1) Nearly all the "reports" about Jones, regardless of the message, do not seem to be actually sourced. They are either speculation by the writer or weak rumor mill bits that are 3rd hand or worse.
2) The information actually coming from the Giants officially is as expected. It is generic and publicly supporting their high priced QB who is still under contract and not going anywhere this year.
3) None of this information has led me to interpret it with any confidence. What I mean is, I honestly don't have an idea what the Giants plans seem to be and the same stories have been taken to mean completely different QB paths.
4) Along with the prior points, I haven't read anything related to Wilson or Lock that seems to come from a source with actual knowledge of the situations. The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM, and even that seems to be to save face. And obviously Lock himself at his presser. But, even that was the kind of generic responses you expect from a player in his situation.
For some reason... I have a feeling Nix might be an under the radar signing for the G-men. There's so much BS swirling around right now, except on Nix and Penix. I wonder if those two are quietly higher on the Giants radar. Maybe with a trade down. And yes a WR at #6 wouldn't shock me at all either.
Man I just have zero idea what to expect this year. I think the Giants are doing a good job at keeping everyone guessing.
You know, I watched a couple of film breakdowns and interviews with Nix and he seems like more of a possibility than I thought previously. His biggest know really is his age but I think that is overblown.
On your point 4, related to Lock, it's from his own interview, backed back the recording posted online. How could you find anything more credible than that?
Then you said "The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM". How could that 2nd hand source more credible than the 1st hand?
And then you said Lock's response was just "kind of generic responses". Lock has been very clear and specific about the situation, that he was not told to compete for the starter's role. How's that generic response?
1) Nearly all the "reports" about Jones, regardless of the message, do not seem to be actually sourced. They are either speculation by the writer or weak rumor mill bits that are 3rd hand or worse.
2) The information actually coming from the Giants officially is as expected. It is generic and publicly supporting their high priced QB who is still under contract and not going anywhere this year.
3) None of this information has led me to interpret it with any confidence. What I mean is, I honestly don't have an idea what the Giants plans seem to be and the same stories have been taken to mean completely different QB paths.
4) Along with the prior points, I haven't read anything related to Wilson or Lock that seems to come from a source with actual knowledge of the situations. The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM, and even that seems to be to save face. And obviously Lock himself at his presser. But, even that was the kind of generic responses you expect from a player in his situation.
On your point 4, related to Lock, it's from his own interview, backed back the recording posted online. How could you find anything more credible than that?
Then you said "The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM". How could that 2nd hand source more credible than the 1st hand?
And then you said Lock's response was just "kind of generic responses". Lock has been very clear and specific about the situation, that he was not told to compete for the starter's role. How's that generic response?
My bet is that you don't like what you heard.
In comment 16437675 Matt M. said:
Quote:
1) Nearly all the "reports" about Jones, regardless of the message, do not seem to be actually sourced. They are either speculation by the writer or weak rumor mill bits that are 3rd hand or worse.
2) The information actually coming from the Giants officially is as expected. It is generic and publicly supporting their high priced QB who is still under contract and not going anywhere this year.
3) None of this information has led me to interpret it with any confidence. What I mean is, I honestly don't have an idea what the Giants plans seem to be and the same stories have been taken to mean completely different QB paths.
4) Along with the prior points, I haven't read anything related to Wilson or Lock that seems to come from a source with actual knowledge of the situations. The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM, and even that seems to be to save face. And obviously Lock himself at his presser. But, even that was the kind of generic responses you expect from a player in his situation.
It has nothing to do with liking what he said. I said Lock's response was generic because it was exactly what you would expect him to say. Whether it is true or not, there is no way he was going to come in here and say he's competing for the job when Jones has been publicly labeled as the starter. There was nothing wrong with what he said. It is exactly what I expected him to say if he was asked directly.
As for the Seattle GM, I said the most "credible" (including those quotes around it) because I think most people would think a GM's comments were credible if he goes on record. In this particular case, it seemed like he was making stuff up with no knowledge of what went down. So, I don't think what he said had any credibility, but people not close to the situation (i.e fans of other teams, fans not really vested in the Giants or not paying much attention, etc.) see a quote attributed to a GM and think it holds water.
Overall, there is nothing about this move that makes me think
a) the Giants will take a QB, b) the Giants are sticking with Jones, or c) are willing to give Lock a shot. Everything that has been "reported" this off season has been all over the place to the point where I think any of those scenarios are possible or some variations of them. I do think the least likely scenario is c. I think they would be more inclined to stick with Jones than move to Lock. If they are going to move on, I would think it's one of the top 6 QBs in the draft. Even Russell Wilson seemed more likely than Lock starting, and I never really put much weight in that possibility.
RE: Overall, there is nothing about this move that makes me think
OK. I think I misunderstand what you mean by saying "generic". But I do think Lock can easily say some bs (which is very common) like I enjoyed my conversations with the GM and coaches and couldn't wait to start working with them, blah, blah. He doesn't have to lie. It's easier and more approapriate for him to bs, then lie.
If the QB they want is there at 6, they'll take him
No, there were tweets about the QBs. That's why I did a search on the Walter site to confirm. There are articles on Maye visiting too.
The only thing I've found online about Daniels and McCarthy is they met with he Giants at the combine. The only thing I've found anywhere about a QB private visit in NJ was Maye. Where did you see the other two made visits?
No, there were tweets about the QBs. That's why I did a search on the Walter site to confirm. There are articles on Maye visiting too.
The only thing I've found online about Daniels and McCarthy is they met with he Giants at the combine. The only thing I've found anywhere about a QB private visit in NJ was Maye. Where did you see the other two made visits?
Twitter. I don't remember which account(s).
The info blackout is pretty good if we can’t even get intel on site visits.
If the Giants draft a quarterback early on this April, that kid is going to play at some point in 2024 unless Jones is playing very well and/or the Giants are winning. Worry about the day Jones is slogging through a long, hopeless losing season in 2024 when it gets here. That hasn’t happened yet. If the Giants draft a quarterback pretty early, everything changes here sooner rather than later. Jones won’ have a short leash, he will have no leash.
No one is getting fired.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: I think the Lock signing confirmed this
Well, you are already wrong since Waller retired. lol
Ha! Kinda a “if a tree falls in the forest…” thing.
There's no credible report of Waller retiring.
That explains me not knowing what the hell Johnny5 was talking about. I’m like, I’m pretty sure there would have been an article or post from Eric or something…
2) The information actually coming from the Giants officially is as expected. It is generic and publicly supporting their high priced QB who is still under contract and not going anywhere this year.
3) None of this information has led me to interpret it with any confidence. What I mean is, I honestly don't have an idea what the Giants plans seem to be and the same stories have been taken to mean completely different QB paths.
4) Along with the prior points, I haven't read anything related to Wilson or Lock that seems to come from a source with actual knowledge of the situations. The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM, and even that seems to be to save face. And obviously Lock himself at his presser. But, even that was the kind of generic responses you expect from a player in his situation.
Man I just have zero idea what to expect this year. I think the Giants are doing a good job at keeping everyone guessing.
You know, I watched a couple of film breakdowns and interviews with Nix and he seems like more of a possibility than I thought previously. His biggest know really is his age but I think that is overblown.
Then you said "The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM". How could that 2nd hand source more credible than the 1st hand?
And then you said Lock's response was just "kind of generic responses". Lock has been very clear and specific about the situation, that he was not told to compete for the starter's role. How's that generic response?
My bet is that you don't like what you heard.
In comment 16437675 Matt M. said:
2) The information actually coming from the Giants officially is as expected. It is generic and publicly supporting their high priced QB who is still under contract and not going anywhere this year.
3) None of this information has led me to interpret it with any confidence. What I mean is, I honestly don't have an idea what the Giants plans seem to be and the same stories have been taken to mean completely different QB paths.
4) Along with the prior points, I haven't read anything related to Wilson or Lock that seems to come from a source with actual knowledge of the situations. The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM, and even that seems to be to save face. And obviously Lock himself at his presser. But, even that was the kind of generic responses you expect from a player in his situation.
Then you said "The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM". How could that 2nd hand source more credible than the 1st hand?
And then you said Lock's response was just "kind of generic responses". Lock has been very clear and specific about the situation, that he was not told to compete for the starter's role. How's that generic response?
My bet is that you don't like what you heard.
In comment 16437675 Matt M. said:
Quote:
1) Nearly all the "reports" about Jones, regardless of the message, do not seem to be actually sourced. They are either speculation by the writer or weak rumor mill bits that are 3rd hand or worse.
2) The information actually coming from the Giants officially is as expected. It is generic and publicly supporting their high priced QB who is still under contract and not going anywhere this year.
3) None of this information has led me to interpret it with any confidence. What I mean is, I honestly don't have an idea what the Giants plans seem to be and the same stories have been taken to mean completely different QB paths.
4) Along with the prior points, I haven't read anything related to Wilson or Lock that seems to come from a source with actual knowledge of the situations. The most "credible" source is the Seattle GM, and even that seems to be to save face. And obviously Lock himself at his presser. But, even that was the kind of generic responses you expect from a player in his situation.
As for the Seattle GM, I said the most "credible" (including those quotes around it) because I think most people would think a GM's comments were credible if he goes on record. In this particular case, it seemed like he was making stuff up with no knowledge of what went down. So, I don't think what he said had any credibility, but people not close to the situation (i.e fans of other teams, fans not really vested in the Giants or not paying much attention, etc.) see a quote attributed to a GM and think it holds water.
But until then it's smart to not make promises to other QBs or tip their hand Savoy what they want in the draft.
Quote:
No, there were tweets about the QBs. That's why I did a search on the Walter site to confirm. There are articles on Maye visiting too.
The only thing I've found online about Daniels and McCarthy is they met with he Giants at the combine. The only thing I've found anywhere about a QB private visit in NJ was Maye. Where did you see the other two made visits?
Twitter. I don't remember which account(s).
Quote:
In comment 16437493 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
No, there were tweets about the QBs. That's why I did a search on the Walter site to confirm. There are articles on Maye visiting too.
The only thing I've found online about Daniels and McCarthy is they met with he Giants at the combine. The only thing I've found anywhere about a QB private visit in NJ was Maye. Where did you see the other two made visits?
Twitter. I don't remember which account(s).
The info blackout is pretty good if we can’t even get intel on site visits.
I swear some of you have never experienced an off-season before
Quote:
In comment 16437461 Sec 103 said:
Quote:
In comment 16437309 Chip said:
Quote:
WR at 6 more than likely.
Unless things change drastically, DJ will be the starter and a WR will be taken at 6
Looking forward to the Giants drafting a WR at #6 and watching Jones throw checkdown passes at Waller’s hamstrings.
Well, you are already wrong since Waller retired. lol
Ha! Kinda a “if a tree falls in the forest…” thing.
Well, you are already wrong since Waller retired. lol
Ha! Kinda a “if a tree falls in the forest…” thing.
There's no credible report of Waller retiring.
No one is getting fired.
Quote:
In comment 16437645 Johnny5 said:
Well, you are already wrong since Waller retired. lol
Ha! Kinda a “if a tree falls in the forest…” thing.
There's no credible report of Waller retiring.
That explains me not knowing what the hell Johnny5 was talking about. I’m like, I’m pretty sure there would have been an article or post from Eric or something…