I had a thought this morning...
It seems like a portion of the fanbase/media don't believe that QB is a need because the trio of Jones, Lock, and DeVito are on the roster this year...despite the inconsistencies in their play.
Let's say Jones has another middling to sub-par season next year or suffers another injury and the team wants to cut him when his cap number is much more manageable in 2025.
Lock is only on a one-year deal and could easily sign elsewhere next year as an unrestricted free agent in 2025.
DeVito is set to become an exclusive rights free agent in 2025. So while he is not an unrestricted free agent, he is still not technically under contract in 2025.
I guess my point is are we underestimating the need of QB? Is there a chance that the team views QB as a much more pressing need than originally anticipated by fans due to the contract status of the 3 QB's on the roster?
Having a rookie, cost-controlled QB on the roster for 4 or 5 years seems like it might be a necessity.
JJ, and the two nix < blue chip WRs for me.
Agree. The potential upside still has to align with where you draft them. A guy you spend a first round pick on should be a guy you think can develop into a top tier QB. But if you don't have a QB and can't get that top tier prospect, you need to have a plan.
Using this year as an example, if no QB they love is available in the first round, grab Nix if he somehow slides to #47 (or within reasonable trade-up range). Take a Rattler, Pratt or Milton in Rd 3 or 4. Try to get better in some way.
What you can't do is wait 5-6 years to decide what you have like the Giants did with Jones. The QB spot should have competition every year until everyone knows you have your guy.
Kenny Pickett - Pittsburgh intelligently moved on after two years
Given the bust rate for round 1 QBs, I wouldn’t say that landing a QB at #6 with Cousins career would be a mistake. If he finishes his current contract, that’s a 15 year career with 13.5 years as starter.
What traits are you looking for that guarantee a QB can win a title? If you would have picked Eli in round 1 but not Cousins (or Rivers), what about Eli at Ole Miss told you that he'd twice be part of a team that got hot at the right time?
What about Josh Allen? Lamar? Herbert? Burrow? Can they win Super Bowls? All of them? Some of them? Which ones? Brock Purdy and Jalen Hurts came as close or closer than all of them. Why weren't they first round picks?
What is the trait or traits that says Caleb Williams can win a Super Bowl but Bo Nix can't? I personally don't know, but I am pretty confident Daniel Jones can't win a Super Bowl. That much I would say.
The Giants haven't been taking any swings.
Quote:
But I'm not drafting the next Kirk Cousins at 6 overall. Sorry. That would be a dumb move. You could have signed him if that's the bar.
Given the bust rate for round 1 QBs, I wouldn’t say that landing a QB at #6 with Cousins career would be a mistake. If he finishes his current contract, that’s a 15 year career with 13.5 years as starter.
There's an opportunity cost here. The #6 overall pick is a valuable commodity and there will be blue chip players on the board at positions of need. Passing on one of them for a QB who you could have signed one of the same caliber to in FA would not be a good outcome. If you have a conviction for a guy's potential that he can be the guy --you have to take it. Not arguing otherwise. But let's not overestimate the value of the average QBs. They aren't the answer teams should be looking for.
So this tells you what kind of organizational malpractice has taken place on the Giants. Setting it and forgetting it with Daniel Jones is just about the worst decision any team has made in the NFL over the last half decade, including the Watson and Russ contracts. We have wasted a half decade of Giants football waiting for a bad player to become great.
Then I'm not clear what you're saying when you say that picking the next Kirk Cousins at 6 is a dumb move. I think landing sometime as successful as Cousins has been would be a huge win at 6.
--Thibodeaux is a nice player. But, by the threshold needed for QB for so many, nowhere near an impact player.
--Toney was picked later on, but a bust.
--Barkley given the hype and draft position of was a bust.
--Eli Apple was a bust.
--Ereck Flowers was a bust.
There are so many busts. But with QB, it always comes with so much fear. Given how hard it is to hit on QB, you should be doing it more often not less.
So this tells you what kind of organizational malpractice has taken place on the Giants. Setting it and forgetting it with Daniel Jones is just about the worst decision any team has made in the NFL over the last half decade, including the Watson and Russ contracts. We have wasted a half decade of Giants football waiting for a bad player to become great.
I agree with the first half. History tells us 2 to 4 of the top 6 QB's will be busts, another 1 to 2 will have good careers but not necessarily studs, and the rest will be studs. This is where it is important to get it right. If we take the next Todd Blackledge and are forced to dump him after 2 years for pennies on the dollar, some will cheer that we recognized our mistake and moved on, but it would be a complete waste of an opportunity to get a stud player or leverage the pick to get a number of valuable assets.
The Giants haven't been taking any swings.
I'm all for taking swings. I don't disagree with you on that.
What I am advocating for is --1) don't overestimate the value of Meh QBs. 2) related to 1, have a high standard for what you are looking for in the guy you chose as the QB of the future for your team 3) if you find a guy who meets 1 and 2, got get him, and 4) Don't pass up on blue chip talent for a guy if he doesn't satisfy 1/2. 5) taking "swings" with 2nd round pick or picks later in the first on seasons when we have them is ok. But don't reach on a high first if you don't really have a conviction on a guy. Those commodities are too valuable.
I can't speak for Uber, but some of that also has to take into account where they were drafted. I personally do not think that Michael Penix or Bo Nix will be successful enough in the NFL to merit a 1st Round pick especially if the latter is in a system that wants to push the ball down the field. That being said, someone like Penix might have a different reaction if he is drafted on Day 2 versus if Washington selected him 2nd overall.
I have my opinions, but they aren't as informed as the teams. If the team has conviction on a guy, I'll defer to their judgment and be supportive, even if he wasn't my preference. At the same time, where I'm in disagreement with others is if they don't draft a QB, I'll be okay with it. To me, that will be a sign that they didn't see any of the options as franchise guys. They've done enough work on the QBs including having conversations with teams to explore trading up to convince me that they don't see Jones as the answer. I know you see it different, but the facts lead me to a different conclusion.
Quote:
So in this particular draft where is the line that distinguishes the good from the "meh"? Opinions seem all over the place with the only commonality being Caleb Williams at 1.
I have my opinions, but they aren't as informed as the teams. If the team has conviction on a guy, I'll defer to their judgment and be supportive, even if he wasn't my preference. At the same time, where I'm in disagreement with others is if they don't draft a QB, I'll be okay with it. To me, that will be a sign that they didn't see any of the options as franchise guys. They've done enough work on the QBs including having conversations with teams to explore trading up to convince me that they don't see Jones as the answer. I know you see it different, but the facts lead me to a different conclusion.
But what's a "franchise guy"?
Obviously no one knows where you will be with a guy in 4 years. But it's all about your projection. What are you projecting for the guy? If a guy projects to that definition, you go get him.
Quote:
You cannot win in this league anymore with below average QB play. You might win if a below average QB goes on an ungodly run, but that's not something you plan for. Only idiots plan for that happen.
So this tells you what kind of organizational malpractice has taken place on the Giants. Setting it and forgetting it with Daniel Jones is just about the worst decision any team has made in the NFL over the last half decade, including the Watson and Russ contracts. We have wasted a half decade of Giants football waiting for a bad player to become great.
I agree with the first half. History tells us 2 to 4 of the top 6 QB's will be busts, another 1 to 2 will have good careers but not necessarily studs, and the rest will be studs. This is where it is important to get it right. If we take the next Todd Blackledge and are forced to dump him after 2 years for pennies on the dollar, some will cheer that we recognized our mistake and moved on, but it would be a complete waste of an opportunity to get a stud player or leverage the pick to get a number of valuable assets.
Predicting who will be a stud and who won't is not a science. GMs and HCs don't have complete information. They won't have better information until the player enters the league and faces the speed of the game, the hits, unique NFL defensive looks, NFL coaching. Nobody can bat 1.000. If somebody has a high batting average picking QBs, it's luck due to a small sample size.
The greater sin is hesitating to make a change. You can't do anything about the sunk cost. It's done. And hanging onto a player due to sunk cost is a fundamental error of management. The player isn't worth what you spent anyway. The value you sunk into him is already gone, you just can't admit it yet. But hanging onto such a player is the bigger killer because of OPPORTUNITY COST. You pass on other potential franchise altering QBs because you are trying to turn around a failed player. Getting it wrong with Trey lance didn't paralyze the 49ers. But Daniel Jones paralyzed us. This has been a catastrophe of poor management. You could write a business school thesis on this subject. It's a textbook example of poor management, poor data and probability analysis.
Quote:
In comment 16473918 Darwinian said:
Quote:
You cannot win in this league anymore with below average QB play. You might win if a below average QB goes on an ungodly run, but that's not something you plan for. Only idiots plan for that happen.
So this tells you what kind of organizational malpractice has taken place on the Giants. Setting it and forgetting it with Daniel Jones is just about the worst decision any team has made in the NFL over the last half decade, including the Watson and Russ contracts. We have wasted a half decade of Giants football waiting for a bad player to become great.
I agree with the first half. History tells us 2 to 4 of the top 6 QB's will be busts, another 1 to 2 will have good careers but not necessarily studs, and the rest will be studs. This is where it is important to get it right. If we take the next Todd Blackledge and are forced to dump him after 2 years for pennies on the dollar, some will cheer that we recognized our mistake and moved on, but it would be a complete waste of an opportunity to get a stud player or leverage the pick to get a number of valuable assets.
Predicting who will be a stud and who won't is not a science. GMs and HCs don't have complete information. They won't have better information until the player enters the league and faces the speed of the game, the hits, unique NFL defensive looks, NFL coaching. Nobody can bat 1.000. If somebody has a high batting average picking QBs, it's luck due to a small sample size.
The greater sin is hesitating to make a change. You can't do anything about the sunk cost. It's done. And hanging onto a player due to sunk cost is a fundamental error of management. The player isn't worth what you spent anyway. The value you sunk into him is already gone, you just can't admit it yet. But hanging onto such a player is the bigger killer because of OPPORTUNITY COST. You pass on other potential franchise altering QBs because you are trying to turn around a failed player. Getting it wrong with Trey lance didn't paralyze the 49ers. But Daniel Jones paralyzed us. This has been a catastrophe of poor management. You could write a business school thesis on this subject. It's a textbook example of poor management, poor data and probability analysis.
Trey Lance didn't paralyze the 49ers because they had a strong roster when healthy outside of the QB spot. The only reason they were in a spot to trade up for Lance was because of injuries. The Giants, on the other hand, are much further away in terms of their roster construction. Getting it wrong on a QB when we could have hit at other positions that impact the team will set the franchise back.
In my post I said in round 2.
Trey Lance didn't paralyze the 49ers because they had a strong roster when healthy outside of the QB spot. The only reason they were in a spot to trade up for Lance was because of injuries. The Giants, on the other hand, are much further away in terms of their roster construction. Getting it wrong on a QB when we could have hit at other positions that impact the team will set the franchise back.
That doesn't matter. hey, the 49ers didn't just waste a top pick, they also squandered tons of draft capital getting to the pick. Allegedly, that is supposed to destroy an organization. But it didn't in the case of the 49ers.
There are GMs and teams who are just wired to move on when the writing is on the wall. Like Branch Rickey said, better a year too early than a year too late. The 49ers didn't have to move on from Jimmy G, the Chiefs didn't have to move on from Alex Smith, the Eagles didn't have to move on from Wentz, but those organizations and leaders are shooting for championships, playoff and SB appearances weren't enough. Compare that to the Giants who couldn't possibly think of moving on after a fluke season and one wild card win. Management and our fan base just aren't wired to move on from a semi-popular face of the franchise until they hit rock bottom. It's a miracle the Bears moved on from Fields, the fan base wanted him to stay.
The mistake was not drafting Daniel Jones. The mistake was constantly pretending it was everyone's fault but his. At some point you just have to say "Yeah you got a raw deal son, but this isn't working here. We're moving on."
The NFL is not little league. It is not about fairness and everyone getting a chance. You produce or you go.
Yes, quarterback is vital. But reaching for quarterback is the worst mistake a GM can make. Why? Because it is by far the most important position in all of sports and, unlike other premium positions, the selected individual instantly becomes the "anointed one" or the "face of the franchise". And this is because the GM has just bet his career on the pick. And he will do anything to make the selection work, for years if necessary. Haven't we just learned this with DJ? And the Jets with Zach Wilson? And the Panthers now with Bryce Young?
Hopefully Schoen is aware of the age old adage that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it...
Yes, quarterback is vital. But reaching for quarterback is the worst mistake a GM can make. Why? Because it is by far the most important position in all of sports and, unlike other premium positions, the selected individual instantly becomes the "anointed one" or the "face of the franchise". And this is because the GM has just bet his career on the pick. And he will do anything to make the selection work, for years if necessary. Haven't we just learned this with DJ? And the Jets with Zach Wilson? And the Panthers now with Bryce Young?
Hopefully Schoen is aware of the age old adage that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it...
Or he could look to 2017 and go grab a talented WR like Corey Davis, Mike Williams or John Ross. Sy had Mahomes as a 76, which would slot him in as QB7 in this class right after Penix and before Joe Milton.
If Joe Schoen is looking to the 1981 draft to guide his decision in 2024, as Giants fans we are all screwed.
The mistake was not drafting Daniel Jones. The mistake was constantly pretending it was everyone's fault but his. At some point you just have to say "Yeah you got a raw deal son, but this isn't working here. We're moving on."
The NFL is not little league. It is not about fairness and everyone getting a chance. You produce or you go.
I wonder and fear that it is more that they don’t want to be proven wrong, thus the continuing double downing on him.
The mistake was not drafting Daniel Jones. The mistake was constantly pretending it was everyone's fault but his. At some point you just have to say "Yeah you got a raw deal son, but this isn't working here. We're moving on."
The NFL is not little league. It is not about fairness and everyone getting a chance. You produce or you go.
This is it in a nutshell.
The "franchise QB" concept needs to be rethought. It's a title that has to be earned, not bequeathed on draft day.
The next QB should be on notice immediately - Maye, Penix, whomever - be good early or be gone.
Quote:
You have to take best player available Lawrence Taylor if you are George Young in 1981! Value is still value. And the opportunity cost of your selection matters! Had George Young drafted Campbell instead of Taylor because of how bad the quarterback position was for the team in 1980, and it was putrid, there would be no Giants championship history as we now know it today.
Yes, quarterback is vital. But reaching for quarterback is the worst mistake a GM can make. Why? Because it is by far the most important position in all of sports and, unlike other premium positions, the selected individual instantly becomes the "anointed one" or the "face of the franchise". And this is because the GM has just bet his career on the pick. And he will do anything to make the selection work, for years if necessary. Haven't we just learned this with DJ? And the Jets with Zach Wilson? And the Panthers now with Bryce Young?
Hopefully Schoen is aware of the age old adage that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it...
Or he could look to 2017 and go grab a talented WR like Corey Davis, Mike Williams or John Ross. Sy had Mahomes as a 76, which would slot him in as QB7 in this class right after Penix and before Joe Milton.
If Joe Schoen is looking to the 1981 draft to guide his decision in 2024, as Giants fans we are all screwed.
Value is value. The time frame is not relevant. The three wide receivers this year are the Lawrence Taylors of the 2024 draft. Yes, maybe one of these second tier quarterbacks is the next Mahomes. Or maybe they are all the next Zach Wilson? The questions is, who will it be? The Bears thought it was Mitchell Trubisky and actually traded up to get him. What a resolute disaster for that franchise!
I love Penix, but he would be overdrafted at six. I would love to see us trade up for him with our second pick if we can't get Daniels or Maye and instead take one of the WRs at six. And I am in agreement with you on taking a guy like Joe Milton on day three and the premise of investing in a quarterback from the draft every year.
Quote:
And it does not set a franchise back 5 years. SF and Pitt are examples of teams who missed on first round guys and then quickly moved on.
The mistake was not drafting Daniel Jones. The mistake was constantly pretending it was everyone's fault but his. At some point you just have to say "Yeah you got a raw deal son, but this isn't working here. We're moving on."
The NFL is not little league. It is not about fairness and everyone getting a chance. You produce or you go.
This is it in a nutshell.
The "franchise QB" concept needs to be rethought. It's a title that has to be earned, not bequeathed on draft day.
The next QB should be on notice immediately - Maye, Penix, whomever - be good early or be gone.
Agreed. Somewhere the idea of 'drafting a potential franchise quarterback' got changed into 'drafting a franchise quarterback'. These rookies after they get drafted are still the same unknowns they were before the draft. As said above, until they prove at what level they belong in the NFL they are all on a wait and see status.
I think draft commentators start a lot of this with their constant exaggerations of what they think these player's careers will be like. I can't count how many times I have heard a 'draft expert' say things like, "this guy is a franchise quarterback'. Now for fans that know better, that phrase can be easily ignored, but for the ones that don't know any better they often eat that stuff up and regurgitate it back to anyone that will listen. Telling a fan that firmly believes an unproven rookie is a franchise quarterback is akin to telling a wrestling fan that wrestling is fake.
Unless it's Maye, or a trade up for Maye.
Daniel Jones and the Giants is hardly a unique story.
for most teams it does not get to a second contract, but some examples:
Jets missing on Darnold didn't set them back?
3 years later they missed again on Wilson. You don't think that set them back?
they compounded it with a large portion of their cap on Aaron Rodgers. You don't think missing on Darnold and then Wilson pushed them into the Rodgers decision?
What about the Browns missing on Mayfield?
That didn't set them back as a franchise?
Do you think they consider that ridiculous DeShaun Watson contract if Mayfield panned out?
The Bears and Fields? 3 years later they have the top pick in the draft (via trade, but their pick wasn't much better) and are taking a QB.
The Patriots with Mac Jones? 3 years later they have the 3rd pick in the draft.
All these teams that miss on QB's are right back at the top of the draft probably picking QB's again. That isn't the definition of setting your franchise back?
The 49ers are an outlier. Made an outlier by having a 7th round pick be able to at least manage a game, at best play the position well, but that's not a strategy. that is luck. Almost like Tom Brady, 6th round comp pick luck and people then saying "you don't need to draft a QB early, the Patriots got Brady in the 6th round".
And the Steelers? The Giants have won a playoff game more recently than the Steelers. What have they done that shows you they are a franchise to emulate? Build solid D's and have good coaching, showing you basically how far that can get you without a difference maker at QB?
There are lot more examples where drafting a QB high in the draft and having that QB fail, DOES in fact set a franchise back in multiple ways. On the field, on the cap (which impacts on the field), in the front office, etc.
What's funny is I have Maye 6th out of these 6. But I think they're all close enough together (and the need is great enough) that I'd be thrilled to draft Maye at 6. The way I see it the Giants lucked out - they're picking #6 in a class where I think the top 6 QBs have admit an equal chance of being good NFL QBs.
Quote:
And it does not set a franchise back 5 years. SF and Pitt are examples of teams who missed on first round guys and then quickly moved on.
The mistake was not drafting Daniel Jones. The mistake was constantly pretending it was everyone's fault but his. At some point you just have to say "Yeah you got a raw deal son, but this isn't working here. We're moving on."
The NFL is not little league. It is not about fairness and everyone getting a chance. You produce or you go.
This is it in a nutshell.
The "franchise QB" concept needs to be rethought. It's a title that has to be earned, not bequeathed on draft day.
The next QB should be on notice immediately - Maye, Penix, whomever - be good early or be gone.
I agree with you completely, but you know Mara doesn't. He will put the guy on the "Olive Garden Face of the Franchise" scholarship right away and take years to make a determination. Which is why getting it right with a quarterback pick is perhaps that much more important for the Giants than any other NFL franchise.
Quote:
the disconnect is I don't think the first QB is a good value at #6.
What's funny is I have Maye 6th out of these 6. But I think they're all close enough together (and the need is great enough) that I'd be thrilled to draft Maye at 6. The way I see it the Giants lucked out - they're picking #6 in a class where I think the top 6 QBs have admit an equal chance of being good NFL QBs.
I hear you. If the other thread regarding the Broncos being willing to part with Surtain Jr, then you'd have my attention on QB at #12. Seeking to maximize the value of #6.
Some clubs compound the mistake, and some solve it. Missing on a QB does not doom you to years of making bad picks. Being the Jets and the Browns condemns you to years of making bad picks.
Quote:
In comment 16474102 JonC said:
Quote:
the disconnect is I don't think the first QB is a good value at #6.
What's funny is I have Maye 6th out of these 6. But I think they're all close enough together (and the need is great enough) that I'd be thrilled to draft Maye at 6. The way I see it the Giants lucked out - they're picking #6 in a class where I think the top 6 QBs have admit an equal chance of being good NFL QBs.
I hear you. If the other thread regarding the Broncos being willing to part with Surtain Jr, then you'd have my attention on QB at #12. Seeking to maximize the value of #6.
Surtain Jr. and #12 for #6? Yes please.
Grab Penix at #12 and let's go!
Some clubs compound the mistake, and some solve it. Missing on a QB does not doom you to years of making bad picks. Being the Jets and the Browns condemns you to years of making bad picks.
Jones has led the Giants to the playoffs too. How does that justify anything?
but I don't see how when you look at EJ Manuel in 2013 until they settled the position in 2018 with Allen as not setting their franchise back.
even moving on from Manuel to journeyman/jag Tyrod Taylor, despite mild success, is not a good outcome for the franchise.
And its worth noting the GM who selected Manuel (Doug Whaley) lost his job.
Quote:
the disconnect is I don't think the first QB is a good value at #6.
What's funny is I have Maye 6th out of these 6. But I think they're all close enough together (and the need is great enough) that I'd be thrilled to draft Maye at 6. The way I see it the Giants lucked out - they're picking #6 in a class where I think the top 6 QBs have admit an equal chance of being good NFL QBs.
That's good that you have them all close enough together, but what if the Giants brass does not? What if none of the QB's they have as first round talents are available at 6 and what is left they have Day 2 grades on?
JS/BD have been through this with a great outcome and then correctly passed on Willis. If they can't get the QB I prefer trading back if they can get lot of good DP's.
Quote:
But I'm not drafting the next Kirk Cousins at 6 overall. Sorry. That would be a dumb move. You could have signed him if that's the bar.
In my post I said in round 2.
I know. I'm fine with that in round 2 as well. All I'm opposing here is the QB at all costs crowds who have gone on record about being happy taking a Cousins-type in round 1. IMO, if that's the upside, that's a huge reach at 6. To your posts, I agree with pretty much all of your points.
Quote:
In comment 16474102 JonC said:
Quote:
the disconnect is I don't think the first QB is a good value at #6.
What's funny is I have Maye 6th out of these 6. But I think they're all close enough together (and the need is great enough) that I'd be thrilled to draft Maye at 6. The way I see it the Giants lucked out - they're picking #6 in a class where I think the top 6 QBs have admit an equal chance of being good NFL QBs.
That's good that you have them all close enough together, but what if the Giants brass does not? What if none of the QB's they have as first round talents are available at 6 and what is left they have Day 2 grades on?
There are two aspects to that in my brain:
1. If it were very clear and definitive I'd agree - don't reach for the day 2 guy and wait to see if he drops to day 2.
2. This may turn out to be wrong (and this is where Schoen's ability to gather intelligence is crucial), but it seems like all 6 of these guys are going in round 1. I have my opinions on who should go in what order, but there is a ton of disagreement - enough that I don't think the gap is very large. If the Giants have a huge gap between Maye, for example, and everyone else (other than Caleb) that would concern me. That evaluation would feel a lot like full bloom love.
I catch a lot of shit because I wanted the Giants to draft Malik Willis - that was because I knew we had no QB and I wanted to see what Daboll could do with a toolsy rough diamond. That feels a bit like what's happening with Maye here, and it scares me a bit.
That's a rambling way of saying that if they have a big gap I'd be concerned about their scouting.
Quote:
In comment 16474113 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 16474102 JonC said:
Quote:
the disconnect is I don't think the first QB is a good value at #6.
What's funny is I have Maye 6th out of these 6. But I think they're all close enough together (and the need is great enough) that I'd be thrilled to draft Maye at 6. The way I see it the Giants lucked out - they're picking #6 in a class where I think the top 6 QBs have admit an equal chance of being good NFL QBs.
That's good that you have them all close enough together, but what if the Giants brass does not? What if none of the QB's they have as first round talents are available at 6 and what is left they have Day 2 grades on?
There are two aspects to that in my brain:
1. If it were very clear and definitive I'd agree - don't reach for the day 2 guy and wait to see if he drops to day 2.
2. This may turn out to be wrong (and this is where Schoen's ability to gather intelligence is crucial), but it seems like all 6 of these guys are going in round 1. I have my opinions on who should go in what order, but there is a ton of disagreement - enough that I don't think the gap is very large. If the Giants have a huge gap between Maye, for example, and everyone else (other than Caleb) that would concern me. That evaluation would feel a lot like full bloom love.
I catch a lot of shit because I wanted the Giants to draft Malik Willis - that was because I knew we had no QB and I wanted to see what Daboll could do with a toolsy rough diamond. That feels a bit like what's happening with Maye here, and it scares me a bit.
That's a rambling way of saying that if they have a big gap I'd be concerned about their scouting.
(1) Just because there is a lot of disagreement does not mean that the gap is not large on some teams' boards.
(2) Will Levis was in every 1st Round Mock up until Draft Day (many in the Top 5) and look what happened to him last year.
(3) How do we know what to believe? Could teams be hyping up someone like a Penix or Nix to make them seem like first rounders to get others to slide?
That's a rambling way of saying that the proof is in the pudding and we will see if the Giants are proven right about their QB evaluations or not. They were correct in 2022 when they ignored all of the QB's.