about this thing, is it just seems so reactionary, which typically hasn't been the Giants style, and imo is a poor way to run any program.
You made a decision and you back the decision. Why? Because you believed it was best for the organization. Now, after terminating two people, you're going to back off that decision. But what has changed? Only the head coach and GM. And yet Mara claims it was as much his idea that the QB's needed to be evaluated as anyone. So he no longer cares enough to do that?
about this thing, is it just seems so reactionary, which typically hasn't been the Giants style, and imo is a poor way to run any program.
You made a decision and you back the decision. Why? Because you believed it was best for the organization. Now, after terminating two people, you're going to back off that decision. But what has changed? Only the head coach and GM. And yet Mara claims it was as much his idea that the QB's needed to be evaluated as anyone. So he no longer cares enough to do that?
I guess the only consistent thing is that Mara was always in favour of the plan to let Eli start the rest of the season and work in Geno and Davis into the game, depending on the situation of the game (as opposed to McAdoo putting a hard stop of the transition at halftime). Maybe that is still the plan.
However, if the plan going forward is to let Eli play the entire game for the rest of the season, then that is clearly a populist reactionary decision that is intended to appease the fanboys and reduce protests/incremental bad PR/hate mail at the expense of evaluating the backups. It's like when Coke introduced New Coke and then quickly yanked it after customer anger.
RE: RE: Do people still give a crap about the stupid streak? Â
Eli didn't, doubtful he was going to catch Favre anyway. And when it's mentioned in the future it's also going to be along with "Eli's would be longer if not benched for his idiot coach that got fired a few days later".
Seriously, does ANYONE anywhere believe that MacMagoo made the decision to sit Eli.? That order came from MARA/TISCH.
MacMagoo still deserved to be fired after SF game
Mcadoo is the one who screwed it up!
RE: RE: RE: Do people still give a crap about the stupid streak? Â
Eli didn't, doubtful he was going to catch Favre anyway. And when it's mentioned in the future it's also going to be along with "Eli's would be longer if not benched for his idiot coach that got fired a few days later".
Seriously, does ANYONE anywhere believe that MacMagoo made the decision to sit Eli.? That order came from MARA/TISCH.
MacMagoo still deserved to be fired after SF game
Mcadoo is the one who screwed it up!
John Mara admitted that he signed off on EXACTLY the plan that McAdoo presented Eli with.
RE: RE: RE: So lets just say the score of the next 4 games going into 4th QTR Â
is Giants losing 17-7 in each one. Offense playing like it usually does and not moving the ball, the defense keeping it reasonable but tiring as always. We happen to put up 7 points because of some short field turnover from the opposing team.
Are we allowed to bench Eli and give snaps to Webb in any of these types of games?
If it were up to you "bleeding hearts" the answer would be no.
So Webb will continue to sit...
How much of a difference in Webb's career do you think it'll really make if he gets a few series' in blowouts?
Under the circumstances you outlined, I'd be fine with giving Webb a look. I'm just not sure it ultimately accomplishes much of anything.
It sounds like a lot of you guys just want to see the guy for the sake of seeing him. If he goes out there and plays slightly better or worse than Geno just did, how much stronger are your convictions about him really going to be?
The fact of the matter is that there's nothing Webb can do between now and New Year's Day that is going to cement his status for the next regime one way or another.
Whether he plays well or he doesn't, it's not going to change the Giants' plans - nor should it. That ship has sailed.
You miss the point. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by playing Eli. Nothing.
therefore you play Webb...
Actually, there is - and I mentioned it several times already.
Webb needs to be ready to play and McAdoo did not intend on playing him at all this season, so there was very little preparation done in that regard.
You don't just throw him out there for the sake of doing it. He's a rookie that was supposed to be redshirted this year and was thought to be a little bit of a project.
There's nothing to be gained by throwing him to the wolves before he's ready, either. And there's a good chance that's the case.
RE: RE: Another thing that bothers me so much... Â
about this thing, is it just seems so reactionary, which typically hasn't been the Giants style, and imo is a poor way to run any program.
You made a decision and you back the decision. Why? Because you believed it was best for the organization. Now, after terminating two people, you're going to back off that decision. But what has changed? Only the head coach and GM. And yet Mara claims it was as much his idea that the QB's needed to be evaluated as anyone. So he no longer cares enough to do that?
I guess the only consistent thing is that Mara was always in favour of the plan to let Eli start the rest of the season and work in Geno and Davis into the game, depending on the situation of the game (as opposed to McAdoo putting a hard stop of the transition at halftime). Maybe that is still the plan.
However, if the plan going forward is to let Eli play the entire game for the rest of the season, then that is clearly a populist reactionary decision that is intended to appease the fanboys and reduce protests/incremental bad PR/hate mail at the expense of evaluating the backups. It's like when Coke introduced New Coke and then quickly yanked it after customer anger.
Mara signed off on McAdoo's plan.
Quote:
Q: Were you aware of Ben’s plan to start and play Eli for the first half, and Geno in the second before he actually went and presented it to Eli?
A: That seems to be the focus of everybody’s attention right now. The plan was, Ben was going to talk to Eli and tell him that he was going to start and play the first half and Geno would play the second half. I signed off on that. But, again, my hope was two things: one, that I was going to speak to Ben and try to get him to be a little bit more flexible about that all. I do not like interfering with coaching decisions about who’s going to play, I’ve never done that before. I also, as I said I think the other day to you guys, was hoping that Eli would be playing so well, it’d be impossible to take him out. In any event, it is where it is and you ought to stop blaming Ben and Jerry on that. If you want to blame me, go ahead and do it. I certainly have the power to overrule them if I wanted to, I chose not to do it.
But i disagree. You guys kill me with this "ready". Â
We have a fairly simple offense and not a whole of options to it anyway. Webb doesn't need to learn the Eli playbook. He need to knwo how to get under center. He needs to know how to make a few checks at the line. He needs to know how to set his RB to handle a potential blitz.
In the end he needs to know how to hand off the ball 2 out of every 3 plays and make a few slant passes and fades.
Every now and then he will have to scramble, and evey now and then he will need to go down and take a sack.
If he is brave, then maybe he will stand in there...so lets see it.
Someone help me out here to understand all of this because I do not watch college football (nor do I have any interest to start checking it out) and I don't really want to spend my time reading 87 stupid mock drafts a few weeks before Christmas; but is there only ONE stud/can't miss QB in this upcoming draft or something?
I'm asking for the reason Gatorade (and others) is paranoid now "Manning is back and how this will derail us for a good draft spot with too many wins".
Is there a Peyton Manning/Andrew Luck type as far as QBs are related in the 2018 draft, and that's it? I think the Browns are locked in for that #1 pick, they're not winning any games this year. #0-16..
The Giants will get a good pick (they already have 10 losses) and hey it won't be Reese making the choice this time around. Hooray?
You made a decision and you back the decision. Why? Because you believed it was best for the organization. Now, after terminating two people, you're going to back off that decision. But what has changed? Only the head coach and GM. And yet Mara claims it was as much his idea that the QB's needed to be evaluated as anyone. So he no longer cares enough to do that?
You made a decision and you back the decision. Why? Because you believed it was best for the organization. Now, after terminating two people, you're going to back off that decision. But what has changed? Only the head coach and GM. And yet Mara claims it was as much his idea that the QB's needed to be evaluated as anyone. So he no longer cares enough to do that?
However, if the plan going forward is to let Eli play the entire game for the rest of the season, then that is clearly a populist reactionary decision that is intended to appease the fanboys and reduce protests/incremental bad PR/hate mail at the expense of evaluating the backups. It's like when Coke introduced New Coke and then quickly yanked it after customer anger.
Quote:
Eli didn't, doubtful he was going to catch Favre anyway. And when it's mentioned in the future it's also going to be along with "Eli's would be longer if not benched for his idiot coach that got fired a few days later".
Seriously, does ANYONE anywhere believe that MacMagoo made the decision to sit Eli.? That order came from MARA/TISCH.
MacMagoo still deserved to be fired after SF game
Mcadoo is the one who screwed it up!
Quote:
In comment 13726105 BigBlue4You09 said:
Quote:
Eli didn't, doubtful he was going to catch Favre anyway. And when it's mentioned in the future it's also going to be along with "Eli's would be longer if not benched for his idiot coach that got fired a few days later".
Seriously, does ANYONE anywhere believe that MacMagoo made the decision to sit Eli.? That order came from MARA/TISCH.
MacMagoo still deserved to be fired after SF game
Mcadoo is the one who screwed it up!
John Mara admitted that he signed off on EXACTLY the plan that McAdoo presented Eli with.
Quote:
In comment 13726573 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
is Giants losing 17-7 in each one. Offense playing like it usually does and not moving the ball, the defense keeping it reasonable but tiring as always. We happen to put up 7 points because of some short field turnover from the opposing team.
Are we allowed to bench Eli and give snaps to Webb in any of these types of games?
If it were up to you "bleeding hearts" the answer would be no.
So Webb will continue to sit...
How much of a difference in Webb's career do you think it'll really make if he gets a few series' in blowouts?
Under the circumstances you outlined, I'd be fine with giving Webb a look. I'm just not sure it ultimately accomplishes much of anything.
It sounds like a lot of you guys just want to see the guy for the sake of seeing him. If he goes out there and plays slightly better or worse than Geno just did, how much stronger are your convictions about him really going to be?
The fact of the matter is that there's nothing Webb can do between now and New Year's Day that is going to cement his status for the next regime one way or another.
Whether he plays well or he doesn't, it's not going to change the Giants' plans - nor should it. That ship has sailed.
You miss the point. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by playing Eli. Nothing.
therefore you play Webb...
Actually, there is - and I mentioned it several times already.
Webb needs to be ready to play and McAdoo did not intend on playing him at all this season, so there was very little preparation done in that regard.
You don't just throw him out there for the sake of doing it. He's a rookie that was supposed to be redshirted this year and was thought to be a little bit of a project.
There's nothing to be gained by throwing him to the wolves before he's ready, either. And there's a good chance that's the case.
Quote:
about this thing, is it just seems so reactionary, which typically hasn't been the Giants style, and imo is a poor way to run any program.
You made a decision and you back the decision. Why? Because you believed it was best for the organization. Now, after terminating two people, you're going to back off that decision. But what has changed? Only the head coach and GM. And yet Mara claims it was as much his idea that the QB's needed to be evaluated as anyone. So he no longer cares enough to do that?
I guess the only consistent thing is that Mara was always in favour of the plan to let Eli start the rest of the season and work in Geno and Davis into the game, depending on the situation of the game (as opposed to McAdoo putting a hard stop of the transition at halftime). Maybe that is still the plan.
However, if the plan going forward is to let Eli play the entire game for the rest of the season, then that is clearly a populist reactionary decision that is intended to appease the fanboys and reduce protests/incremental bad PR/hate mail at the expense of evaluating the backups. It's like when Coke introduced New Coke and then quickly yanked it after customer anger.
Mara signed off on McAdoo's plan.
A: That seems to be the focus of everybody’s attention right now. The plan was, Ben was going to talk to Eli and tell him that he was going to start and play the first half and Geno would play the second half. I signed off on that. But, again, my hope was two things: one, that I was going to speak to Ben and try to get him to be a little bit more flexible about that all. I do not like interfering with coaching decisions about who’s going to play, I’ve never done that before. I also, as I said I think the other day to you guys, was hoping that Eli would be playing so well, it’d be impossible to take him out. In any event, it is where it is and you ought to stop blaming Ben and Jerry on that. If you want to blame me, go ahead and do it. I certainly have the power to overrule them if I wanted to, I chose not to do it.
In the end he needs to know how to hand off the ball 2 out of every 3 plays and make a few slant passes and fades.
Every now and then he will have to scramble, and evey now and then he will need to go down and take a sack.
If he is brave, then maybe he will stand in there...so lets see it.
You all have been spoiled for having Eli show up to play every week for the past 14 years...
I'm asking for the reason Gatorade (and others) is paranoid now "Manning is back and how this will derail us for a good draft spot with too many wins".
Is there a Peyton Manning/Andrew Luck type as far as QBs are related in the 2018 draft, and that's it? I think the Browns are locked in for that #1 pick, they're not winning any games this year. #0-16..
The Giants will get a good pick (they already have 10 losses) and hey it won't be Reese making the choice this time around. Hooray?