough to find a franchise QB but when you do, you don't let them go until you know that are finished. Eli isn't!!
They stuck to their draft board.
Still haven't heard someone come out and say it.
So regardless of what they felt about Eli, you believe Saquon would have been the pick?
I could see passing on Mayfield,Allen and possibly Rosen. But not Sam. Just Too good production and personality match for what they look for.
It is damn tough to find a franchise QB but when you do, you don't let them go until you know that are finished. Eli isn't!!
John I think their thinking centers more on this than Darnold's grade. They don't want to let go of a Qb they think has years of championship football left.
Sadly, it doesn't stop the multitude of threads thinking the information will come out and the theories behind what the thinking was.
JonC and Victor have pretty much given the most rational view.
Thinking the situation is getting clearer from comments by DG isn't going to happen.
Quote:
probably was #4 at highest.
They stuck to their draft board.
Still haven't heard someone come out and say it.
So regardless of what they felt about Eli, you believe Saquon would have been the pick?
I could see passing on Mayfield,Allen and possibly Rosen. But not Sam. Just Too good production and personality match for what they look for.
It seems contradictory that you would have skepticism about one person's statement on the team's vluation of Darnold but in other posts insist that the Giants valued Darnold highly. I'd like to see someone come out and say that too.
In truth, there's a lot of conjecture here about the what the Giants themselves believed. Maybe not so much conjecture but transference of our own views onto the brain of DG
Time will tell. I think it's past time to move on from this debate. It will undoubtedly resurface many times over, but for now we should get behind the decision and enjoy the truly special addition to the team. The impact SB is going to have for Eli and Odell is going to be massive.
Occam's razor on Barkley...and every other pick they made...is that DG spoke truth. The name at the top of the ability/talent/value list (value being *solely* a function of ability and talent) was Barkley in the first round, Hernandez in the second round, Carter at 3a...etc.
I really do think that they switched from the previous regime having a tier of talent and then picking by need to a straight vertical list of ability and then just going straight down that list to pick the top name at their time to pick.
If they factored in need and selected from a tier of similarly ranked people, DG was first of all lying, and second of all, they would have taken a lot more time to deliberate before picking.
If I'm the new Head Coach in that situation, I wouldn't really want "Make Rookie QB our next franchise QB" on my plate. It's recipe for disaster.
I'd want the vet QB leading my offensive meetings while I try to fix the mess and get the 52 other guys up to speed. Get the team ready and to the point where a rookie QB can come in and have success.
But seriously, if Barkley is Adrian Peterson but a better receiver & blocker than we did well. If not, we'll never hear the end of it.
I don't care how great a QB you are. If you can't run the ball and stop the run and pressure the QB you're not going to win very many games. I like Gettleman addressing our running game and the OL.
I said it before and I'll say it again. If the Ravens can win a SB with Trent "Effin" Dilfer at QB what does that tell you. They won because the could run the ball and stop the run and pressure the QB on defense.
I predict the Giants will win another SB before Darnold, Rosen or Mayfield ever do.
I love the pick. I think it just underscores that ownership believes we are in a 'win now' window (despite last year's debacle) while Eli still has life in his arm.
Many here have a problem with the word rebuild ... this wasn't a tear down start from scratch rebuild. But, they are rebuilding the defense, the OL, and the offensive scheme, as well as depth/specials.
But seriously, if Barkley is Adrian Peterson but a better receiver & blocker than we did well. If not, we'll never hear the end of it.
I think it's more the results. If we win a SuperBowl or at least come close and Barkley plays a big role in Eli's remaining few years, this will be considered the 'right' move.
However if we don't and/or one of Darnold or Rosen become a top 10 NFL QB for the next 10-15 years this will be questioned for years to come.
I actually agree with Giants thinking. I believe Eli has a few years left and Barkley could have even more a positive impact than Gurley,Zeke and Fournette have had leading their teams to the playoffs.
And of course if either Webb or Lauletta at least prove to be in range of what Darnold or Rosen become that in itself further justifies the pick.
Quote:
People will still question the pick... I don’t know what to tell them... If Saquon plays as well as he is capable of playing in his first two years, we will be in some playoff games, and if Eli has anything left he can lead one last playoff run IMO. By the time Darnold develops into a great QB like I think he will, this entire team will have had to be rebuilt and we will have to witness several really bad years with no guarantee of contention any time soon. Loving the Saquon pick more and more each day as we get closer to seeing him in action, can’t wait. Does Giants rookie mini camp start this Friday?
I love the pick. I think it just underscores that ownership believes we are in a 'win now' window (despite last year's debacle) while Eli still has life in his arm.
Too, Shurmur had Keenum 1 win from the SB. He was great with Foles when he was first with Philly. Did well with Bradford pre injury. Aside from the fact that they considered SB a no-brainer, I have to believe Webb or Lauletta could manage this O under the aegis of Shurmur if necessary.
Many here have a problem with the word rebuild ... this wasn't a tear down start from scratch rebuild. But, they are rebuilding the defense, the OL, and the offensive scheme, as well as depth/specials.
Which is a big reason why they chose Barkley and not Darnold. B/C if they didnt feel they could 'win now' (or soon) they likely don't pass up on the franchise talent of Darnold.
Anyway, he says that while he really liked the Giants' draft, he also really didn't like it, because even if Barkley turns out to be "the next big thing" at RB, it won't mean anything if Eli Manning is cooked. The Giants will have blown their best chance at getting a franchise QB to succeed him, and they'll regret it for the next fifteen years.
Fifteen years? Seriously? Yup, that's what he said. Fifteen years.
I thought that was pretty stupid. Even if Manning is cooked, even if Webb or Lauletta never amount to anything more than acceptable back-ups, would it really take them that long to find another QB that could lead them to glory? I don't think so. They may go through some lean years, but if they can put together a team that's relatively stout across the board while they're looking for their QB (in the draft, through free-agency, or via a trade), well, so be it.
I look at what the 2005 Steelers were able to do with a dominant defense, a monster running game, and the 11th pick in the '04 draft in his second year at QB, and I don't worry too much about what the Giants didn't do in this year's draft.
Anyway, he says that while he really liked the Giants' draft, he also really didn't like it, because even if Barkley turns out to be "the next big thing" at RB, it won't mean anything if Eli Manning is cooked. The Giants will have blown their best chance at getting a franchise QB to succeed him, and they'll regret it for the next fifteen years.
Fifteen years? Seriously? Yup, that's what he said. Fifteen years.
I thought that was pretty stupid. Even if Manning is cooked, even if Webb or Lauletta never amount to anything more than acceptable back-ups, would it really take them that long to find another QB that could lead them to glory? I don't think so. They may go through some lean years, but if they can put together a team that's relatively stout across the board while they're looking for their QB (in the draft, through free-agency, or via a trade), well, so be it.
I look at what the 2005 Steelers were able to do with a dominant defense, a monster running game, and the 11th pick in the '04 draft in his second year at QB, and I don't worry too much about what the Giants didn't do in this year's draft.
There has been alot of debate on the top 4 guys in this draft. I guess it all depends on your 'final' grade on 3 of the 4 (since Mayfield went #1). If you beleive that one or more of Allen,Rosen or Darnold will become franchise Qbs it makes the debate all the more interesting.
Because if Eli falls apart too soon and Webb /Lauletta aren't legit NFL QB's and one of those guys turn into the next Eli, Ben Roethlisberger or Phil Rivers, this could become a historic miss for the organization.
Of course swing the pendulum the other way and we win a championship with Eli and Barkley playing big roles in the next 2-3 years and it possibly becomes the best decision ever.
Quote:
and Kim Jones also reported there's a plan in place to quickly rebuild over the next 2-3 years. You could say that's a view that suggests the window is open now and they're trying to keep it open for whatever Eli's got left, as well as bring a QB along during the process.
Many here have a problem with the word rebuild ... this wasn't a tear down start from scratch rebuild. But, they are rebuilding the defense, the OL, and the offensive scheme, as well as depth/specials.
Which is a big reason why they chose Barkley and not Darnold. B/C if they didnt feel they could 'win now' (or soon) they likely don't pass up on the franchise talent of Darnold.
If they BELIEVED he was a franchise talent in the first place. They weren’t going to settle or force such a high pick. DG said this many times
DG gave his folks plenty of opportunities to convince him to go with another player but nobody was able to.
He also was never going to trade that pick.
Therefore, we have Saquon Barkley.
Lets play ball...
Oooooohhhhh... didn't know that. Thanks.
The other thing to think about wrt Davis Webb is that he was drafted in the 3rd round because he was not NFL ready. Now fast forward one year, and maybe he is more ready than he was last year, maybe he is a better prospect now than he was a year ago. If so, he might very well be a first round value, today, in the eyes of the Giants management.
Davis and Lauletta are literally two months apart, age wise. I am not so sure where Davis would be ranked in this year's draft if you took his college tape and added a year of experience on an NFL practice squad. I suspect he is above the third rounder in terms of value to the organization, and may have graded out above several of the highly touted QB's, which is what really matters.
DG gave his folks plenty of opportunities to convince him to go with another player but nobody was able to.
He also was never going to trade that pick.
Therefore, we have Saquon Barkley.
Lets play ball...
This thread's original intent was not to question the pick but moreso to see if we could figure out Giants thinking behind it.
Obviously there are many variables but the big one in my estimation is they believe Eli has years left AND that they could compete for a championship in his remaining window. Otherwise, I just don't see them passing up Darnold at #2.
Quote:
and Kim Jones also reported there's a plan in place to quickly rebuild over the next 2-3 years. You could say that's a view that suggests the window is open now and they're trying to keep it open for whatever Eli's got left, as well as bring a QB along during the process.
Many here have a problem with the word rebuild ... this wasn't a tear down start from scratch rebuild. But, they are rebuilding the defense, the OL, and the offensive scheme, as well as depth/specials.
Which is a big reason why they chose Barkley and not Darnold. B/C if they didnt feel they could 'win now' (or soon) they likely don't pass up on the franchise talent of Darnold.
I was one of Darnold's biggest supporters here, and even I don't think that statement is truth, and all the other facts and logic suggest the contrary.
They stayed true to their board and conviction on SB.
DG said Barkley was graded as high as Peyton Manning. They've basically said without saying that Barkley carried a much higher grade than the other QB's (Chubb was supposedly the next closest).
It's ponderous that you're trying to figure out something that's already been laid out pretty clearly.
But I'm guessing it will be 100 more threads before it finally sinks in.
Quote:
a great player with minimal to no risk.
DG gave his folks plenty of opportunities to convince him to go with another player but nobody was able to.
He also was never going to trade that pick.
Therefore, we have Saquon Barkley.
Lets play ball...
This thread's original intent was not to question the pick but moreso to see if we could figure out Giants thinking behind it.
Obviously there are many variables but the big one in my estimation is they believe Eli has years left AND that they could compete for a championship in his remaining window. Otherwise, I just don't see them passing up Darnold at #2.
I gave you all the thinking you need behind it.
Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.
Both have strong arguments. Papa’s 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 don’t 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 I’m 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 hasn’t settled and it won’t settle for a long time, if ever. This decision has the fodder that will last the players’ careers and becomes football lore that will be hotly debated for possibly decades.
Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.
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.
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 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.
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.
Could they be wrong and you right? Sure, it happens of course. But the odds of them being wrong and you right? Just sayin’/askin’.
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?
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.
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.
Very similar to the BoM song.
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.
Lots of varying views of this draft. It will be interesting in 3 or 4 years to look back.
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?
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.
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'.
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.
So be it.
Sometimes this place feels like the Twilight Zone.
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?
Sometimes this place feels like the Twilight Zone.
No way. With his salary? Well...color me shocked, and let me apologize.
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?
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.
Not sure why, but I have now reached the moment when I say,
whatever...
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.
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?
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.
I gotta be real with ya Joe... this seems to be the point of this thread in a nutshell.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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!
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 isn’t about “one more run with Eli.” DG has been pretty transparent regarding his philosophy to team building — run the ball, stop the run, rush the passer. Every move he’s made since stepping in as GM has been in line with that philosophy.
If you disagree that’s fine. But there’s nothing short sighted or reactive about his approach.
Papa: But if the Giants bring home another trophy in two to three years it was worth it.
Both have strong arguments. Papa’s 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 don’t 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 I’m 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 hasn’t settled and it won’t settle for a long time, if ever. This decision has the fodder that will last the players’ 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.
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?
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.
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."
So be it.
Time will tell if they made the right choice.
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
Caddyshack - ( New Window )
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 he’s 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.
It’s 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 Coach’s 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. He’s 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 that’s 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 )
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.