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?
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.