Made a very large bet that Darnold would not be great. I hope he is right. Even if Barkley is everything we hope he can be, if Darnold is great it will have been the wrong pick.
Webb looking horrific thursday night is concerning as well. DG made bets on Eli, Webb, and Darnold not being great. His tenure as Giants GM rides on those 3 bets
What if Darnold is great, Barkley is great, and he drafts another QB Â
Without trading picks or players? Then DG is forgiven but that also means he was wrong about Eli and we have a top 5 pick
No it doesn't mean that. You can draft great QBs outside of the top 5. I'm not talking about banking on a 6th rounder, you can have a mid to late first round pick be a great QB no questions asked. You know that but you want to bash DG.
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
Made a very large bet that Darnold would not be great. I hope he is right. Even if Barkley is everything we hope he can be, if Darnold is great it will have been the wrong pick.
Webb looking horrific thursday night is concerning as well. DG made bets on Eli, Webb, and Darnold not being great. His tenure as Giants GM rides on those 3 bets
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
QB was the right pick at 2. Period
RE: RE: RE: What if Darnold is great, Barkley is great, and he drafts another QB Â
Without trading picks or players? Then DG is forgiven but that also means he was wrong about Eli and we have a top 5 pick
No it doesn't mean that. You can draft great QBs outside of the top 5. I'm not talking about banking on a 6th rounder, you can have a mid to late first round pick be a great QB no questions asked. You know that but you want to bash DG.
Ohh I see so a mid to late first rounder that will be great. Must not have been rated high in college to be late first rounder as a qb. But if we do take one late first then do you not think people and media will question why not take Darnold or a qb this past draft
So a late first round qb next year that we will hope we strike gold and SB this year will be a better chance than taking Darnold this year and a running back in later rounds.
Or here me out, this could be crazy
Darnold this year and that late first rounder next year could be an impact linebacker or DE
Sounds better to me than a RB with the second pick and a later first round qb next year that we must hope and pray is sent from above...
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
If this scenario played out, would it be the wrong pick if we won one or two superbowls with Barkley and the Jets didn't win any in that time period?
I had the QB's in the Draft ranked Darnold then a gap to Mayfield Â
Both had good debuts. If I were the Giants when Cleveland passed on Sam I would have pulled the trigger but not for Mayfield. That said I also thought Barkley was the defacto best player at the time of the Draft but project Darnold's development into a legit franchise guy. The positional value at QB combined with the stage Eli is at in his career were the deciding factors.
All water under the bridge now as it's all about Saquon.
and I have never seen so much made of week 1 of the preseason. I mean, there have been threads highlighting passer ratings and other statistics.
It’s prettt much all the people who were in the “draft a QB” camp worrying or wanting to prematurely pay themselves on the back.
You know who else looked phenomenal last night? Teddy Bridgewater, on repaired knee after 2 years out of football. Big deal. Forget waiting until the season is over, can we at least wait until the preseason is over?
RE: Webb
The people burying him after Thursday night, would be the same people pumping the brakes if he put up a Unitas-esque performance that apparently some of these other guys did.
Just remember something as you watch the class of 2018. There were a lot of idiots along the way who tried to tell us the likes of Mark Sanchez, RGIII and Flacco were elite franchise QBs.
Without trading picks or players? Then DG is forgiven but that also means he was wrong about Eli and we have a top 5 pick
No it doesn't mean that. You can draft great QBs outside of the top 5. I'm not talking about banking on a 6th rounder, you can have a mid to late first round pick be a great QB no questions asked. You know that but you want to bash DG.
Ohh I see so a mid to late first rounder that will be great. Must not have been rated high in college to be late first rounder as a qb. But if we do take one late first then do you not think people and media will question why not take Darnold or a qb this past draft
So a late first round qb next year that we will hope we strike gold and SB this year will be a better chance than taking Darnold this year and a running back in later rounds.
Or here me out, this could be crazy
Darnold this year and that late first rounder next year could be an impact linebacker or DE
Sounds better to me than a RB with the second pick and a later first round qb next year that we must hope and pray is sent from above...
Yeah Barkley this year and a QB next year in the mid to late portion of the first round where we'll be hopefully drafting means you get a generational RB and likely a good QB prospect. Rather than a bit of a better QB prospect this year and someone who doesn't come close to Barkley next year.
Looked good and I think is the exact type of qb you want in the modern nfl, can read a defense and is accurate. Most importantly he is mobile without being a run first qb. There will be other qbs like him in the 2020 and 2021 draft. I particularly like the kid from Stanford, who I think has Giants written all over him.
Darnold will never be a Giant, so there’s no point in crying over spilled milk. Eli may very well have two or three years left and hopefully the Giants can pair possibly the kid from Stanford (or someone similar) with a competent oline, Barkley, and OBJ. The obvious caveat is that fans will have to be ok giving up likely 2-3 first round picks to get that guy. Whereas Darnold could have been had at 2 this year.
Webb is not the answer, as you all saw the other night and as those who watched him in college have been saying since last year. That’s ok though, there will be other top qbs and the Giants can get one if they so choose. Hopefully they do not need to cross this bridge until 2020 or 2021, because the 2019 draft will not feature a legit top 5 qb.
Darnold could get hurt. He could crap out. He could never play like that again in games that count. But he looked nothing like Mark Sanchez. He looked like a star. Mark Sanchez never looked like a star. He's big, he's fast, he has a big arm, he's smart and he had a lot of poise during the game and after. Jet fans have every reason to be really excited and if he's their Eli and the Giants passed on him it will be just a little bit sweeter. Barkley seems like the real deal too but RBs just don't matter as much as QBs.
Looked good and I think is the exact type of qb you want in the modern nfl, can read a defense and is accurate. Most importantly he is mobile without being a run first qb. There will be other qbs like him in the 2020 and 2021 draft. I particularly like the kid from Stanford, who I think has Giants written all over him.
Darnold will never be a Giant, so there’s no point in crying over spilled milk. Eli may very well have two or three years left and hopefully the Giants can pair possibly the kid from Stanford (or someone similar) with a competent oline, Barkley, and OBJ. The obvious caveat is that fans will have to be ok giving up likely 2-3 first round picks to get that guy. Whereas Darnold could have been had at 2 this year.
Webb is not the answer, as you all saw the other night and as those who watched him in college have been saying since last year. That’s ok though, there will be other top qbs and the Giants can get one if they so choose. Hopefully they do not need to cross this bridge until 2020 or 2021, because the 2019 draft will not feature a legit top 5 qb.
We heard what a terrible draft 2017 was for QBs and now Watson is a God and Mahomes is the next big thing. I don't think it's a done deal that 2019 won't have a legit top 5 QB, unless you mean one worthy of a top 5 pick.
Ohh sorry sir...Please tell us what kind of post would be better for you to love football?
Rah Rah, all is good in Big Blue land and Eli has 10 more years and SB is a future HOF and Darnold is a bust because that is why DG passes on him.
Championship here we come
I’ll never understand the mindset of a miserable fuck spending their existence being a whiny troll on an internet message board. you literally add nothing here. there’s plenty of posters who are pessimistic about the giants but have excellent conversations. you are a fucking troll and make continue to poison this board...
yet more quality posters will leave here and you’ll still be here. Sad.
Looked good and I think is the exact type of qb you want in the modern nfl, can read a defense and is accurate. Most importantly he is mobile without being a run first qb. There will be other qbs like him in the 2020 and 2021 draft. I particularly like the kid from Stanford, who I think has Giants written all over him.
Darnold will never be a Giant, so there’s no point in crying over spilled milk. Eli may very well have two or three years left and hopefully the Giants can pair possibly the kid from Stanford (or someone similar) with a competent oline, Barkley, and OBJ. The obvious caveat is that fans will have to be ok giving up likely 2-3 first round picks to get that guy. Whereas Darnold could have been had at 2 this year.
Webb is not the answer, as you all saw the other night and as those who watched him in college have been saying since last year. That’s ok though, there will be other top qbs and the Giants can get one if they so choose. Hopefully they do not need to cross this bridge until 2020 or 2021, because the 2019 draft will not feature a legit top 5 qb.
We heard what a terrible draft 2017 was for QBs and now Watson is a God and Mahomes is the next big thing. I don't think it's a done deal that 2019 won't have a legit top 5 QB, unless you mean one worthy of a top 5 pick.
Thinking one more worthy of a top 5 pick. Things can change, but I don’t see 2019 being the year to make an investment in qb. 2020 and 2021 I think will feature potentially Costello, Lawrence, Fromm, Patterson, and maybe Grier(up in the air on that one).
Darnold could get hurt. He could crap out. He could never play like that again in games that count. But he looked nothing like Mark Sanchez. He looked like a star. Mark Sanchez never looked like a star. He's big, he's fast, he has a big arm, he's smart and he had a lot of poise during the game and after. Jet fans have every reason to be really excited and if he's their Eli and the Giants passed on him it will be just a little bit sweeter. Barkley seems like the real deal too but RBs just don't matter as much as QBs.
In a 2 game stretch in 2010 against the Pats and Dolphins, in the REGULAR season, Sanchez threw for 6tds and 0 ints and had a qb rating of 122.
after he gets at least a couple years of regular season experience.
But even as that guy, it's still way too soon. It's one really good pre-season performance. So, let's relax.
(However, as a small side-note, if Webb had the same performance as Darnold last night, the same people poo-pooing Darnold's performance would be praising Webb. Or, if Dranold was a Giant, they'd also be putting Darnold over. Let's be honest).
is just a Giant fan. Save your stats I could care less about numbers in the NFL they're meaningless. This is the forum that thinks Joe Namath isn't a HOFer. Not much intelligent conversation about the Jets here.
Made a very large bet that Darnold would not be great. I hope he is right. Even if Barkley is everything we hope he can be, if Darnold is great it will have been the wrong pick.
This is it in a nutshell and it's amazing how many people don't get this.
In today's NFL, especially with a world-class WR already on the team... a very good QB (on par with Eli or Simms) teamed with a solid RB (similar to Bradshaw or Morris) will always be better than the best RB in the league teamed with the next Brown, Kanell or Graham.
(And I'm afraid that the later combo is where we're heading.)
Let's start a thread!!! Darnold, Rosen and Mayfield haven't thrown one meaningful pass in a real NFL game against a real defense. Once the bullets start flying in real games with game planning and exotic blitz packages and coverages that these guys have to actually read.
I'll reserve judgment on these guys (including Barkley) till they actually play some real games against real competition
Ohh sorry sir...Please tell us what kind of post would be better for you to love football?
Rah Rah, all is good in Big Blue land and Eli has 10 more years and SB is a future HOF and Darnold is a bust because that is why DG passes on him.
Championship here we come
why do you care if the giants win a championship? you said yourself all you care about is making the playoffs for the next 10 years
all they all care about is getting a QB this past draft. Success, in the form of championships is immaterial. If Barkley is a HoF, we’ve got three years of playoffs that we would have passed on just so we could pick a QB.
How Darnold does is completely irrelevant to our success and to my own satisfaction. I wish him all the best in the world. But if Barkley truly is a HoF then I am more thane ecstatic and not just because we have a HoF player (which people apparently think is a trivial thing) but because a HoFer on this team with 2 other HoFers on offense, is absolutely a playoff team.
Here do not want to accept the premise that Darnold s performance at the end of the day must be factored into evaluating the wisdom of passing on him for a RB
Prior to the draft, we heard the qb s were flawed. Now we re hearing it doesn't matter how they play.
Barkley could be a great player, still does equate to the impact of a franchise quarterback, if indeed that is what Darnold becomes.
The don t take a quarterback crowd are hedging their bets.
Then why are so many on BBI going bonkers about Barkley’s 1st carry?
There were 0 plays made by Barkley this game that were any close to that one run. The run is significant because it showcased Barkley's talent. Only a handful RBs in the NFL can even make that play.
RE: If how players look in the preseason doesnt matter Â
Then why are so many on BBI going bonkers about Barkley’s 1st carry?
good players are always exciting. It’s cool and positive, but not necessarily predictive. And, despite the impression you’re trying to give, most people understand that i think.
was exactly was elite RBs do in this league and not many of them exist. The life for an RB isn’t the same as a QB. Darnold played well and good for him. But when blitzes come and the bullets fly, let’s see how he does. God for the Jets if they found a winner.
Are people really sold on Darnold after that game? Â
Sure he looked good but all of his passes were short. The two that he thew downfield were off the mark. This reminds me of Brady Quinn's debut where ESPN was hyping him up because he completed his first 10 passes but they failed tom point out that they were all check downs.
was exactly was elite RBs do in this league and not many of them exist. The life for an RB isn’t the same as a QB. Darnold played well and good for him. But when blitzes come and the bullets fly, let’s see how he does. God for the Jets if they found a winner.
Exactly! The difference between going from preseason to the regular season is far bigger for a QB than an RB.
and they saw how bad he is, they might have taken Darnold. If SD proves to be the goods, the Giants only have themselves to blame for passing over him.
Here do not want to accept the premise that Darnold s performance at the end of the day must be factored into evaluating the wisdom of passing on him for a RB
Prior to the draft, we heard the qb s were flawed. Now we re hearing it doesn't matter how they play.
Barkley could be a great player, still does equate to the impact of a franchise quarterback, if indeed that is what Darnold becomes.
The don t take a quarterback crowd are hedging their bets.
Yeah, we can start to have a realistic discussion on that in about 3-5 years. Not Day 2 after preseason game number 1.
Nobody is hedging their bets after a single preseason game, trust me. Nothing changed anybody's opinion yet. If anything, the opening snap further entrenched the don't take a QB crowd in their take, even validated it.
There are literally people here trying to dissect Barkley's 4 carries in a preaseason game, and coming to the conclusion somehow that it is a negative rather than a positive that he took the opening snap 40 yards from our own twelve yard line. Madness.
The truth is, the don't take a QB crowd has been ecstatic, and continue to be, while the "take a QB at all costs crowd" has not been able to come to grips with what happened since the night of the draft.
How we got fleeced by the chargers when we got Eli. The chargers got merriman, kaeding and Roman oben. Thread after thread of the same garbage. Who won that trade again??
This is more of the same. Darnold is better and it means nothing that we drafted Barkley if we don't win a Superbowl blah blah blah
The bottom line is we drafted Barkley and did not draft any of the top quarterbacks for a variety of reasons.
Accorsi was not afraid to stake his name to Eli and gettleman was not afraid to stake his name to Barkley.
We will see how it all plays out, but the verdict is not going to be determined by one preseason game or even 1 season. Hell, we may not know for 10 years, but please continue on with the giants screwed up and and we will be in quarterback hell while the jets are celebrating Superbowl victories with Darnold.
Darnold may have a great career and maybe not. Too early to tell. But Â
I remember last year preseason game against the Pats, Webb came in and looked fantastic. He "pulled an Eli" and came back with very little time on the clock to beat them at the end of the game. Time will tell. I'm not giving up on him or Lauletta yet. Seems like most on here have.
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
If this scenario played out, would it be the wrong pick if we won one or two superbowls with Barkley and the Jets didn't win any in that time period?
Exactly. How many Super Bowls did Marino win.
RE: Darnold may have a great career and maybe not. Too early to tell. But Â
I remember last year preseason game against the Pats, Webb came in and looked fantastic. He "pulled an Eli" and came back with very little time on the clock to beat them at the end of the game. Time will tell. I'm not giving up on him or Lauletta yet. Seems like most on here have.
i wonder if Jaguars fans watched that game and were pissed off that their stupid management passed on Webb and instead drafted that do-nothing, little value JAG, Fournette?
I didn't even enjoy the pick at #2 because I was pissed we didn't take Darnold. But then I realized QBs are a crap shoot and Barkley is supposed to be a slam dunk. We can shoot the craps against in a year or two. That said even if I didn't change my thinking I'd like to think I wouldn't whine nonstop about it and would just root for Barkley to succeed.
RE: RE: Darnold may have a great career and maybe not. Too early to tell. But Â
I remember last year preseason game against the Pats, Webb came in and looked fantastic. He "pulled an Eli" and came back with very little time on the clock to beat them at the end of the game. Time will tell. I'm not giving up on him or Lauletta yet. Seems like most on here have.
i wonder if Jaguars fans watched that game and were pissed off that their stupid management passed on Webb and instead drafted that do-nothing, little value JAG, Fournette?
Wasn't one taken top 5 or so and one taken in the 3rd round. Typo?
are we really going to have a Barkley vs. Mayfield/Darnold/Rosen/Allen debate after every single game from here until when?
Because that's what it feels like you guys are setting us up for.
And if someone posts a thread like that after every game...what of it?
You're not required to read those threads or participate unless you choose to.
I swear some of you think BBI is supposed to be some sort of "safe space" where only the topics YOU want to discuss are allowed.
It's really simple. If it's a topic you don't want to discuss or something you don't want to read, then don't open the thread.
And I also find it interesting Britt that you had no problem earlier this week starting your own thread about Darnold to suggest that he would have been a risky choice for the Giants @ 2...yet now that Darnold has actually played a game (and played well) somehow that's not a thread-worthy debate?
Interesting.
This is a legitimate debate but having it every week is insanity Â
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Some of you guys already wrote your narrative. You're not willing to let this play out at all, you've already made up your mind. And any time Sam Darnold throws a TD pass or Saquon Barkley is tackled for a loss, this is where you'll be - telling everyone all about it.
What if Darnold and Barkley are both really good?
The 2018 NFL draft wasn't the Giants' last opportunity to find a QB... there will be other opportunities.
I thought Webb sucked against Cleveland - but I'm willing to watch more of him before I decide he's a wash.
I also thought Lauletta did some good things and wouldn't write him off.
are we really going to have a Barkley vs. Mayfield/Darnold/Rosen/Allen debate after every single game from here until when?
Because that's what it feels like you guys are setting us up for.
I think you should expect folks on here will do just that (not me).
My guess is they will be as productive as the Eli threads that were posted after last year's game when he had his ups (second Philly game) and his downs (Arizona game). You know what I mean...
RE: This is a legitimate debate but having it every week is insanity Â
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
RE: RE: RE: Darnold may have a great career and maybe not. Too early to tell. But Â
I remember last year preseason game against the Pats, Webb came in and looked fantastic. He "pulled an Eli" and came back with very little time on the clock to beat them at the end of the game. Time will tell. I'm not giving up on him or Lauletta yet. Seems like most on here have.
i wonder if Jaguars fans watched that game and were pissed off that their stupid management passed on Webb and instead drafted that do-nothing, little value JAG, Fournette?
Wasn't one taken top 5 or so and one taken in the 3rd round. Typo?
nope. Not a typo. Doesn’t change the point. They chose poorly in taking Fournette over Webb...at least based on one preseason game.
RE: RE: This is a legitimate debate but having it every week is insanity Â
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
RE: RE: What if Darnold is great, Barkley is great, and he drafts another QB Â
I was saying that I've heard a variation of this all offseason, and it is still being said in all of its brilliant ignorant glory!
Quote:
Barkley
crackerjack465 : 4:44 pm : link : reply
could be a HOF.
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
If you pick a HoF RB - a HoF any position - that is a GREAT pick. It doesn't matter if other guys are great picks, if you pick a HoF, he's going to give us many years of excellent football to watch.
And it doesn't even take into account who the Giants next QB is!
Just a moronic statement on so many levels and yet there are quite a few posters spewing a variation of that bullshit.
I was saying that I've heard a variation of this all offseason, and it is still being said in all of its brilliant ignorant glory!
Quote:
Barkley
crackerjack465 : 4:44 pm : link : reply
could be a HOF.
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
If you pick a HoF RB - a HoF any position - that is a GREAT pick. It doesn't matter if other guys are great picks, if you pick a HoF, he's going to give us many years of excellent football to watch.
And it doesn't even take into account who the Giants next QB is!
Just a moronic statement on so many levels and yet there are quite a few posters spewing a variation of that bullshit.
thats BS. We have the second claim of anyone put on waivers. We can pick up a HoFer anytime.
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
RE: RE: RE: RE: This is a legitimate debate but having it every week is insanity Â
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
He does well in the modern offense with all short throws. Still, in order to win in the league, you have to make deep throws. In all of the college tape on him out there, I saw zero true deep throws. Same last night. I remember Dak looking like a Hall of Fame player two years ago until he played us. Then he had to make some deep throws, and I saw the weakness. I suspect Darnold is the same. I think the Jets have a good QB. Just not a great one. And probably one you will not win it all with. At the end of the day, if he doesn't lead you to a SB, he is a failure. I don't think he is that type of player.
You are completely missing the point, though it’s not surprising. The question isn’t can you start a thread day after day bitching about not taking a QB. The question is, why the hell would you want to? It’s over. They didn’t take one. At what point do we move on and focus on this team and what we have to do from this point forward?
We all know the answer. The QB at all costs crowd want to be right. They want to say “I told you so”. They want to believe that they are the smartest guys in the room. In most cases, their parents basements. Guys like you will deny it all day long, but it is incredibly obvious that you’d rather see Darnold succeed and Barkley fail because it’s more gratifying for you to be right than it is for the Giants to succeed. You don’t appear to ebe enjoying any of this. You wanted a QB and it’s more important for your weird ass ego that we regret the move than it is to actually support the team on the field.
Don’t bother denying it. We all know you will claim it’s bullshit. But you and all the other QB at all costs guys are proving the point on a daily basis. Many times, multiple times a day. Good luck in your endeavor
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: This is a legitimate debate but having it every week is insanity Â
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: This is a legitimate debate but having it every week is insanity Â
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
at least 1 or 2 of those guys will turn out to be solid QBs. But even I agree having a thread on this everyday/every week is a tad ridiculous. We still have Eli, and when he is retired, however long it takes to find a good QB, is how long it takes. Maybe we'll get lucky and it won't take long at all, who knows. If it does wind up taking a long time, then at least we'll still have Beckham and Barkley and be loaded at those positions. Let's just hope it isn't a repeat of the 90's and go from there. And if it is that type of situation, let's at least hope we win a Championship this year or next..
Darnold could get hurt. He could crap out. He could never play like that again in games that count. But he looked nothing like Mark Sanchez. He looked like a star. Mark Sanchez never looked like a star. He's big, he's fast, he has a big arm, he's smart and he had a lot of poise during the game and after. Jet fans have every reason to be really excited and if he's their Eli and the Giants passed on him it will be just a little bit sweeter. Barkley seems like the real deal too but RBs just don't matter as much as QBs.
You are completely missing the point, though it’s not surprising. The question isn’t can you start a thread day after day bitching about not taking a QB. The question is, why the hell would you want to? It’s over. They didn’t take one. At what point do we move on and focus on this team and what we have to do from this point forward?
We all know the answer. The QB at all costs crowd want to be right. They want to say “I told you so”. They want to believe that they are the smartest guys in the room. In most cases, their parents basements. Guys like you will deny it all day long, but it is incredibly obvious that you’d rather see Darnold succeed and Barkley fail because it’s more gratifying for you to be right than it is for the Giants to succeed. You don’t appear to ebe enjoying any of this. You wanted a QB and it’s more important for your weird ass ego that we regret the move than it is to actually support the team on the field.
Don’t bother denying it. We all know you will claim it’s bullshit. But you and all the other QB at all costs guys are proving the point on a daily basis. Many times, multiple times a day. Good luck in your endeavor
I don't know how old you are but that's a pretty immature post.
You open with a needless insult and then include a tired "living in your parents basement" burn and I'm supposed to take you seriously?
I don't for one minute think that if the Giants had decided to go with a QB @ 2, that the BBIers who wanted Barkley or some other non-QB would be rooting against the team because the Giants didn't take their guy. It's an idiotic narrative. We are ALL Giants fans and we ALL want them to succeed.
Posters will return to claim that they were right, there's no denying that. But nobody is rooting against them just so they can run to BBI and "win" a debate.
RE: I also wanted a QB and still very much think Â
at least 1 or 2 of those guys will turn out to be solid QBs. But even I agree having a thread on this everyday/every week is a tad ridiculous. We still have Eli, and when he is retired, however long it takes to find a good QB, is how long it takes. Maybe we'll get lucky and it won't take long at all, who knows. If it does wind up taking a long time, then at least we'll still have Beckham and Barkley and be loaded at those positions. Let's just hope it isn't a repeat of the 90's and go from there. And if it is that type of situation, let's at least hope we win a Championship this year or next..
This is pretty much how I feel. I wanted a QB. It didn’t happen. So I guess I can either move on and let things play out and hope for the best or I can continually whine, bitch, moan and complain that the Giants certainly screwed up. I have no interest in being “right”. My only interest is this team that we have and moving forward. Looking back has usually never had positive results. Life’s too damn short. Enjoy what you have and not what you might have had. But that’s just me.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: This is a legitimate debate but having it every week is insanity Â
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
Yeah. Bullshit.
Another well-thought-out post.
Keep 'em coming!
I wanted Saquon and I would take Saquon again 10 times out of 10. Â
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
Oh how magnanimous of you. What I said was "...seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all." That was based on people on another thread complaining after his first performance because one of his runs was a loss. I'm not extrapolating off of nothing. There are plenty on this site that in my opinion have been way too hard on Eli over his career it, again, isn't far fetched to think that could happen with Saquon.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: What if Darnold is great, Barkley is great, and he drafts another QB Â
Without trading picks or players? Then DG is forgiven but that also means he was wrong about Eli and we have a top 5 pick
No it doesn't mean that. You can draft great QBs outside of the top 5. I'm not talking about banking on a 6th rounder, you can have a mid to late first round pick be a great QB no questions asked. You know that but you want to bash DG.
Ohh I see so a mid to late first rounder that will be great. Must not have been rated high in college to be late first rounder as a qb. But if we do take one late first then do you not think people and media will question why not take Darnold or a qb this past draft
So a late first round qb next year that we will hope we strike gold and SB this year will be a better chance than taking Darnold this year and a running back in later rounds.
Or here me out, this could be crazy
Darnold this year and that late first rounder next year could be an impact linebacker or DE
Sounds better to me than a RB with the second pick and a later first round qb next year that we must hope and pray is sent from above...
Yeah Barkley this year and a QB next year in the mid to late portion of the first round where we'll be hopefully drafting means you get a generational RB and likely a good QB prospect. Rather than a bit of a better QB prospect this year and someone who doesn't come close to Barkley next year.
\
So you telling me that there will not be a back drafted from rounds 2 to 6 in the next 3 years that would not be as productive or better than SB...I can tell you the chances of that happening are much higher then we finding a qb who will be as franchise qb
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: This is a legitimate debate but having it every week is insanity Â
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
Oh how magnanimous of you. What I said was "...seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all." That was based on people on another thread complaining after his first performance because one of his runs was a loss. I'm not extrapolating off of nothing. There are plenty on this site that in my opinion have been way too hard on Eli over his career it, again, isn't far fetched to think that could happen with Saquon.
Whatever. Have a good night! I've got to run.
By the way, back in Dayne's rookie year (before the login function was added) I used to occasionally post as "No Gain Dayne" so at least we agree on something.
I enjoyed coming here and reading interesting posts. But now it sucks. Get over yourselves and stop arguing about bs. People don't agree w you...big fucking deal. It sucks for those of us that aren't shitheads like you to open a thread and have to read 90% personal arguments and attacks. No one cares about you or what you have to say.
Id ban every stupid fuck that thinks it is their god given need to attack a post they don't agree with. What do I know tho, it's the internet in 2018. Live it up shitheads
I think a lot of that goes on here. Guys rooting more to be correct than the Giants winning. And it s not just the quarterback or no quarterback debate
the Giants still believe in the “franchise QB” model. If they still believe in that model, you’d figure they would have taken Darnold/Allen/Rosen since Eli is 37 coming off a 3-13 season.
With Shurmur being hired from Minnesota, maybe the thought process was:
1. Draft Barkley - best player on their board
2. Build up the o-line, running game with Eli - hope he has 2-3 years left
3. Draft Lauletta - a guy Shurmur previously met and is high on
4. QB cap flexibility allows for stronger roster
I hope what I outlined above is the case. Interestingly enough, the Vikings had this model but still threw crazy money at Cousins. Would love to know if Shurmur agreed would that move.
But, the fact remains - if NYG believes in the franchise QB model and Darnold has a 15 year career delivering NYJ a Super Bowl, of course the pick will be scrutinized. But as Britt mentioned, it’s a conversation for 5-7 years down the road.
Also, if Barkley lives up to expectations and is a key part to deep playoff runs & maybe even a SB title, the pick was correct. The player Barkley is cannot be dismissed in the debate.
Lastly, I firmly believe Davis Webb had absolutely nothing to do with the decision. I think Shurmur has clear hopes for Lauletta & I think we should all be rooting for him.
Made a very large bet that Darnold would not be great. I hope he is right. Even if Barkley is everything we hope he can be, if Darnold is great it will have been the wrong pick.
It's arguments liek this that make no sense to me.
No consideration as to how successful or not the teams they are on are. It's like winning doesn't even matter let alone Super Bowls.
Made a very large bet that Darnold would not be great. I hope he is right. Even if Barkley is everything we hope he can be, if Darnold is great it will have been the wrong pick.
Webb looking horrific thursday night is concerning as well. DG made bets on Eli, Webb, and Darnold not being great. His tenure as Giants GM rides on those 3 bets
Again, with this crap. He played well against the 2nd team defense Webb did not. It was one game. He may have had some jitters shit happens. How do you know Darnold was the next QB on his board? Barkley is
The player we have I could care less now Darnold, our goal is to win now with Barkley. You have complained now for months now about this selection. All of you including the person who started this thread all sound like the people who did not get their candidate to win and are hoping that candidate fails now so you can say see I was right. I really hope Barkley makes you all eat crow so we can stop with all this revisionist shit every time Darnold plays. The what if’s threads are already unbearable.
I didn't even enjoy the pick at #2 because I was pissed we didn't take Darnold. But then I realized QBs are a crap shoot and Barkley is supposed to be a slam dunk. We can shoot the craps against in a year or two. That said even if I didn't change my thinking I'd like to think I wouldn't whine nonstop about it and would just root for Barkley to succeed.
AMEN! Best post on this. They all want to say I told you so.
Here do not want to accept the premise that Darnold s performance at the end of the day must be factored into evaluating the wisdom of passing on him for a RB
Prior to the draft, we heard the qb s were flawed. Now we re hearing it doesn't matter how they play.
Barkley could be a great player, still does equate to the impact of a franchise quarterback, if indeed that is what Darnold becomes.
The don t take a quarterback crowd are hedging their bets.
Yeah, we can start to have a realistic discussion on that in about 3-5 years. Not Day 2 after preseason game number 1.
Nobody is hedging their bets after a single preseason game, trust me. Nothing changed anybody's opinion yet. If anything, the opening snap further entrenched the don't take a QB crowd in their take, even validated it.
There are literally people here trying to dissect Barkley's 4 carries in a preaseason game, and coming to the conclusion somehow that it is a negative rather than a positive that he took the opening snap 40 yards from our own twelve yard line. Madness.
The truth is, the don't take a QB crowd has been ecstatic, and continue to be, while the "take a QB at all costs crowd" has not been able to come to grips with what happened since the night of the draft.
I absolutely think Barkley will be great. Unless the Giants by some miracle win a Super Bowl because of him, if Darnold is a great franchise quarterback Barkley could be the best RB in the last decade and it still would have been the wrong pick.
I could make an argument that if Barkley is great and Darnold is just a good qb that it was the wrong pick.
I dont think anyone denies that Barkley was the safest pick. He's the one most likely to fulfill his potential. Problem is the ceiling value for a RB is no where near the ceiling value for a QB.
I very much fear 8-10 year stretch of horrific QB play after Simms was gone. I'm skeptical of Eli being able to turn the clock back, and even if he does no one behind him gives me any type of hope that we have our next QB already on the roster.
This is a QB driven league. We've been blessed to have one for the last 15 years, but his time is coming to an end much faster than any of us would like.
are nowhere to be found when their opinions, which they like to assert as facts, don’t play out. Let others have a say, if it’s that stupid then go do something else instead feeling the need to belittle them.
It’s simple, QB’s are hard to come by and have much more effect on a roster and also a much longer shelf life. Barkley will be great, no doubt, but it would have been a mistake if any of the other three QBs turn out to be franchise QBs.
I am on the fence with Eli, prob not a basher but definitely not a homer. He has to play well during the next two years too for this pick to make sense.
RE: RE: What if Darnold is great, Barkley is great, and he drafts another QB Â
are nowhere to be found when their opinions, which they like to assert as facts, don’t play out. Let others have a say, if it’s that stupid then go do something else instead feeling the need to belittle them.
It’s simple, QB’s are hard to come by and have much more effect on a roster and also a much longer shelf life. Barkley will be great, no doubt, but it would have been a mistake if any of the other three QBs turn out to be franchise QBs.
I am on the fence with Eli, prob not a basher but definitely not a homer. He has to play well during the next two years too for this pick to make sense.
like so many other posts, once again wins and playoffs are not even mentioned. It’s like people forget what the object of the game is.
If Barkley truly is a HoFer then we currently have *3* Hofers on the roster. There’s wins and playoffs in there. Why is that irrelevant as opposed to having a franchise QB, a few years down the road. Especially, as we were heading wth no runnng game and a pretty qb . but no wins?
I could make an argument that if Barkley is great and Darnold is just a good qb that it was the wrong pick.
No you can't.
Barkley becomes the wrong pick if the Giants fail when Eli moves on and Barkley cannot help them be any better.
It isn't even tied to Darnold - it is tied to Eli's successor and whether or not getting Barkley this year kept us from a better QB.
What if Darnold becomes "good" like Andy Dalton. That would make Barkley the "wrong pick"?
Bullshit.
I think you even said that if Barkley and Darnold both are HoF'ers that it was the wrong pick. Complete bullshit!
A HOF QB and a hall of fame RB do not have even close to the same value to a team.
Let's say he's Ladanian Tomlinson and Darnold is Ben Roethlisberger.
This team isn't going anywhere unless Eli turns the clock back or they find a QB. Regardless of how good Barkley is. Let's just hope DG is right. He went the safe route, we'll see if he made the right decision over the next few years.
the Giants won the Super Bowl, they were one of, if not the worst, rushing team in the league statistically during the regular season.
They ran the ball better in the playoffs, still not great but decent enough.
It's much easier to build a team that can contend for Super Bowls when you have a franchise QB. I'm not sure Eli is that player anymore.
The value of a hall of fame quarterback compared to the value of a hall of fame running back isn't even close. There's a reason decent QB's get paid on the same level that a top RB does.
I have no doubt Barkley will be great if he stays healthy, but I dont think it will matter unless the Giants find a long term answer at QB.
I could make an argument that if Barkley is great and Darnold is just a good qb that it was the wrong pick.
No you can't.
Barkley becomes the wrong pick if the Giants fail when Eli moves on and Barkley cannot help them be any better.
It isn't even tied to Darnold - it is tied to Eli's successor and whether or not getting Barkley this year kept us from a better QB.
What if Darnold becomes "good" like Andy Dalton. That would make Barkley the "wrong pick"?
Bullshit.
I think you even said that if Barkley and Darnold both are HoF'ers that it was the wrong pick. Complete bullshit!
A HOF QB and a hall of fame RB do not have even close to the same value to a team.
Let's say he's Ladanian Tomlinson and Darnold is Ben Roethlisberger.
This team isn't going anywhere unless Eli turns the clock back or they find a QB. Regardless of how good Barkley is. Let's just hope DG is right. He went the safe route, we'll see if he made the right decision over the next few years.
This is such a simplistic view. Of course a HOF QB is more valuable. But the Giants obviously feel that Barkley has a greater chance to be that player than Darnold does. What’s so difficult to understand about that?
And this idea that all Darnold has to be is “good”, for the pick to be bad is even more ludicrous. “Good” QBs can be found anywhere. Why would using the 2nd overall pick on a good QB be considered a success while a HOF RB would be a bad pick? The ONLY way to look back on this from Darnolds perspective and regret the pick is if he turns out great and Barkley doesn’t. Otherwise, contrary to popular belief, Darnold, Allen and Rosen aren’t the last QBs that will ever walk the earth. Especially if your standards for excellence is simply “good”.
If Barkley is a HOF player, it's not going to matter if the Giants don't have a franchise quarterback.
If you guaranteed DG before the draft that Darnold would be a HOF player and Barkley would be a HOF player, do you think he's even considering taking Barkley with the Giants current roster?
What has Adrian Peterson won?
I want the Giants to win Super Bowls. Thats it. I dont see it happening without a franchise QB.
most certainly can't be found anywhere. If that were the case, then why have multiple franchises gone years, some decades, without having even 1 good QB.
If Barkley is a HOF player, it's not going to matter if the Giants don't have a franchise quarterback.
If you guaranteed DG before the draft that Darnold would be a HOF player and Barkley would be a HOF player, do you think he's even considering taking Barkley with the Giants current roster?
What has Adrian Peterson won?
I want the Giants to win Super Bowls. Thats it. I dont see it happening without a franchise QB.
drafting a hall of fame quarterback does not guarantee you a superbowl, so i dont undersrand your point...
darnold and barkley as singular picks do not make their teams super bowl contenders...
if Darnold is good and Barkley is great it is still the wrong pick. No mention of winning or losing - just good vs. great.
Fucking asinine.
Dalton is the definition of a good QB. Not great. Not terrible. Good. Kirk Cousins is a good QB. Not great.
And yet none of it really matters. If you get a great player in a draft, it is a good pick. And the main point that matters more is who replaces Eli. Perhaps it is a draftee in our slot. Perhaps it is a veteran signee. Perhaps it is a draftee we trade up for.
We don't know.
That will be far more important to this debate than the relative strength of Darnold vs. Barkley.
Too many people gloss over this and it leads to terrible takes like a good player is a better pick than a great player or that a HoF players isn't the right pick
If Barkley is a HOF player, it's not going to matter if the Giants don't have a franchise quarterback.
If you guaranteed DG before the draft that Darnold would be a HOF player and Barkley would be a HOF player, do you think he's even considering taking Barkley with the Giants current roster?
What has Adrian Peterson won?
I want the Giants to win Super Bowls. Thats it. I dont see it happening without a franchise QB.
Again, like I already stated in my earlier post, it’s blatantly obvious that Gettleman DIDNT view Darnold as a HOFer. Otherwise yes, he would have been the pick. So again, why is this so hard to grasp?
He never even played in a Super Bowl, never mind won one.
When judging a player at the end of his career it's not Super Bowl or bust, but when building a team, that is what your goal should be.
It's hard to find a path to winning a Super Bowl unless you have a franchise QB. Not impossible, but very, very hard.
DG clearly didn't love any of the QB's. His giants tenure rides on finding a long term answer at QB, if he doesn't he will lose his job as a result in a few years.
top pick QBs used to sit for atleast a year, the learning curve was immense. Now rookies are coming in and having immense success because the game is drastically different. It’s absolutely easier to find a QB now.
And I’m not saying that their value is equal to an RB, it clearly isn’t. But I’ll gladly take the all purpose RB if we aren’t convinced the QB options were worth it. And the goal isn’t to find a “good” QB. If you have one you are generally going to be a mediocre and non threatening team.
and Flacco are not HOF qb's, but they are good to very good players.
Foles is the outlier. Magic carpet ride, flukey type run. But they arent ever in that position if they dont have Carson Wentz. Wentz got them homefield advantage throughout and a bye. Then Foles played two insane games in the NFC Title game and Super Bowl. He was horrible in the first playoff game.
BigBlueShock, I completely agree that DG didn't view Darnold as that kind of player. We will see if he is right or not. Even if Barkley is a smashing success, if the Giants don't find a QB in the next couple years for the long term, that will likely cost DG his job at some point.
I would love nothing more than Eli to turn the clock back and Webb to turn into a franchise level QB. I just don't think it's going to happen. I fear a 1992-1999 type of stretch for the Giants coming up.
never won anything because he rarely ever had a competent quarterback
I think we would all do hand springs if Barkley has the career that AP had.
Unfortunately the second a running back comes into the league his prime starts. His best years start immediately. If the Giants take 5 years to find an answer at QB, they will likely have wasted Barkley's prime years. A lot rides on Eli turning the clock back for a couple of seasons. I don't think it's out of the question for him to do that, I just worry that the last few seasons have taken their toll on him and he's also what, 37?
Barkley should be great if he stays healthy, just not sure any of it will matter if Eli continues to suck or they can't find a good QB in the next 3 years.
You are completely missing the point, though it’s not surprising. The question isn’t can you start a thread day after day bitching about not taking a QB. The question is, why the hell would you want to? It’s over. They didn’t take one. At what point do we move on and focus on this team and what we have to do from this point forward?
We all know the answer. The QB at all costs crowd want to be right. They want to say “I told you so”. They want to believe that they are the smartest guys in the room. In most cases, their parents basements. Guys like you will deny it all day long, but it is incredibly obvious that you’d rather see Darnold succeed and Barkley fail because it’s more gratifying for you to be right than it is for the Giants to succeed. You don’t appear to ebe enjoying any of this. You wanted a QB and it’s more important for your weird ass ego that we regret the move than it is to actually support the team on the field.
Don’t bother denying it. We all know you will claim it’s bullshit. But you and all the other QB at all costs guys are proving the point on a daily basis. Many times, multiple times a day. Good luck in your endeavor
I don't know how old you are but that's a pretty immature post.
You open with a needless insult and then include a tired "living in your parents basement" burn and I'm supposed to take you seriously?
I don't for one minute think that if the Giants had decided to go with a QB @ 2, that the BBIers who wanted Barkley or some other non-QB would be rooting against the team because the Giants didn't take their guy. It's an idiotic narrative. We are ALL Giants fans and we ALL want them to succeed.
Posters will return to claim that they were right, there's no denying that. But nobody is rooting against them just so they can run to BBI and "win" a debate.
as often as possible. To that end, a HOF-type QB isn't going to be the only piece that achieves that goal, nor does having a HOF-type RB.
However, between the two, I think its fairly easy to understand that a HOF-type QB contributes more to the overall equation of reaching that goal versus a HOF-type RB.
Time is the only thing that will tell us if Gettleman's view of reaching that goal was sound...
russell wilson, nick foles, joe flacco 3 qbs who have won superbowls recently and none are great qbs...
Russell Wilson isn’t a great QB?
wilson is a good player who makes a lot happen with his legs but i dont think he is a great quarterback at all
Struggle immensely with the view of not characterizing Wilson as a great QB with his immense level of talent, production and wins. Not to say anything of the fact he has never missed a start in his career...
he hasn’t won shit either. Andrew Luck hasn’t won shit. Cam came close but hasn’t won either. On and on and on.
See how stupid the titles argument is?
Competing for titles consistently is damn near impossible without a franchise QB.
When Andrew Luck went down, the Colts went from being in the AFC title game to being one of the worst teams in the entire sport.
The idea is to build a team that can compete for super bowls consistently. It takes a lot of things coming together to win even one.
Fatman, again, the last time the Giants won the Super Bowl they had the worst running game in the league during the regular season. The offensive line point is a good one, you need a serviceable line to compete. A solid running game is the least important component to building a team to compete for titles. It's not all that hard to put together a running back corps that can help you win a title. Look at the Eagles. Undrafted rookie free agent, Blount who they signed in the off-season on a team friendly deal because he was not highly sought after, traded for Ajayi mid season who the Dolphins didn't want anymore. They literally put their entire backfield together in the matter of a few months.
Tomlinson and Peterson are by far the two best running backs of the last decade. Neither one even played in a Super Bowl. Total I think they only played in 15 playoff games combined.
Barkley can stand on his head every game for the next 5 years but it's not going to matter if the guy under center plays like shit.
How any of you are comfortable with the quarterback position right now is beyond me. They have no chance to even sniff competing for a title if that position isn't figured out.
It's not Super Bowl or bust, but when you're building a team that has to be your goal, putting a team together that can compete for Super Bowls.
DG made large bets on Eli and Webb. He also made a large bet that the QB's he passed on would not be franchise quarterbacks.
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
The decision to use the #2 overall pick as an investment in Eli's successor or not was a franchise altering decision. The decision not to take a QB was controversial --right or wrong. There were a lot of strong statements made, such as there being no franchise QBs in this draft. We will see. But this debate is going to fade away anytime soon, and the fact that the most likely QB prospect will start his career in NY is going to keep this front and center for a long time. Better get used to it.
Unfortunately, this topic seems to have become too polarizing to allow for much in the way of meaningful conversation.
Why does the QB crowd always have to spin things to fit their narrative that don’t exist? It’s been a constant theme around here. Who the hell hasn’t questioned the decision to not take a QB? I wanted a QB too! That’s not the issue here. The issue is how long and how often are you guys going to continue to complain about it? Your constant bitching isn’t changing a damn thing. So there are two choices here. One is to use up an enormous amount of energy and aggravation by continually posting the same bitchfests day after day after day. The second is to just accept the fact that they took Barkley and start focusing on how to make this team that is actually here, better.
I for one will never understand why people would want to go the first option. Are you really going to piss and moan for the next decade? What’s the end game? You get to say “I told you so!”? We get it. You thought Gettleman should have thrown a dart and just picked a QB, regardless of their evaluations, simply because you wanted a QB. At what point do we move on? It’s not our fault he didn’t take a QB but we are the ones that have to live with it. Twice over. First on the field and secondly on these incessant posts. Lucky us!
The decision to use the #2 overall pick as an investment in Eli's successor or not was a franchise altering decision. The decision not to take a QB was controversial --right or wrong. There were a lot of strong statements made, such as there being no franchise QBs in this draft. We will see. But this debate is going to fade away anytime soon, and the fact that the most likely QB prospect will start his career in NY is going to keep this front and center for a long time. Better get used to it.
Unfortunately, this topic seems to have become too polarizing to allow for much in the way of meaningful conversation.
Good post. Darnold proves the Giants wrong or not. SB proves the Giants wrong or not. Regardless, the only meaningful conversation that would resonate with me is how they look after the season plays out and beyond
If Darnold becomes a franchise QB for the Jets that does not necessarily mean DG made a bad pick. But DG does still need to address the QB position. Right now the team has investments of a 3rd round and 4th round pick in the position. Those are not throw away late picks. If those guys don't pan out, they are going to have to make further investments. Teams can find themselves chasing that allusive player for years. That's why most teams take the shot whey they have their chance -because good chances don't come often unless you are very bad for years and you can blow a hell of a lot of resources if you have a legitimate answer. That's QB hell. I sure as hell hope that is not where we are headed.
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
Your last point is the most important, in my opinion.
RE: RE: There is legitimate discussion to be had Â
The decision to use the #2 overall pick as an investment in Eli's successor or not was a franchise altering decision. The decision not to take a QB was controversial --right or wrong. There were a lot of strong statements made, such as there being no franchise QBs in this draft. We will see. But this debate is going to fade away anytime soon, and the fact that the most likely QB prospect will start his career in NY is going to keep this front and center for a long time. Better get used to it.
Unfortunately, this topic seems to have become too polarizing to allow for much in the way of meaningful conversation.
Good post. Darnold proves the Giants wrong or not. SB proves the Giants wrong or not. Regardless, the only meaningful conversation that would resonate with me is how they look after the season plays out and beyond
That's the right way to look at it. You've always had the right perspective on these things '56. We won't know anything for years. I would suggest that the odds of them having blown the pick are very low. Even those in favor of a QB have to acknowledge that Barkley has the look of being a very good player. That at least should be reassuring to any Giants fan.
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
But the timing was perfect now. New coach, new GM, new offense, #2 pick in a stacked QB draft, a potential out in Eli's contract, and the opportunity to free up a lot of cap space for Beckham's impending deal. A lot of things had to align, and they did. In terms of moving from one franchise QB to the next (one of the hardest managerial feats to execute in sports) it didn't get any cleaner than that.
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
Your last point is the most important, in my opinion.
That's why, coming from someone who was very high on Darnold and believes he is going to be elite, I'm far more discouraged by the play of Webb than I am of the play of Darnold. The best case scenarios is that one of our two young QBs will make us all forget about Darnold.
Do we know Darnold is the QB the Giants would have selected had they gone QB? At best, the earliest Darnold (or any other QB) was going to start for the Giants was next year and that's if they release or trade Eli. Barkely, on the other hand, is starting from day 1. Barkley is also not just rushing the ball; he will probably be getting an additional 5 touches, on average, per game catching the ball and also help open up the entire offense.
At this point, I think whining over Darnold is pointless. As stated above, do we even know if he is who they would have taken? Basically, all we need to see is if Barkley is a great player. As FatMan pointed out, if the answer is yes, then he is a good pick.
And there is the right pick. I think few doubt that Barkley will be a good pick. But was he the RIGHT pick for a selection that has franchise altering implications. This was not your normal pick. The selection sets a trajectory at a franchise level.
But the timing was perfect now. New coach, new GM, new offense, #2 pick in a stacked QB draft, a potential out in Eli's contract, and the opportunity to free up a lot of cap space for Beckham's impending deal. A lot of things had to align, and they did. In terms of moving from one franchise QB to the next (one of the hardest managerial feats to execute in sports) it didn't get any cleaner than that.
But here's the thing not many people are discussing - if Barkley is great and Darnold sucks then we just avoided a minefield.
I think when it all came down to picking Barkley the Giants thinking was a combination of Barkley being a generational back and none of the other QB's looked at as being long-term franchise players.
Struggle immensely with the view of not characterizing Wilson as a great QB with his immense level of talent, production and wins. Not to say anything of the fact he has never missed a start in his career...
When someone says something like Russell Wilson is a good but not great QB, they've already ignored a ton of evidence on the way to their position. Providing more evidence to the contrary isn't going to change anything.
If that's the case is question our talent evaluators.
Obviously nothing is certain about any player at this early stage. But we do know about the roles quarterbacks and running backs play, as well as the attritional effect of football on the careers of running backs. We also know how hard it is to find quarterbacks versus running backs.
over just about every QB in the NFL other than Rodgers (I think he’s got good enough mileage left) to build my team. He’s a fantastic player. “Good” is a fucking criminal description of his level of play.
If the Giants were going to take Darnold at 2 if Barkley was gone, why do people think the Giants didn’t view him as a potential Pro Bowl QB/long-term solution? That seems a bit contradictory to me.
I wanted a QB. I don’t know enough about them to have a favorite, but four QBs going top four makes me think it was a decent pool to pick from. I also think having a high pick locked up at a relatively low cap number is valuable - and that’s mitigated by picking a RB who is already paid as a top five player at his position. I always go back to 04 - Fitzgerald was the best player in that draft, but AZ probably would have been better served by picking Rivers or Big Ben.
But there are a number of ways for this to work out really well for the Giants. We’ll see.
over just about every QB in the NFL other than Rodgers (I think he’s got good enough mileage left) to build my team. He’s a fantastic player. “Good” is a fucking criminal description of his level of play.
over just about every QB in the NFL other than Rodgers (I think he’s got good enough mileage left) to build my team. He’s a fantastic player. “Good” is a fucking criminal description of his level of play.
If that's the case is question our talent evaluators.
Obviously nothing is certain about any player at this early stage. But we do know about the roles quarterbacks and running backs play, as well as the attritional effect of football on the careers of running backs. We also know how hard it is to find quarterbacks versus running backs.
Question for you Terps. I’m not being confrontational at all, just genuinely curious. You are on record saying that you’d like to get away from the franchise QB model. You are also incredibly against handing out elite contracts to non elite players, particularly QB because they take up such a huge portion of the cap. So with that said, I’m legitimately curious why you’re all on board with taking a QB that high? It goes against everything you’ve failed against. Put it this way, you have said that you wouldn’t pay any QB franchise money unless they are Brady or Rodgers. So where does that leave this team when Darnold is up for his first post rookie contract? It’s incredibly unlikely, if not altogether impossible that he ends up anywhere in the stratosphere of Brady or Rodgers, so what’s your plan? Say his upside is Matt Ryan. A very good, but not great QB. Are you paying him top 5 QB money? Based on your previous posts, the answer is hell no. So basically, unless he’s a top 5 elite QB, you’re letting him walk and now you have completely wasted the 2nd overall pick. If you don’t have every intention of signing a QB to a top 5 NFL contract in his contract year, then how is that good for the long term of the team? Are you paying Darnold $30 Million per if he’s not a HOF QB on Brady’s level? Nope. You’re not. So what’s the end game here? Hope and pray he becomes Aaron Rodgers?
If the Giants were going to take Darnold at 2 if Barkley was gone, why do people think the Giants didn’t view him as a potential Pro Bowl QB/long-term solution? That seems a bit contradictory to me.
I wanted a QB. I don’t know enough about them to have a favorite, but four QBs going top four makes me think it was a decent pool to pick from. I also think having a high pick locked up at a relatively low cap number is valuable - and that’s mitigated by picking a RB who is already paid as a top five player at his position. I always go back to 04 - Fitzgerald was the best player in that draft, but AZ probably would have been better served by picking Rivers or Big Ben.
But there are a number of ways for this to work out really well for the Giants. We’ll see.
There were several “insiders” on here that suggested that if Barkley were gone, they’d have taken Chubb. Yes, they liked Darnold more than the others, but he supposedly still wasn’t their pick. No idea how accurate it was, but that’s what several of the guys we rely on here were saying
If that's the case is question our talent evaluators.
Obviously nothing is certain about any player at this early stage. But we do know about the roles quarterbacks and running backs play, as well as the attritional effect of football on the careers of running backs. We also know how hard it is to find quarterbacks versus running backs.
Question for you Terps. I’m not being confrontational at all, just genuinely curious. You are on record saying that you’d like to get away from the franchise QB model. You are also incredibly against handing out elite contracts to non elite players, particularly QB because they take up such a huge portion of the cap. So with that said, I’m legitimately curious why you’re all on board with taking a QB that high? It goes against everything you’ve failed against. Put it this way, you have said that you wouldn’t pay any QB franchise money unless they are Brady or Rodgers. So where does that leave this team when Darnold is up for his first post rookie contract? It’s incredibly unlikely, if not altogether impossible that he ends up anywhere in the stratosphere of Brady or Rodgers, so what’s your plan? Say his upside is Matt Ryan. A very good, but not great QB. Are you paying him top 5 QB money? Based on your previous posts, the answer is hell no. So basically, unless he’s a top 5 elite QB, you’re letting him walk and now you have completely wasted the 2nd overall pick. If you don’t have every intention of signing a QB to a top 5 NFL contract in his contract year, then how is that good for the long term of the team? Are you paying Darnold $30 Million per if he’s not a HOF QB on Brady’s level? Nope. You’re not. So what’s the end game here? Hope and pray he becomes Aaron Rodgers?
Wow. Sorry about the formatting. Paragraphs are not my friend apparently
I don't understand why people think that #2 overall is the only place Â
Aaron Rodgers was 24th overall. Tom Brady, we know, was a sixth round pick. Jimmy Garapolo, 2nd round. Russell Wilson, 3rd round. Kirk Cousins, 4th round. Hell, Ben Roethlisberger was 11th overall, a pick we've been near for several years now. Josh Rosen went 10th.
Alot of those guys above are better than the past five years of top 5 pick QB's.
(not including Rosen in the better than statement) Â
basically they feel like they currently have a franchise QB for a couple more years, so why use a major asset like the number 2 overall pick to just sit. And wasn't one of the major arguments for drafting a QB about his rookie contract being cheap? You'd be wasting like two years of that value.
RE: I don't understand why people think that #2 overall is the only place Â
Aaron Rodgers was 24th overall. Tom Brady, we know, was a sixth round pick. Jimmy Garapolo, 2nd round. Russell Wilson, 3rd round. Kirk Cousins, 4th round. Hell, Ben Roethlisberger was 11th overall, a pick we've been near for several years now. Josh Rosen went 10th.
Alot of those guys above are better than the past five years of top 5 pick QB's.
It isn't. But it's as good a shot as we're likely to get in, possibly, decades.
complaining about this debate? The decision to take Barkley was a huge one. We will all root for him as Giants fans, but it won't matter how great he is if we don't have a QB.
This isn't about Danold, Rosen or Barkley any more. It is about Eli. No, I am not going to come tell you I told you so if he plays poorly again this year. But the amount of posters on here that are completely denying even the possibility that Eli just isn't good anymore is alarming.
I hope I am wrong, and will admit it if he plays great. I just don't see the guy that was capable of winning superbowls anymore. Attack all you want, I don't care. At this point he needs to prove he can still play at a high level, or the Giants are in trouble.
Quarterbacks taken in the first round since 2007: Â
2017
2: Mitchell Trubisky
10: Patrick Mahomes
12: Deshaun Watson
Out of that list of 29 Quarterbacks taken in the first round, how many can truly be considered a successful franchise QB? For every 1, there are two or three more failures/busts.
There are no guarantees. Picking number 2 doesn't guarantee you anything.
Wow. That list is mostly fugly. I doubt it puts things into perspective for many, nothing else has, but that list of mediocrity should absolutely give people at least a slight reason to pause and see how things play out.
Wow. That list is mostly fugly. I doubt it puts things into perspective for many, nothing else has, but that list of mediocrity should absolutely give people at least a slight reason to pause and see how things play out.
Alas, it won’t. But it should
Take away the number one overalls (which we didn't have access to, anyway), and the list gets really ugly.
Bending the narrative to make the Giants sound right Â
Any list of drafted quarterbacks in any era is going to have more misses than hits. In a draft like this you improve your odds of hitting, just like we did in 2004 and just like the teams in '83. Yeah there might be a Tony Eason or a JP Losman in the group, but your chances of hitting are better than they normally would be.
The game has changed. We are in this era. We are also in an era where the proliferation of the spread offense in college make it very hard to evaluate QB's because they don't learn the pro game in college like they used to.
That's not bending the narrative, that's just the reality of the situation. That list above is reality.
That doesn't mean Darnold or any of the others won't be good.
But the odds are that not all four of the sure thing QB's from this draft (Mayfield, Darnold, Allen, Rosen) will pan out. But which one/s?
And I don't know if the Giants were right or not. Â
Any list of drafted quarterbacks in any era is going to have more misses than hits. In a draft like this you improve your odds of hitting, just like we did in 2004 and just like the teams in '83. Yeah there might be a Tony Eason or a JP Losman in the group, but your chances of hitting are better than they normally would be.
Since April? Alot of that has been going on for the past 6 years..
RE: Quarterbacks taken in the first round since 2007: Â
2017
2: Mitchell Trubisky
10: Patrick Mahomes
12: Deshaun Watson
Out of that list of 29 Quarterbacks taken in the first round, how many can truly be considered a successful franchise QB? For every 1, there are two or three more failures/busts.
There are no guarantees. Picking number 2 doesn't guarantee you anything.
But this is exactly the point. Good QBs are very hard to come by. Yes, picking one at #2 doesn't guarantee you will get a good one. But the list gets a lot uglier after that.
What makes the #2 pick so special is the Giants had their choice of any QB except Mayfield, and if they loved Mayfield they were close enough to at least open up legitimate conversations to get him. Odds are, in the future, they are going to have no where near the opportunity. They are going to have to settle for someone falling to them, or offer typically a huge ransom to trade up. And most likely if someone the actually like might fall to them, very often another team who also likes him will trade up to steal the guy from you. So picking later, it is much less likely your top QB will fall to your pick and even if he does, the odds are even worse that he will pan out. You are at the mercy of the draft unless you are willing to invest several picks to trade up, but even if you do get lucky and your guy is there, odds of a QB panning out get even worse after the first one or two picks.
This is why when you have your chance, you need to think real hard about pulling the trigger. Teams spend years praying for the opportunity the Giants just passed up on.
I get it if none of the QBs in this draft are any good. But DG was paid a lot of money to get that evaluation right and it was likely the most critical decision of his career, which many GMs will never have such an opportunity. There were legitimate prospects available (no one would have said Darnold was a reach for a need), and the initial look for two of the prospects looked pretty darn good. So that along with Webb looking like shit was not encouraging. But I guess we will have to wait and see how it continues to unfold.
I love Barkely as a player and am very excited about him. I would have taken him over any player except Darnold. But my feeling is, until proven wrong, Darnold was the sort of gift I feel like we never get. If he continues to show the things we saw a glimpse of on Thursday, they may have turned down a major franchise altering opportunity. And if Webb or Lauletta don't pan out, the franchise has a very big question mark they still have to figure out.
that when we stink again like everyone thinks we will, we can have our pick on the next QB. And then we can start talking about how much will be riding on that pick being right, how it wasn’t a good class to have the top pick, and how the franchise will be set back 50 years if it’s wrong.
complaining about this debate? The decision to take Barkley was a huge one. We will all root for him as Giants fans, but it won't matter how great he is if we don't have a QB.
This isn't about Danold, Rosen or Barkley any more. It is about Eli. No, I am not going to come tell you I told you so if he plays poorly again this year. But the amount of posters on here that are completely denying even the possibility that Eli just isn't good anymore is alarming.
I hope I am wrong, and will admit it if he plays great. I just don't see the guy that was capable of winning superbowls anymore. Attack all you want, I don't care. At this point he needs to prove he can still play at a high level, or the Giants are in trouble.
Like reading my mind. Good post...
RE: I don't understand why people think that #2 overall is the only place Â
Aaron Rodgers was 24th overall. Tom Brady, we know, was a sixth round pick. Jimmy Garapolo, 2nd round. Russell Wilson, 3rd round. Kirk Cousins, 4th round. Hell, Ben Roethlisberger was 11th overall, a pick we've been near for several years now. Josh Rosen went 10th.
Alot of those guys above are better than the past five years of top 5 pick QB's.
Good post. There is absolutely variation of where good QBs arise from in the draft. The risk comes more from how many reasonable quality prospects come out each year and when teams decide to pull the trigger...
I could make an argument that if Barkley is great and Darnold is just a good qb that it was the wrong pick.
No you can't.
Barkley becomes the wrong pick if the Giants fail when Eli moves on and Barkley cannot help them be any better.
It isn't even tied to Darnold - it is tied to Eli's successor and whether or not getting Barkley this year kept us from a better QB.
What if Darnold becomes "good" like Andy Dalton. That would make Barkley the "wrong pick"?
Bullshit.
I think you even said that if Barkley and Darnold both are HoF'ers that it was the wrong pick. Complete bullshit!
A HOF QB and a hall of fame RB do not have even close to the same value to a team.
Let's say he's Ladanian Tomlinson and Darnold is Ben Roethlisberger.
This team isn't going anywhere unless Eli turns the clock back or they find a QB. Regardless of how good Barkley is. Let's just hope DG is right. He went the safe route, we'll see if he made the right decision over the next few years.
Big Ben had a Hall of Fame RB’s and WR’s, Eli immediately becomes a
Better QB because of Barkley. If Barkley makes Eli better and we win another Championship before he retires then Barkley was the right choice.
RE: The goal is to build a team that can compete for a championship Â
as often as possible. To that end, a HOF-type QB isn't going to be the only piece that achieves that goal, nor does having a HOF-type RB.
However, between the two, I think its fairly easy to understand that a HOF-type QB contributes more to the overall equation of reaching that goal versus a HOF-type RB.
Time is the only thing that will tell us if Gettleman's view of reaching that goal was sound...
Why does the QB crowd always have to spin things to fit their narrative that don’t exist? It’s been a constant theme around here. Who the hell hasn’t questioned the decision to not take a QB? I wanted a QB too! That’s not the issue here. The issue is how long and how often are you guys going to continue to complain about it? Your constant bitching isn’t changing a damn thing. So there are two choices here. One is to use up an enormous amount of energy and aggravation by continually posting the same bitchfests day after day after day. The second is to just accept the fact that they took Barkley and start focusing on how to make this team that is actually here, better.
I for one will never understand why people would want to go the first option. Are you really going to piss and moan for the next decade? What’s the end game? You get to say “I told you so!”? We get it. You thought Gettleman should have thrown a dart and just picked a QB, regardless of their evaluations, simply because you wanted a QB. At what point do we move on? It’s not our fault he didn’t take a QB but we are the ones that have to live with it. Twice over. First on the field and secondly on these incessant posts. Lucky us!
This thread is probably the first time I have said anything about it since the week of the draft. It's not my job to make the team better with what they have, it's the GM's job. Fans talking about that decision still isn't helping or hurting the actual team so why do you care so much? It's a debate, which is what message boards are for. It's pretty annoying to hear people act like you can't ever question a move ever again after it actually happens. If it happens every day on here, then sure, I get why it could be annoying. But this decision was a franchise altering decision, it will be talked about often for years.
It wasn't brought up out of the blue. The way Darnold plays will be closely followed by many Giants fans.
I'm not going to throw it in other peoples face and say "I told you so". All of us want the same thing. But it is fair to question the decision they made in April, it wont be truly answered for a few years at least, but its more than fair to still question it.
It's Gettlemans job to get this decision correct. His job likely will hinge on this decision. Acting like picking a QB there would have been just randomly throwing darts at a dartboard is absurd.
DG clearly didn't love Darnold. We'll see if he is right in his evaluation of him.
One thing that does concern me when hearing DG talk is I think he values running the football too much. I think he places much more importance on running the football than other GM's do. Maybe he'll be proven right for having that belief, but it does concern me a bit. His "touched by the hand of God" comment about SB is also ridiculous.
We all want the same thing here, the Giants to win. If all of us just sat here with our pom poms out and never questioned anything the front office did there wouldn't be any point in having a message board.
and will be forever grateful for what he has done for this franchise.
That being said, he can't play much worse than he has in the last couple seasons. There have been many reasons for that beyond just Eli, but the bottom line is Eli has been piss poor the last couple of years. I'm sure Saquon will help him, and having Solder and a better line will help, but it's also possible that he's just not any good anymore. I think he will bounce back a bit this year, but I don't think Eli has enough left in the tank to make this team a true contender before he retires, even if he does bounce back a bit. DG seems to believe that Eli has enough left to lead the Giants into contention the next 2-3 years. His job is likely going to come down to Eli bouncing back and Webb being the QB of the future.
and will be forever grateful for what he has done for this franchise.
That being said, he can't play much worse than he has in the last couple seasons. There have been many reasons for that beyond just Eli, but the bottom line is Eli has been piss poor the last couple of years. I'm sure Saquon will help him, and having Solder and a better line will help, but it's also possible that he's just not any good anymore. I think he will bounce back a bit this year, but I don't think Eli has enough left in the tank to make this team a true contender before he retires, even if he does bounce back a bit. DG seems to believe that Eli has enough left to lead the Giants into contention the next 2-3 years. His job is likely going to come down to Eli bouncing back and Webb being the QB of the future.
My only disagreement with you is Eli's numbers in the 3 games Odell started last season were pretty darn good (that includes the San Diego game I thought he played terribly in). If we extrapolated those numbers over a full 16 game season, they would be tremendous (65% completions, 37 TDs, 4600+ passing yards). Heck, even on a terrible team, the Giants had the lead with 4 minutes left to go in all 3 of those games and it can be argued the defense/special teams were the main culprits for losing. In fairness to Eli, he was a good NFL QB in 2017 when he had his full compliment of weapons.
As I said a thousand times prior to the draft, I would've taken Darnold. But, put me in the group that doesn't really care what Darnold does because it's pretty much a fruitless exercise.
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
How fast do you win with the rookie QB.
Now you have the rookie QB, Odell signed no running game, and guys like Snacks, Jenkins deals ending along with Solder. Or you have a QB you still believe in get him a RB improve the line and see what happens. Guess which one DG tried
But the timing was perfect now. New coach, new GM, new offense, #2 pick in a stacked QB draft, a potential out in Eli's contract, and the opportunity to free up a lot of cap space for Beckham's impending deal. A lot of things had to align, and they did. In terms of moving from one franchise QB to the next (one of the hardest managerial feats to execute in sports) it didn't get any cleaner than that.
But He also should have had that one pass intercepted and the vast majority of the passes were under 7 yards. He did make a real nice pass on that TD where he ran out of the pocket
RE: Bending the narrative to make the Giants sound right Â
Any list of drafted quarterbacks in any era is going to have more misses than hits. In a draft like this you improve your odds of hitting, just like we did in 2004 and just like the teams in '83. Yeah there might be a Tony Eason or a JP Losman in the group, but your chances of hitting are better than they normally would be.
thats BS. There’s n need to bend any narrative. Given all the information available on the state of their own team, available players, context, and, well, everything, the Giants did do right. In an absolute sense; in any sense.
Barkley is one of the best RB prospects I've ever seen; a guy who can do it all. He is likely to be a good, if not great, RB.
That said, I can't see how anyone could suggest that we made the right pick. Many pundits have called this the strongest QB draft in decades. Four GMs made the decision to take QBs in the top 10; in fact, three traded up to do it. Despite having Darnold, Rosen, and Allen on the board for us - three guys expected to go in the top 5 when the college football season started - we passed on all of them. And we did so because...
DSG looked at what, two games of Eli Manning's season last year and decided to ignore all evidence to the contrary that he is in - or even could be - in decline. He is an Eli apologist hand picked by the GM who drafted Eli in a fake GM search for a team that refuses to ever go outside the organization for new ideas. He has an antiquated approach - believing this is 1960s football. Worse yet, he refuses to even consider modern analytics, and he mocked the reporter who even asked him the question. He thinks he is the smartest guy in the room; in my experience, those people typically end up being the dumbest.
DSG wants to win now, and he completely ignored the future of a franchise that was coming off a 3-13 season. Even if you don't think they were truly that bad, there is nothing to suggest that the Giants are good enough to compete, as they have been terrible for years, and even the 11-5 season was a mirage. The top four teams in the conference - the Eagles, Vikings, Rams, and Saints - all are SB contenders and all improved in the offseason. At best, there is room for us to sneak in as the 5 or 6 seed and promptly get hammered in the 1st round. And that's ignoring that teams like the Falcons, Packers, Cowboys, and probably Niners are all favored to make the playoffs after us.
The guy has no clue what he is doing or talking about. It is insane to believe that there wasn't a QB out there that he thought could be a franchise guy. It's patently ridiculous. And for those of you in the Webb camp, there is a good chance that ship has sailed already.
We can try to get guys in the fourth round or later, and we will need a wing and a prayer to even hope one of them becomes a serviceable starter, let alone a franchise QB. But DSG's motto is you set your team back years if you pick a QB and don't get it right. But, isn't he tasked with actually hitting on one? All he has done is bring the Panthers to the Giants. And if he thought QB hell was picking the wrong QB, he ain't seen nothing yet if Darnold hits while the Giants go 8-8 every year because of subpar QB play.
Barkley is one of the best RB prospects I've ever seen; a guy who can do it all. He is likely to be a good, if not great, RB.
That said, I can't see how anyone could suggest that we made the right pick. Many pundits have called this the strongest QB draft in decades. Four GMs made the decision to take QBs in the top 10; in fact, three traded up to do it. Despite having Darnold, Rosen, and Allen on the board for us - three guys expected to go in the top 5 when the college football season started - we passed on all of them. And we did so because...
DSG looked at what, two games of Eli Manning's season last year and decided to ignore all evidence to the contrary that he is in - or even could be - in decline. He is an Eli apologist hand picked by the GM who drafted Eli in a fake GM search for a team that refuses to ever go outside the organization for new ideas. He has an antiquated approach - believing this is 1960s football. Worse yet, he refuses to even consider modern analytics, and he mocked the reporter who even asked him the question. He thinks he is the smartest guy in the room; in my experience, those people typically end up being the dumbest.
DSG wants to win now, and he completely ignored the future of a franchise that was coming off a 3-13 season. Even if you don't think they were truly that bad, there is nothing to suggest that the Giants are good enough to compete, as they have been terrible for years, and even the 11-5 season was a mirage. The top four teams in the conference - the Eagles, Vikings, Rams, and Saints - all are SB contenders and all improved in the offseason. At best, there is room for us to sneak in as the 5 or 6 seed and promptly get hammered in the 1st round. And that's ignoring that teams like the Falcons, Packers, Cowboys, and probably Niners are all favored to make the playoffs after us.
The guy has no clue what he is doing or talking about. It is insane to believe that there wasn't a QB out there that he thought could be a franchise guy. It's patently ridiculous. And for those of you in the Webb camp, there is a good chance that ship has sailed already.
We can try to get guys in the fourth round or later, and we will need a wing and a prayer to even hope one of them becomes a serviceable starter, let alone a franchise QB. But DSG's motto is you set your team back years if you pick a QB and don't get it right. But, isn't he tasked with actually hitting on one? All he has done is bring the Panthers to the Giants. And if he thought QB hell was picking the wrong QB, he ain't seen nothing yet if Darnold hits while the Giants go 8-8 every year because of subpar QB play.
Thank you for that post. It’s was a giant waste of time.
This won't be so different than the River/Ben/Eli threads that started in pre-season 04 and ran pretty regularly through Feb of 2008. It's going to be a long ride for some for the next 3 or so years as the story is told on this.
I'm not going to be a hypocrite or pretend I didn't strongly want a quarterback. I feel the same way today as I did in April. When I feel the team makes a mistake it bothers me, and admittedly it will bother me as a fan until I'm (likely inevitably) proven wrong.
I don't think Eli has it left in him, I think quarterbacks are much more valuable than RBs, I think RBs bust as commonly as QBs, and I think if you have a shot at the best QB in a draft you take it for myriad reasons.
I clearly hope I'm wrong. I hope Manning has championship football left in him. I hope he and Barkley raise a trophy together.
has so many wrong things in it, I don't have the time to rip it apart. Let me say that you are football clueless and should root for another team immediately.
And what the hell does the 'S' in DSG stand for? Is it something only a complete asshole would come up with?
I just wanted to be the 200th post on this thread. Â
basically they feel like they currently have a franchise QB for a couple more years, so why use a major asset like the number 2 overall pick to just sit. And wasn't one of the major arguments for drafting a QB about his rookie contract being cheap? You'd be wasting like two years of that value.
Eli at this stage isn’t a top tiered QB. The only aspect of “franchise qb” that applies to him is the cap hit.
that when we stink again like everyone thinks we will, we can have our pick on the next QB. And then we can start talking about how much will be riding on that pick being right, how it wasn’t a good class to have the top pick, and how the franchise will be set back 50 years if it’s wrong.
Good times BBI.
QB class sucks this year in college. Look to 2020.
first team snaps!!! While we are asleep at the wheel. No game plan in the first preseason game. 3 bad runs by Barkley and we let our Def Coordinator take time off when we need to get ready for the Lions!
/sarcasm off
This should be NGT.
RE: RE: Quarterbacks taken in the first round since 2007: Â
2017
2: Mitchell Trubisky
10: Patrick Mahomes
12: Deshaun Watson
Out of that list of 29 Quarterbacks taken in the first round, how many can truly be considered a successful franchise QB? For every 1, there are two or three more failures/busts.
There are no guarantees. Picking number 2 doesn't guarantee you anything.
But this is exactly the point. Good QBs are very hard to come by. Yes, picking one at #2 doesn't guarantee you will get a good one. But the list gets a lot uglier after that.
What makes the #2 pick so special is the Giants had their choice of any QB except Mayfield, and if they loved Mayfield they were close enough to at least open up legitimate conversations to get him. Odds are, in the future, they are going to have no where near the opportunity. They are going to have to settle for someone falling to them, or offer typically a huge ransom to trade up. And most likely if someone the actually like might fall to them, very often another team who also likes him will trade up to steal the guy from you. So picking later, it is much less likely your top QB will fall to your pick and even if he does, the odds are even worse that he will pan out. You are at the mercy of the draft unless you are willing to invest several picks to trade up, but even if you do get lucky and your guy is there, odds of a QB panning out get even worse after the first one or two picks.
This is why when you have your chance, you need to think real hard about pulling the trigger. Teams spend years praying for the opportunity the Giants just passed up on.
I get it if none of the QBs in this draft are any good. But DG was paid a lot of money to get that evaluation right and it was likely the most critical decision of his career, which many GMs will never have such an opportunity. There were legitimate prospects available (no one would have said Darnold was a reach for a need), and the initial look for two of the prospects looked pretty darn good. So that along with Webb looking like shit was not encouraging. But I guess we will have to wait and see how it continues to unfold.
Bravo Uber, nice way to encapsulate what many here are thinking/feeling.
and they determined not one was worthy. I wanted to draft Darnold, but if the conviction was not there but it was for another prospect, then I'll defer the opinion for now.
We'll have to wait and watch it play out, well beyond one exhibition game. There's a good chance NYG will get another opportunity high in the draft, and there's also the element of Shurmur owning some pelts in deploying less than stellar QBs with success.
and they determined not one was worthy. I wanted to draft Darnold, but if the conviction was not there but it was for another prospect, then I'll defer the opinion for now.
We'll have to wait and watch it play out, well beyond one exhibition game. There's a good chance NYG will get another opportunity high in the draft, and there's also the element of Shurmur owning some pelts in deploying less than stellar QBs with success.
Quote:
there's also the element of Shurmur owning some pelts in deploying less than stellar QBs with success.
A very strong element, imv
My guess is the S is for you so Giants34 can watch Â
And while his post takes some unnecessary extremes (like saying DG only looked at 2 games to assess Eli and some others), what he wrote could be how this whole thing shakes out.
Or he could be wrong just like many others here...
Yes, not one strong enough to pass on a franchise QB Â
I'll talk football when it is actually pertinent, like I've already done on this thread in quite a few posts.
Why should I try to validate the position of posters who use ridiculous monikers and the like? DSG?? Great. Let me engage in a serious discussion with a fuckhead who has some secret bash against Gettleman?
Why would I engage in serious football discussion with Les who call people "fanboys", or bw who calls the front office "Jints Central"?
I want focus of those posts to be put squarely on the inane aspect they bring. They don't deserve to be looked at any further from an analysis standpoint.
But then again - if talking football is so important to you, why make absolutely disgusting comments about "goosestepping" instead of focusing just on football? And calling out others for responding to morons?
Because you do exactly the same thing you accuse others of and don't even see it.
RE: Yes, not one strong enough to pass on a franchise QB Â
should one present himself, but there's more than one way to build a championship caliber football team, especially in this watered down era.
Jon -You are 100% correct with that statement.
I firmly believe that the league is circling back around towards offenses built on strong running games.
Why? Because I just don't believe colleges are producing pro ready QB's at the same rate it used to.
Why? Spread offense and quarterbacks struggling to make the transition to the pros due to not being able to read defenses as well, and therefore not having the ability to audible at the line of scrimmage out of a bad play. Also, having more limited options due to having not taken snaps from under center.
are playing the QB's a lot earlier than they used to, even the high drafted ones.
Sitting a guy like Aaron Rodgers doesn't happen anymore. I'm not sure how much more pro ready QB's were years ago, most of them got to sit and learn for a year or two.
Teams aren't waiting to throw the highly touted QB into the fire anymore. Not sure why, probably many factors at play here, one being that there have been so many bad QB's recently that teams can't afford to be patient.
A lot of it gets blamed on the college game, but the NFL having zero patience and not letting guys sit and learn is just as big of a problem.
are playing the QB's a lot earlier than they used to, even the high drafted ones.
Sitting a guy like Aaron Rodgers doesn't happen anymore. I'm not sure how much more pro ready QB's were years ago, most of them got to sit and learn for a year or two.
Teams aren't waiting to throw the highly touted QB into the fire anymore. Not sure why, probably many factors at play here, one being that there have been so many bad QB's recently that teams can't afford to be patient.
A lot of it gets blamed on the college game, but the NFL having zero patience and not letting guys sit and learn is just as big of a problem.
I would counter that the teams that throw their highly drafted QB's into the fire right away do so because they don't have an established QB to sit him behind to begin with.
If Darnold was drafted by us, he absolutely would have sat this year. It's a situation to situation, team by team basis.
that if you have a franchise QB, it's a hell of a lot easier to build a championship caliber team than if you don't have one.
In any one given year, you can build a team a few different ways to win a title. Still much easier to do it if you have the QB in place than if you don't. You're way behind right from the start if you dont have the franchise QB in place.
I don't see any way to build a championship contender consistently over a number of years unless you have a franchise QB. If you look around at the teams that have had sustained success and had a legit chance to win a title every year, every single one of them has had a franchise QB.
Again, we have a franchise QB that the powers that be.... Â
can still perform at that level for another couple years.
What's wrong with building a team around that? Because it makes it that much easier when the new guys does finally step in. With a great team around him.
Certainly your odds improve with the franchise QB Â
but the brass felt that guy wasn't there. It makes more sense to me to pick the best player in that case and stay true to your draft board, rather than reach and gamble on a prospect who is probably 50/50 to become a plus NFL QB.
And, this is coming from one who touted Darnold for 18 months prior to the draft.
are playing the QB's a lot earlier than they used to, even the high drafted ones.
Sitting a guy like Aaron Rodgers doesn't happen anymore. I'm not sure how much more pro ready QB's were years ago, most of them got to sit and learn for a year or two.
Teams aren't waiting to throw the highly touted QB into the fire anymore. Not sure why, probably many factors at play here, one being that there have been so many bad QB's recently that teams can't afford to be patient.
A lot of it gets blamed on the college game, but the NFL having zero patience and not letting guys sit and learn is just as big of a problem.
I would counter that the teams that throw their highly drafted QB's into the fire right away do so because they don't have an established QB to sit him behind to begin with.
If Darnold was drafted by us, he absolutely would have sat this year. It's a situation to situation, team by team basis.
I made that point in my post above, teams can't afford to be patient because they have such shit at QB in the first place.
And its usually the same teams doing it regularly. My biggest fear is turning into one of those teams. The teams that have been laughingstocks for a while have one thing in common: instability at the quarterback position.
I'm worried the Giants are going to wind up in that position soon.
Part of the appeal with Darnold for me was that I thought it was a perfect situation for the Giants. He could sit a year and learn behind Eli. Let Eli make one last run at it this year, then let him go in the 2019 off-season, save a bunch of money on the cap, and start Darnold next year.
If Webb or Lauletta don't pan out, the Giants will likely be one of those teams that has no choice but to throw a QB into the fire early on, which I don't believe is a good idea for any team.
Last year was a perfect storm of suck and injuries and just awful luck. The Giants had much more talent than a 3-13 team, just everything went wrong all at the same time. Chances are they won't pick that high for a long time. I would have used that to try to set up the franchise with a long term answer at QB.
As I said earlier, DG made big bets on Eli and Webb. I hope and pray he hits on those bets. I don't want another 1992-1999 situation.
RE: Again, we have a franchise QB that the powers that be.... Â
can still perform at that level for another couple years.
What's wrong with building a team around that? Because it makes it that much easier when the new guys does finally step in. With a great team around him.
They certainly are banking on that. I think it's a very, very risky gamble. Eli needs to bounce back in a huge way. He's not young by any stretch and just has not played good football at all in a while.
I hope I'm wrong about Eli, but I fear that his best football is way behind him.
Bringing in Darnold would not have been throwing in the towel on 2018, either. Let's not forget that this is a team that people were picking to go to the Super Bowl last year. Obviously Saquon is a special talent, but they still could have gone for it this year while having a potential franchise QB waiting in the wings.
DG made a big bet on Eli and Webb and if he's wrong it will almost certainly cost him his job.
I think his age, his health, and his physical decline.... Â
He looks to me like he can still make all the throws. I don't see a physical decline like others.
Also, he just turned 37. He played all of last season at 36. They way people talk about him, you'd think he was turning 40.
Not to mention he's coming off two career years in 2014 and 2015. His only down years were under McAdoo as head coach, and we all saw how bad that offensive design was.
He's not coming off two career years in 2014 and 2015. First, they were 3 and 4 years ago. Second, those weren't career years - the team went 6-10 each season. I know that's not all on him, but stats are for losers.
Besides, even if he was coming off 5 straight MVP years it would be prudent to actively be trying to replace him with someone younger and cheaper. The Giants aren't the only team in this position. Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rivers - all these guys are playing well but the end could come at any moment. Their respective teams should actively be looking for replacements.
One thing that was telling was the recent interview given by Louis Riddick. Besides sounding profoundly smart and qualified for the Giants' GM position, Riddick also implied that he thought Eli's time might be done.
Here's a basic fact: though he thankfully appears to be beating his illness, Gettleman is 67 years old. The moment he was hired he was not long for the Giants' GM position. His planning horizon isn't likely to extend as far out as Riddick's would have. I know many would disagree but I believe Gettleman's hiring occurred in part because he would keep Eli at QB whereas Riddick might not have.
The Giants are all in for these next couple years. After that - uncertainty.
But I really wish he had average time to drop back and throw the ball. Having a defender in his face after about 2 seconds is going to make almost any QB look crappy. Maybe this new Oline will work out.
I agree that keeping Eli around was an organizational decision Â
made clear - directly or indirectly - to both Gettleman and Shurmur during the interview process. If you're holding Eli to something close to the standard he set in his prime, he played a grand total of one good game last season out of 15. I hope I'm wrong, but I think he's done. Forget the next 10 seasons, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Darnold outplays him THIS season.
I still think Darnold's poor mechanics will be exposed... Â
He's not coming off two career years in 2014 and 2015. First, they were 3 and 4 years ago. Second, those weren't career years - the team went 6-10 each season. I know that's not all on him, but stats are for losers.
Besides, even if he was coming off 5 straight MVP years it would be prudent to actively be trying to replace him with someone younger and cheaper. The Giants aren't the only team in this position. Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rivers - all these guys are playing well but the end could come at any moment. Their respective teams should actively be looking for replacements.
One thing that was telling was the recent interview given by Louis Riddick. Besides sounding profoundly smart and qualified for the Giants' GM position, Riddick also implied that he thought Eli's time might be done.
Here's a basic fact: though he thankfully appears to be beating his illness, Gettleman is 67 years old. The moment he was hired he was not long for the Giants' GM position. His planning horizon isn't likely to extend as far out as Riddick's would have. I know many would disagree but I believe Gettleman's hiring occurred in part because he would keep Eli at QB whereas Riddick might not have.
The Giants are all in for these next couple years. After that - uncertainty.
Stats may be for losers, but he had the highest TD total of his career by far in 2015, and 2nd highest yardage total of his career. We're talking physical decline here, and in that season, he showed he had a very live arm.
Yeah, we were 6-10, but we lost 7 games when we were either tied or gained the lead in the final two minutes. That was a defensive failure, and that's what they addressed in 2016, and they rebounded. Eli's play sunk because they left the O-line as is/was, and McAdoo's scheme was absolute shit. That was not coincidence that Eli's and the offense's play fell off a cliff after Coughlin left. I think a better scheme (remains to be seen) this year you'll see a huge bounceback. All we can do is wait and see.
Now I'm not talking the next ten years, I'm talking the next two years. He can still win, and he can still make all the throws. Give him just average protection and a better scheme, and you will see a successful offense/QB in 2018.
Now I'm not talking the next ten years, I'm talking the next two years. He can still win, and he can still make all the throws. Give him just average protection and a better scheme, and you will see a successful offense/QB in 2018.
On a good team I think Eli can still play at a Super Bowl level. Unfortunately I don't think this is or will be a good team in the next two years. Not Super Bowl level, anyway. And then...what?
I see the path they chose in going with Eli this season, and possibly next if he returns to a higher level of play. But, we absolutely need to stay aware and strike when the opportunity arises to acquire his replacement. It's time.
Now I'm not talking the next ten years, I'm talking the next two years. He can still win, and he can still make all the throws. Give him just average protection and a better scheme, and you will see a successful offense/QB in 2018.
On a good team I think Eli can still play at a Super Bowl level. Unfortunately I don't think this is or will be a good team in the next two years. Not Super Bowl level, anyway. And then...what?
My hope is that at the end of two years we will have a strong offensive and defensive line, and running game. So that the new QB can step in and not be asked to do much. A much more comfortable situation. That is my hope.
Now I'm not talking the next ten years, I'm talking the next two years. He can still win, and he can still make all the throws. Give him just average protection and a better scheme, and you will see a successful offense/QB in 2018.
On a good team I think Eli can still play at a Super Bowl level. Unfortunately I don't think this is or will be a good team in the next two years. Not Super Bowl level, anyway. And then...what?
My hope is that at the end of two years we will have a strong offensive and defensive line, and running game. So that the new QB can step in and not be asked to do much. A much more comfortable situation. That is my hope.
Then the search begins...
Hopefully its not filled with paying Case Keenums or Kirk Cousins exhorbitant sums. Or watching Brown, Kanell, Graham, Palmer, Collins flounder for 10 years. Or even worse, a run like the Jets. O'Donnell, Foley, Testaverde, Lucas, Pennigton, Bollinger, Sanchez, Smith, Fitzpatrick. Not that easy to find the guy.
RE: I agree that keeping Eli around was an organizational decision Â
made clear - directly or indirectly - to both Gettleman and Shurmur during the interview process. If you're holding Eli to something close to the standard he set in his prime, he played a grand total of one good game last season out of 15. I hope I'm wrong, but I think he's done. Forget the next 10 seasons, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Darnold outplays him THIS season.
It wouldnt surprise you if darnold out plays Eli this season?
It would shock the crap out of me.
I wanted mayfield or Rosen. Darnold will be an average player in the nfl in my view.
I’m more curious to know if the giants would have drafted a qb if only two hot shots existed rather than four. For some reason I feel like they over thought things because there were so many qbs in this draft. Shit they even said as much after the draft. That scares me. Of course no one in the media asked the million dollar question..if all the scouts and coaches loved a different qb and there was no consensus, didn’t you guys grade all the qbs and if so, didn’t one of the qbs still have a higher grade than everyone else?
We might never know. But the stupid questions the media talkies asked gettleman brought nothing to the table.
More than likely it was a combination of things. They still love Eli, they really loved Barkley, and they weren’t Gaga over any of the qbs. It is what it is... this topic has already pushed me further and further away from even talking football with many because it’s such a beaten to death topic and it’s not even September year 1 yet. It’s also a popular or easy talking point for idiots. Many here share good insight. Many here don’t.
When Eli is done & if Webb/Lauletta aren't the answer, Â
I have no doubt that the Giants, whoever the GM is, will move heaven & earth to get a franchise QB, be it trading up in the draft or FA.
And that's the problem...we didn't have to move heaven and earth. The guy was sitting there for us, and at the draft he wasn't old enough to buy a beer.
Yeah, stupid us. Took the best player in the draft Â
I have no doubt that the Giants, whoever the GM is, will move heaven & earth to get a franchise QB, be it trading up in the draft or FA.
And that's the problem...we didn't have to move heaven and earth. The guy was sitting there for us, and at the draft he wasn't old enough to buy a beer.
We'll see. I think Darnold will be good, but a franchise QB? That's TBD. I'm not getting worked up over one preseason game.
RE: RE: When Eli is done & if Webb/Lauletta aren't the answer, Â
I have no doubt that the Giants, whoever the GM is, will move heaven & earth to get a franchise QB, be it trading up in the draft or FA.
And that's the problem...we didn't have to move heaven and earth. The guy was sitting there for us, and at the draft he wasn't old enough to buy a beer.
Eh, what did we give up for Eli? What did the Redskins give up for RGIII? What did the Eagles give up for Wentz? The Redskins traded all that for RGIII & he was essentially a bust, the more successful QB was taken in the 4th round.
I think both sides of the argument are getting too worked up. If there is a QB NYG covets, they’ll trade up for him, fans will be outraged & it will turn out they didn’t give up much. That doesn’t concern me.
are playing the QB's a lot earlier than they used to, even the high drafted ones.
Sitting a guy like Aaron Rodgers doesn't happen anymore. I'm not sure how much more pro ready QB's were years ago, most of them got to sit and learn for a year or two.
Teams aren't waiting to throw the highly touted QB into the fire anymore. Not sure why, probably many factors at play here, one being that there have been so many bad QB's recently that teams can't afford to be patient.
A lot of it gets blamed on the college game, but the NFL having zero patience and not letting guys sit and learn is just as big of a problem.
I would counter that the teams that throw their highly drafted QB's into the fire right away do so because they don't have an established QB to sit him behind to begin with.
If Darnold was drafted by us, he absolutely would have sat this year. It's a situation to situation, team by team basis.
Absolutely true. The Packers had Favre who was strong as an ox. But they knew they had to move on to a younger, and smarter QB eventually. Rodgers was a top prospect, a great talent who got all the time he needed to work out ever single kink. He was a good QB with the attitude of a seasoned vet his first season. By year two he was great
Another thing to take into consideration, a lot of these young hotshots coming out of college probably wouldn't even accept sitting 3 years. Somebody like Rosen and Mayfield may put up a stink
Nothing is ever stared down. Sanchez locked on. Geno locked on. Darnold scans the entire field extremely well and makes very fast decisions as to the best place to put the football.
Hope he does well for the Jets. The Pats could use some actual competition...
Webb looking horrific thursday night is concerning as well. DG made bets on Eli, Webb, and Darnold not being great. His tenure as Giants GM rides on those 3 bets
Stop, you're going to confuse them.
Without trading picks or players? Then DG is forgiven but that also means he was wrong about Eli and we have a top 5 pick
Quote:
that is great next year?
Without trading picks or players? Then DG is forgiven but that also means he was wrong about Eli and we have a top 5 pick
No it doesn't mean that. You can draft great QBs outside of the top 5. I'm not talking about banking on a 6th rounder, you can have a mid to late first round pick be a great QB no questions asked. You know that but you want to bash DG.
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
Webb looking horrific thursday night is concerning as well. DG made bets on Eli, Webb, and Darnold not being great. His tenure as Giants GM rides on those 3 bets
I agree 100%.
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
QB was the right pick at 2. Period
Quote:
In comment 14036554 BestFeature said:
Quote:
that is great next year?
Without trading picks or players? Then DG is forgiven but that also means he was wrong about Eli and we have a top 5 pick
No it doesn't mean that. You can draft great QBs outside of the top 5. I'm not talking about banking on a 6th rounder, you can have a mid to late first round pick be a great QB no questions asked. You know that but you want to bash DG.
Ohh I see so a mid to late first rounder that will be great. Must not have been rated high in college to be late first rounder as a qb. But if we do take one late first then do you not think people and media will question why not take Darnold or a qb this past draft
So a late first round qb next year that we will hope we strike gold and SB this year will be a better chance than taking Darnold this year and a running back in later rounds.
Or here me out, this could be crazy
Darnold this year and that late first rounder next year could be an impact linebacker or DE
Sounds better to me than a RB with the second pick and a later first round qb next year that we must hope and pray is sent from above...
Ohh sorry sir...Please tell us what kind of post would be better for you to love football?
Rah Rah, all is good in Big Blue land and Eli has 10 more years and SB is a future HOF and Darnold is a bust because that is why DG passes on him.
Championship here we come
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
If this scenario played out, would it be the wrong pick if we won one or two superbowls with Barkley and the Jets didn't win any in that time period?
All water under the bridge now as it's all about Saquon.
It’s prettt much all the people who were in the “draft a QB” camp worrying or wanting to prematurely pay themselves on the back.
You know who else looked phenomenal last night? Teddy Bridgewater, on repaired knee after 2 years out of football. Big deal. Forget waiting until the season is over, can we at least wait until the preseason is over?
RE: Webb
The people burying him after Thursday night, would be the same people pumping the brakes if he put up a Unitas-esque performance that apparently some of these other guys did.
Just remember something as you watch the class of 2018. There were a lot of idiots along the way who tried to tell us the likes of Mark Sanchez, RGIII and Flacco were elite franchise QBs.
Quote:
who would have thought...
Ohh sorry sir...Please tell us what kind of post would be better for you to love football?
Rah Rah, all is good in Big Blue land and Eli has 10 more years and SB is a future HOF and Darnold is a bust because that is why DG passes on him.
Championship here we come
why do you care if the giants win a championship? you said yourself all you care about is making the playoffs for the next 10 years
Quote:
In comment 14036565 NYSports1 said:
Quote:
In comment 14036554 BestFeature said:
Quote:
that is great next year?
Without trading picks or players? Then DG is forgiven but that also means he was wrong about Eli and we have a top 5 pick
No it doesn't mean that. You can draft great QBs outside of the top 5. I'm not talking about banking on a 6th rounder, you can have a mid to late first round pick be a great QB no questions asked. You know that but you want to bash DG.
Ohh I see so a mid to late first rounder that will be great. Must not have been rated high in college to be late first rounder as a qb. But if we do take one late first then do you not think people and media will question why not take Darnold or a qb this past draft
So a late first round qb next year that we will hope we strike gold and SB this year will be a better chance than taking Darnold this year and a running back in later rounds.
Or here me out, this could be crazy
Darnold this year and that late first rounder next year could be an impact linebacker or DE
Sounds better to me than a RB with the second pick and a later first round qb next year that we must hope and pray is sent from above...
Yeah Barkley this year and a QB next year in the mid to late portion of the first round where we'll be hopefully drafting means you get a generational RB and likely a good QB prospect. Rather than a bit of a better QB prospect this year and someone who doesn't come close to Barkley next year.
Darnold will never be a Giant, so there’s no point in crying over spilled milk. Eli may very well have two or three years left and hopefully the Giants can pair possibly the kid from Stanford (or someone similar) with a competent oline, Barkley, and OBJ. The obvious caveat is that fans will have to be ok giving up likely 2-3 first round picks to get that guy. Whereas Darnold could have been had at 2 this year.
Webb is not the answer, as you all saw the other night and as those who watched him in college have been saying since last year. That’s ok though, there will be other top qbs and the Giants can get one if they so choose. Hopefully they do not need to cross this bridge until 2020 or 2021, because the 2019 draft will not feature a legit top 5 qb.
Darnold will never be a Giant, so there’s no point in crying over spilled milk. Eli may very well have two or three years left and hopefully the Giants can pair possibly the kid from Stanford (or someone similar) with a competent oline, Barkley, and OBJ. The obvious caveat is that fans will have to be ok giving up likely 2-3 first round picks to get that guy. Whereas Darnold could have been had at 2 this year.
Webb is not the answer, as you all saw the other night and as those who watched him in college have been saying since last year. That’s ok though, there will be other top qbs and the Giants can get one if they so choose. Hopefully they do not need to cross this bridge until 2020 or 2021, because the 2019 draft will not feature a legit top 5 qb.
We heard what a terrible draft 2017 was for QBs and now Watson is a God and Mahomes is the next big thing. I don't think it's a done deal that 2019 won't have a legit top 5 QB, unless you mean one worthy of a top 5 pick.
Quote:
who would have thought...
Ohh sorry sir...Please tell us what kind of post would be better for you to love football?
Rah Rah, all is good in Big Blue land and Eli has 10 more years and SB is a future HOF and Darnold is a bust because that is why DG passes on him.
Championship here we come
I’ll never understand the mindset of a miserable fuck spending their existence being a whiny troll on an internet message board. you literally add nothing here. there’s plenty of posters who are pessimistic about the giants but have excellent conversations. you are a fucking troll and make continue to poison this board...
yet more quality posters will leave here and you’ll still be here. Sad.
Quote:
Looked good and I think is the exact type of qb you want in the modern nfl, can read a defense and is accurate. Most importantly he is mobile without being a run first qb. There will be other qbs like him in the 2020 and 2021 draft. I particularly like the kid from Stanford, who I think has Giants written all over him.
Darnold will never be a Giant, so there’s no point in crying over spilled milk. Eli may very well have two or three years left and hopefully the Giants can pair possibly the kid from Stanford (or someone similar) with a competent oline, Barkley, and OBJ. The obvious caveat is that fans will have to be ok giving up likely 2-3 first round picks to get that guy. Whereas Darnold could have been had at 2 this year.
Webb is not the answer, as you all saw the other night and as those who watched him in college have been saying since last year. That’s ok though, there will be other top qbs and the Giants can get one if they so choose. Hopefully they do not need to cross this bridge until 2020 or 2021, because the 2019 draft will not feature a legit top 5 qb.
We heard what a terrible draft 2017 was for QBs and now Watson is a God and Mahomes is the next big thing. I don't think it's a done deal that 2019 won't have a legit top 5 QB, unless you mean one worthy of a top 5 pick.
Thinking one more worthy of a top 5 pick. Things can change, but I don’t see 2019 being the year to make an investment in qb. 2020 and 2021 I think will feature potentially Costello, Lawrence, Fromm, Patterson, and maybe Grier(up in the air on that one).
In a 2 game stretch in 2010 against the Pats and Dolphins, in the REGULAR season, Sanchez threw for 6tds and 0 ints and had a qb rating of 122.
So basically you are full of shit. NTTAWTT
How does the bellyaching Giants fan calculus work out on that one?
And, it’s preseason
But even as that guy, it's still way too soon. It's one really good pre-season performance. So, let's relax.
(However, as a small side-note, if Webb had the same performance as Darnold last night, the same people poo-pooing Darnold's performance would be praising Webb. Or, if Dranold was a Giant, they'd also be putting Darnold over. Let's be honest).
Youre just a bomer and blindly root
This is it in a nutshell and it's amazing how many people don't get this.
In today's NFL, especially with a world-class WR already on the team... a very good QB (on par with Eli or Simms) teamed with a solid RB (similar to Bradshaw or Morris) will always be better than the best RB in the league teamed with the next Brown, Kanell or Graham.
(And I'm afraid that the later combo is where we're heading.)
Darnold might be great. He might suck. Who knows? DG thought Barkley was the best player in the draft & took him. Time will tell.
I'll reserve judgment on these guys (including Barkley) till they actually play some real games against real competition
Quote:
who would have thought...
Ohh sorry sir...Please tell us what kind of post would be better for you to love football?
Rah Rah, all is good in Big Blue land and Eli has 10 more years and SB is a future HOF and Darnold is a bust because that is why DG passes on him.
Championship here we come
Because of cunts like you.
Quote:
who would have thought...
Youre just a bomer and blindly root
Not gonna lie, no idea what any of that means.
Quote:
In comment 14036573 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
who would have thought...
Ohh sorry sir...Please tell us what kind of post would be better for you to love football?
Rah Rah, all is good in Big Blue land and Eli has 10 more years and SB is a future HOF and Darnold is a bust because that is why DG passes on him.
Championship here we come
why do you care if the giants win a championship? you said yourself all you care about is making the playoffs for the next 10 years
How Darnold does is completely irrelevant to our success and to my own satisfaction. I wish him all the best in the world. But if Barkley truly is a HoF then I am more thane ecstatic and not just because we have a HoF player (which people apparently think is a trivial thing) but because a HoFer on this team with 2 other HoFers on offense, is absolutely a playoff team.
Prior to the draft, we heard the qb s were flawed. Now we re hearing it doesn't matter how they play.
Barkley could be a great player, still does equate to the impact of a franchise quarterback, if indeed that is what Darnold becomes.
The don t take a quarterback crowd are hedging their bets.
There were 0 plays made by Barkley this game that were any close to that one run. The run is significant because it showcased Barkley's talent. Only a handful RBs in the NFL can even make that play.
Exactly! The difference between going from preseason to the regular season is far bigger for a QB than an RB.
Prior to the draft, we heard the qb s were flawed. Now we re hearing it doesn't matter how they play.
Barkley could be a great player, still does equate to the impact of a franchise quarterback, if indeed that is what Darnold becomes.
The don t take a quarterback crowd are hedging their bets.
Yeah, we can start to have a realistic discussion on that in about 3-5 years. Not Day 2 after preseason game number 1.
Nobody is hedging their bets after a single preseason game, trust me. Nothing changed anybody's opinion yet. If anything, the opening snap further entrenched the don't take a QB crowd in their take, even validated it.
There are literally people here trying to dissect Barkley's 4 carries in a preaseason game, and coming to the conclusion somehow that it is a negative rather than a positive that he took the opening snap 40 yards from our own twelve yard line. Madness.
The truth is, the don't take a QB crowd has been ecstatic, and continue to be, while the "take a QB at all costs crowd" has not been able to come to grips with what happened since the night of the draft.
Because that's what it feels like you guys are setting us up for.
This is more of the same. Darnold is better and it means nothing that we drafted Barkley if we don't win a Superbowl blah blah blah
The bottom line is we drafted Barkley and did not draft any of the top quarterbacks for a variety of reasons.
Accorsi was not afraid to stake his name to Eli and gettleman was not afraid to stake his name to Barkley.
We will see how it all plays out, but the verdict is not going to be determined by one preseason game or even 1 season. Hell, we may not know for 10 years, but please continue on with the giants screwed up and and we will be in quarterback hell while the jets are celebrating Superbowl victories with Darnold.
Quote:
could be a HOF.
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
If this scenario played out, would it be the wrong pick if we won one or two superbowls with Barkley and the Jets didn't win any in that time period?
Exactly. How many Super Bowls did Marino win.
Quote:
I remember last year preseason game against the Pats, Webb came in and looked fantastic. He "pulled an Eli" and came back with very little time on the clock to beat them at the end of the game. Time will tell. I'm not giving up on him or Lauletta yet. Seems like most on here have.
i wonder if Jaguars fans watched that game and were pissed off that their stupid management passed on Webb and instead drafted that do-nothing, little value JAG, Fournette?
Wasn't one taken top 5 or so and one taken in the 3rd round. Typo?
Because that's what it feels like you guys are setting us up for.
Get ready for it.. it's going to be a long year of this shit.
Quote:
are we really going to have a Barkley vs. Mayfield/Darnold/Rosen/Allen debate after every single game from here until when?
Because that's what it feels like you guys are setting us up for.
Get ready for it.. it's going to be a long year of this shit.
It's actually fascinating to a degree. People are really struggling to accept that we passed on a QB. They were really blindsided by it.
Quote:
are we really going to have a Barkley vs. Mayfield/Darnold/Rosen/Allen debate after every single game from here until when?
Because that's what it feels like you guys are setting us up for.
Get ready for it.. it's going to be a long year of this shit.
it is bad, nysports, said he would rather make the playoffs than win a championship and basically said championshops do not matter...
rather have 10 years of playoffs than 1 superbowl...
than its a home run...assuming no RB next year can do what Barkley does. Is this what your banking on?
Because that's what it feels like you guys are setting us up for.
And if someone posts a thread like that after every game...what of it?
You're not required to read those threads or participate unless you choose to.
I swear some of you think BBI is supposed to be some sort of "safe space" where only the topics YOU want to discuss are allowed.
It's really simple. If it's a topic you don't want to discuss or something you don't want to read, then don't open the thread.
And I also find it interesting Britt that you had no problem earlier this week starting your own thread about Darnold to suggest that he would have been a risky choice for the Giants @ 2...yet now that Darnold has actually played a game (and played well) somehow that's not a thread-worthy debate?
Interesting.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
What if Darnold and Barkley are both really good?
The 2018 NFL draft wasn't the Giants' last opportunity to find a QB... there will be other opportunities.
I thought Webb sucked against Cleveland - but I'm willing to watch more of him before I decide he's a wash.
I also thought Lauletta did some good things and wouldn't write him off.
Maybe let's just see how it plays out.
Because that's what it feels like you guys are setting us up for.
I think you should expect folks on here will do just that (not me).
My guess is they will be as productive as the Eli threads that were posted after last year's game when he had his ups (second Philly game) and his downs (Arizona game). You know what I mean...
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Quote:
In comment 14036682 Blue21 said:
Quote:
I remember last year preseason game against the Pats, Webb came in and looked fantastic. He "pulled an Eli" and came back with very little time on the clock to beat them at the end of the game. Time will tell. I'm not giving up on him or Lauletta yet. Seems like most on here have.
i wonder if Jaguars fans watched that game and were pissed off that their stupid management passed on Webb and instead drafted that do-nothing, little value JAG, Fournette?
Wasn't one taken top 5 or so and one taken in the 3rd round. Typo?
Quote:
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Quote:
that is great next year?
than its a home run...assuming no RB next year can do what Barkley does. Is this what your banking on?
Hard to bank on a great QB even in this year's draft. Just bringing up another element that needs to be considered.
crackerjack465 : 4:44 pm : link : reply
could be a HOF.
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
If you pick a HoF RB - a HoF any position - that is a GREAT pick. It doesn't matter if other guys are great picks, if you pick a HoF, he's going to give us many years of excellent football to watch.
And it doesn't even take into account who the Giants next QB is!
Just a moronic statement on so many levels and yet there are quite a few posters spewing a variation of that bullshit.
Quote:
Barkley
crackerjack465 : 4:44 pm : link : reply
could be a HOF.
But if Darnold is too, then it was the wrong pick, plain and simple.
Sure, we could trade up again another year, but we could've solved the QB problem this year, in a strong class, without having to give up future assets.
It's a QB league
If you pick a HoF RB - a HoF any position - that is a GREAT pick. It doesn't matter if other guys are great picks, if you pick a HoF, he's going to give us many years of excellent football to watch.
And it doesn't even take into account who the Giants next QB is!
Just a moronic statement on so many levels and yet there are quite a few posters spewing a variation of that bullshit.
Someone trying to make that argument is going to get their ass laughed out of the room.
Quote:
In comment 14036702 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
Quote:
In comment 14036706 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036702 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
We all know the answer. The QB at all costs crowd want to be right. They want to say “I told you so”. They want to believe that they are the smartest guys in the room. In most cases, their parents basements. Guys like you will deny it all day long, but it is incredibly obvious that you’d rather see Darnold succeed and Barkley fail because it’s more gratifying for you to be right than it is for the Giants to succeed. You don’t appear to ebe enjoying any of this. You wanted a QB and it’s more important for your weird ass ego that we regret the move than it is to actually support the team on the field.
Don’t bother denying it. We all know you will claim it’s bullshit. But you and all the other QB at all costs guys are proving the point on a daily basis. Many times, multiple times a day. Good luck in your endeavor
Quote:
In comment 14036711 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
In comment 14036706 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036702 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
Quote:
In comment 14036729 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036711 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
In comment 14036706 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036702 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
Yeah. Bullshit.
We all know the answer. The QB at all costs crowd want to be right. They want to say “I told you so”. They want to believe that they are the smartest guys in the room. In most cases, their parents basements. Guys like you will deny it all day long, but it is incredibly obvious that you’d rather see Darnold succeed and Barkley fail because it’s more gratifying for you to be right than it is for the Giants to succeed. You don’t appear to ebe enjoying any of this. You wanted a QB and it’s more important for your weird ass ego that we regret the move than it is to actually support the team on the field.
Don’t bother denying it. We all know you will claim it’s bullshit. But you and all the other QB at all costs guys are proving the point on a daily basis. Many times, multiple times a day. Good luck in your endeavor
I don't know how old you are but that's a pretty immature post.
You open with a needless insult and then include a tired "living in your parents basement" burn and I'm supposed to take you seriously?
I don't for one minute think that if the Giants had decided to go with a QB @ 2, that the BBIers who wanted Barkley or some other non-QB would be rooting against the team because the Giants didn't take their guy. It's an idiotic narrative. We are ALL Giants fans and we ALL want them to succeed.
Posters will return to claim that they were right, there's no denying that. But nobody is rooting against them just so they can run to BBI and "win" a debate.
This is pretty much how I feel. I wanted a QB. It didn’t happen. So I guess I can either move on and let things play out and hope for the best or I can continually whine, bitch, moan and complain that the Giants certainly screwed up. I have no interest in being “right”. My only interest is this team that we have and moving forward. Looking back has usually never had positive results. Life’s too damn short. Enjoy what you have and not what you might have had. But that’s just me.
Quote:
In comment 14036740 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
In comment 14036729 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036711 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
In comment 14036706 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036702 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
Yeah. Bullshit.
Another well-thought-out post.
Keep 'em coming!
Quote:
In comment 14036729 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036711 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
In comment 14036706 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036702 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
Oh how magnanimous of you. What I said was "...seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all." That was based on people on another thread complaining after his first performance because one of his runs was a loss. I'm not extrapolating off of nothing. There are plenty on this site that in my opinion have been way too hard on Eli over his career it, again, isn't far fetched to think that could happen with Saquon.
Quote:
In comment 14036567 BestFeature said:
Quote:
In comment 14036565 NYSports1 said:
Quote:
In comment 14036554 BestFeature said:
Quote:
that is great next year?
Without trading picks or players? Then DG is forgiven but that also means he was wrong about Eli and we have a top 5 pick
No it doesn't mean that. You can draft great QBs outside of the top 5. I'm not talking about banking on a 6th rounder, you can have a mid to late first round pick be a great QB no questions asked. You know that but you want to bash DG.
Ohh I see so a mid to late first rounder that will be great. Must not have been rated high in college to be late first rounder as a qb. But if we do take one late first then do you not think people and media will question why not take Darnold or a qb this past draft
So a late first round qb next year that we will hope we strike gold and SB this year will be a better chance than taking Darnold this year and a running back in later rounds.
Or here me out, this could be crazy
Darnold this year and that late first rounder next year could be an impact linebacker or DE
Sounds better to me than a RB with the second pick and a later first round qb next year that we must hope and pray is sent from above...
Yeah Barkley this year and a QB next year in the mid to late portion of the first round where we'll be hopefully drafting means you get a generational RB and likely a good QB prospect. Rather than a bit of a better QB prospect this year and someone who doesn't come close to Barkley next year.
So you telling me that there will not be a back drafted from rounds 2 to 6 in the next 3 years that would not be as productive or better than SB...I can tell you the chances of that happening are much higher then we finding a qb who will be as franchise qb
Quote:
In comment 14036740 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
In comment 14036729 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036711 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
In comment 14036706 Jim in Tampa said:
Quote:
In comment 14036702 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
the sad thing is there seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all.
Darnold looked very poised and his arm looked great. Which I believe bodes well for him.
That being said we have to see what happens with our team. If our line can be decent I think we have a shot at one more playoff run before Eli retires. I think Eli has something left in the tank, if I am wrong and so is the new regime maybe its time to move on from the Giants old guard. There are a lot of angles to this decision and we have to let it all play out.
Also, just a closing thought. If Barkley is great for us he deserves our unwavering support as fans even if Darnold is great too. It does feel like nothing will ever be good enough for some, it isn't Saquon's fault he was a slam dunk draft pick and RBs don't get paid much on the whole.
Again...It's pretty simple.
YOU don't have to have the debate EVERY week. Only people that open the thread and choose to participate will be part of the debate.
Ok Mr. Sass Caps. I am entitled to think it is insanity to have the debate every week. If people can beat a dead horse about a topic why can't I also comment on the commentary? It is you that isn't applying the same logic to me that you are advocating.
I simply stated that it is insanity to have the debate every week. It is you that is taking it a step further and telling me I don't have to with an aggressive tone to your writing. I know full and well what I can and can't do thank you very much. Now before you say isn't it just as insane to comment on the commentary every week? Well, I have no plans to do that. So to recap we are both trying to be arbiters but you are doing it more aggressively and literally telling me what to do while also being a hypocrite.
Caps are a way to emphasize words. They are not meant to be aggressive or inflammatory. Sorry you viewed them that way and took my post so personally.
I'm simply reminding you (and others) that you don't have to open threads you don't like, nor do you have to participate. If you really think about it, suggesting that BBI shouldn't debate something just because YOU don't want to or at least you don't want to every week is pretty silly.
I’m not a Mets fan, I don’t watch hockey and I think FF is stupid. But if I opened Mets, Rangers or FF threads to tell those thread participants that they shouldn’t be debating something that I’m not interested in people would think I was a loon and probably tell me to f**k off.
There will be threads on BBI that don't interest you and debates you don't want to have. It makes no sense for you (or anyone else) to suggest that we shouldn't be having the debate, just because you don't want to have it.
At no point did I say they shouldn't do it. I said it was insanity and I believe that to be the case wholeheartedly. Per my point you were the only one telling people what to do. People do things that others think are crazy all the time it doesn't mean I think individuals should be limited in their freedom.
I actually let you off pretty easy. I didn't even mention the "insane" part of your original post where you said that "some...aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all" presumably because they're focused on one or more of the QBs the Giants passed on.
I was a "we need to draft a QB" guy (obviously) but I'll have no problem rooting for Barkley, because I'm a Giants fan of 50+ years and I root for ALL players wearing the uniform. I expect that every other Giants fan on this site will be rooting for Barkley to do well and for the Giants to win...regardless of which player they wanted in the draft.
Oh how magnanimous of you. What I said was "...seem to be some that aren't going to enjoy Barkley's career at all." That was based on people on another thread complaining after his first performance because one of his runs was a loss. I'm not extrapolating off of nothing. There are plenty on this site that in my opinion have been way too hard on Eli over his career it, again, isn't far fetched to think that could happen with Saquon.
Whatever. Have a good night! I've got to run.
By the way, back in Dayne's rookie year (before the login function was added) I used to occasionally post as "No Gain Dayne" so at least we agree on something.
;>)
Darnold lovers please exit here - ( New Window )
OUCH!
im betting the giants will be regretting themselves after eli leaves for not grabbing one of the qbs from this draft like Darnold
good luck with that wish
With Shurmur being hired from Minnesota, maybe the thought process was:
1. Draft Barkley - best player on their board
2. Build up the o-line, running game with Eli - hope he has 2-3 years left
3. Draft Lauletta - a guy Shurmur previously met and is high on
4. QB cap flexibility allows for stronger roster
I hope what I outlined above is the case. Interestingly enough, the Vikings had this model but still threw crazy money at Cousins. Would love to know if Shurmur agreed would that move.
But, the fact remains - if NYG believes in the franchise QB model and Darnold has a 15 year career delivering NYJ a Super Bowl, of course the pick will be scrutinized. But as Britt mentioned, it’s a conversation for 5-7 years down the road.
Also, if Barkley lives up to expectations and is a key part to deep playoff runs & maybe even a SB title, the pick was correct. The player Barkley is cannot be dismissed in the debate.
Lastly, I firmly believe Davis Webb had absolutely nothing to do with the decision. I think Shurmur has clear hopes for Lauletta & I think we should all be rooting for him.
if it takes a meaningless site for that, then you never loved football in the first place
your taking this site too seriously
Quote:
who would have thought...
if it takes a meaningless site for that, then you never loved football in the first place
your taking this site too seriously
You are taking my comment too seriously.
- does a bear shit in the woods
- what came first, the chicken or the egg
- if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there does it make a sound
It's arguments liek this that make no sense to me.
No consideration as to how successful or not the teams they are on are. It's like winning doesn't even matter let alone Super Bowls.
Webb looking horrific thursday night is concerning as well. DG made bets on Eli, Webb, and Darnold not being great. His tenure as Giants GM rides on those 3 bets
Again, with this crap. He played well against the 2nd team defense Webb did not. It was one game. He may have had some jitters shit happens. How do you know Darnold was the next QB on his board? Barkley is
The player we have I could care less now Darnold, our goal is to win now with Barkley. You have complained now for months now about this selection. All of you including the person who started this thread all sound like the people who did not get their candidate to win and are hoping that candidate fails now so you can say see I was right. I really hope Barkley makes you all eat crow so we can stop with all this revisionist shit every time Darnold plays. The what if’s threads are already unbearable.
AMEN! Best post on this. They all want to say I told you so.
Quote:
Here do not want to accept the premise that Darnold s performance at the end of the day must be factored into evaluating the wisdom of passing on him for a RB
Prior to the draft, we heard the qb s were flawed. Now we re hearing it doesn't matter how they play.
Barkley could be a great player, still does equate to the impact of a franchise quarterback, if indeed that is what Darnold becomes.
The don t take a quarterback crowd are hedging their bets.
Yeah, we can start to have a realistic discussion on that in about 3-5 years. Not Day 2 after preseason game number 1.
Nobody is hedging their bets after a single preseason game, trust me. Nothing changed anybody's opinion yet. If anything, the opening snap further entrenched the don't take a QB crowd in their take, even validated it.
There are literally people here trying to dissect Barkley's 4 carries in a preaseason game, and coming to the conclusion somehow that it is a negative rather than a positive that he took the opening snap 40 yards from our own twelve yard line. Madness.
The truth is, the don't take a QB crowd has been ecstatic, and continue to be, while the "take a QB at all costs crowd" has not been able to come to grips with what happened since the night of the draft.
I absolutely think Barkley will be great. Unless the Giants by some miracle win a Super Bowl because of him, if Darnold is a great franchise quarterback Barkley could be the best RB in the last decade and it still would have been the wrong pick.
I could make an argument that if Barkley is great and Darnold is just a good qb that it was the wrong pick.
I dont think anyone denies that Barkley was the safest pick. He's the one most likely to fulfill his potential. Problem is the ceiling value for a RB is no where near the ceiling value for a QB.
I very much fear 8-10 year stretch of horrific QB play after Simms was gone. I'm skeptical of Eli being able to turn the clock back, and even if he does no one behind him gives me any type of hope that we have our next QB already on the roster.
This is a QB driven league. We've been blessed to have one for the last 15 years, but his time is coming to an end much faster than any of us would like.
No you can't.
Barkley becomes the wrong pick if the Giants fail when Eli moves on and Barkley cannot help them be any better.
It isn't even tied to Darnold - it is tied to Eli's successor and whether or not getting Barkley this year kept us from a better QB.
What if Darnold becomes "good" like Andy Dalton. That would make Barkley the "wrong pick"?
Bullshit.
I think you even said that if Barkley and Darnold both are HoF'ers that it was the wrong pick. Complete bullshit!
Quote:
In comment 14036573 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
who would have thought...
if it takes a meaningless site for that, then you never loved football in the first place
your taking this site too seriously
You are taking my comment too seriously.
lmao
Whiners.
Pissed and moaned about Eli for his entire career.
Hate the best WR ever to wear blue because..you know, peeing.
They draft the best player in the draft and you whine and bitch that they didn't pick the fumble machine.
I've come to the conclusion that some of you are just miserable, unhappy people.
It’s simple, QB’s are hard to come by and have much more effect on a roster and also a much longer shelf life. Barkley will be great, no doubt, but it would have been a mistake if any of the other three QBs turn out to be franchise QBs.
I am on the fence with Eli, prob not a basher but definitely not a homer. He has to play well during the next two years too for this pick to make sense.
Quote:
that is great next year?
good luck with that wish
But Darnold is guaranteed to be great.
It’s simple, QB’s are hard to come by and have much more effect on a roster and also a much longer shelf life. Barkley will be great, no doubt, but it would have been a mistake if any of the other three QBs turn out to be franchise QBs.
I am on the fence with Eli, prob not a basher but definitely not a homer. He has to play well during the next two years too for this pick to make sense.
If Barkley truly is a HoFer then we currently have *3* Hofers on the roster. There’s wins and playoffs in there. Why is that irrelevant as opposed to having a franchise QB, a few years down the road. Especially, as we were heading wth no runnng game and a pretty qb . but no wins?
Again, what is the purpose of playing games?
Quote:
I could make an argument that if Barkley is great and Darnold is just a good qb that it was the wrong pick.
No you can't.
Barkley becomes the wrong pick if the Giants fail when Eli moves on and Barkley cannot help them be any better.
It isn't even tied to Darnold - it is tied to Eli's successor and whether or not getting Barkley this year kept us from a better QB.
What if Darnold becomes "good" like Andy Dalton. That would make Barkley the "wrong pick"?
Bullshit.
I think you even said that if Barkley and Darnold both are HoF'ers that it was the wrong pick. Complete bullshit!
A HOF QB and a hall of fame RB do not have even close to the same value to a team.
Let's say he's Ladanian Tomlinson and Darnold is Ben Roethlisberger.
This team isn't going anywhere unless Eli turns the clock back or they find a QB. Regardless of how good Barkley is. Let's just hope DG is right. He went the safe route, we'll see if he made the right decision over the next few years.
They ran the ball better in the playoffs, still not great but decent enough.
It's much easier to build a team that can contend for Super Bowls when you have a franchise QB. I'm not sure Eli is that player anymore.
The value of a hall of fame quarterback compared to the value of a hall of fame running back isn't even close. There's a reason decent QB's get paid on the same level that a top RB does.
I have no doubt Barkley will be great if he stays healthy, but I dont think it will matter unless the Giants find a long term answer at QB.
Like I said yesterday, go back to the hoF'ers and find one where the argument has ever been made that they were the wrong pick.
It is asinine both at face value and with repeated attempts to argue that the point has merit.
It doesn't.
If you pick a HoF player - it is the right pick and it is a great one.
Like I said above, so if Darnold simply becomes "good" like Dalton and Barkley is great like Edgerrin James, it will be the wrong pick?
What the fuck has Dalton won?
Did Ladanian Tomlinson win anything?
Quote:
Quote:
I could make an argument that if Barkley is great and Darnold is just a good qb that it was the wrong pick.
No you can't.
Barkley becomes the wrong pick if the Giants fail when Eli moves on and Barkley cannot help them be any better.
It isn't even tied to Darnold - it is tied to Eli's successor and whether or not getting Barkley this year kept us from a better QB.
What if Darnold becomes "good" like Andy Dalton. That would make Barkley the "wrong pick"?
Bullshit.
I think you even said that if Barkley and Darnold both are HoF'ers that it was the wrong pick. Complete bullshit!
A HOF QB and a hall of fame RB do not have even close to the same value to a team.
Let's say he's Ladanian Tomlinson and Darnold is Ben Roethlisberger.
This team isn't going anywhere unless Eli turns the clock back or they find a QB. Regardless of how good Barkley is. Let's just hope DG is right. He went the safe route, we'll see if he made the right decision over the next few years.
This is such a simplistic view. Of course a HOF QB is more valuable. But the Giants obviously feel that Barkley has a greater chance to be that player than Darnold does. What’s so difficult to understand about that?
And this idea that all Darnold has to be is “good”, for the pick to be bad is even more ludicrous. “Good” QBs can be found anywhere. Why would using the 2nd overall pick on a good QB be considered a success while a HOF RB would be a bad pick? The ONLY way to look back on this from Darnolds perspective and regret the pick is if he turns out great and Barkley doesn’t. Otherwise, contrary to popular belief, Darnold, Allen and Rosen aren’t the last QBs that will ever walk the earth. Especially if your standards for excellence is simply “good”.
If Barkley is a HOF player, it's not going to matter if the Giants don't have a franchise quarterback.
If you guaranteed DG before the draft that Darnold would be a HOF player and Barkley would be a HOF player, do you think he's even considering taking Barkley with the Giants current roster?
What has Adrian Peterson won?
I want the Giants to win Super Bowls. Thats it. I dont see it happening without a franchise QB.
Did Ladanian Tomlinson win anything?
How about Dan Marino? Archie Manning?
Trent Dilfer did. So did Nick Foles. Just this past year.
If Barkley is a HOF player, it's not going to matter if the Giants don't have a franchise quarterback.
If you guaranteed DG before the draft that Darnold would be a HOF player and Barkley would be a HOF player, do you think he's even considering taking Barkley with the Giants current roster?
What has Adrian Peterson won?
I want the Giants to win Super Bowls. Thats it. I dont see it happening without a franchise QB.
drafting a hall of fame quarterback does not guarantee you a superbowl, so i dont undersrand your point...
darnold and barkley as singular picks do not make their teams super bowl contenders...
Fucking asinine.
Dalton is the definition of a good QB. Not great. Not terrible. Good. Kirk Cousins is a good QB. Not great.
And yet none of it really matters. If you get a great player in a draft, it is a good pick. And the main point that matters more is who replaces Eli. Perhaps it is a draftee in our slot. Perhaps it is a veteran signee. Perhaps it is a draftee we trade up for.
We don't know.
That will be far more important to this debate than the relative strength of Darnold vs. Barkley.
Too many people gloss over this and it leads to terrible takes like a good player is a better pick than a great player or that a HoF players isn't the right pick
If Barkley is a HOF player, it's not going to matter if the Giants don't have a franchise quarterback.
If you guaranteed DG before the draft that Darnold would be a HOF player and Barkley would be a HOF player, do you think he's even considering taking Barkley with the Giants current roster?
What has Adrian Peterson won?
I want the Giants to win Super Bowls. Thats it. I dont see it happening without a franchise QB.
Again, like I already stated in my earlier post, it’s blatantly obvious that Gettleman DIDNT view Darnold as a HOFer. Otherwise yes, he would have been the pick. So again, why is this so hard to grasp?
He never even played in a Super Bowl, never mind won one.
When judging a player at the end of his career it's not Super Bowl or bust, but when building a team, that is what your goal should be.
It's hard to find a path to winning a Super Bowl unless you have a franchise QB. Not impossible, but very, very hard.
DG clearly didn't love any of the QB's. His giants tenure rides on finding a long term answer at QB, if he doesn't he will lose his job as a result in a few years.
And I’m not saying that their value is equal to an RB, it clearly isn’t. But I’ll gladly take the all purpose RB if we aren’t convinced the QB options were worth it. And the goal isn’t to find a “good” QB. If you have one you are generally going to be a mediocre and non threatening team.
I’m not really interested in arguing with you though. Have fun being mad at the Barkley pick.
Foles is the outlier. Magic carpet ride, flukey type run. But they arent ever in that position if they dont have Carson Wentz. Wentz got them homefield advantage throughout and a bye. Then Foles played two insane games in the NFC Title game and Super Bowl. He was horrible in the first playoff game.
BigBlueShock, I completely agree that DG didn't view Darnold as that kind of player. We will see if he is right or not. Even if Barkley is a smashing success, if the Giants don't find a QB in the next couple years for the long term, that will likely cost DG his job at some point.
I would love nothing more than Eli to turn the clock back and Webb to turn into a franchise level QB. I just don't think it's going to happen. I fear a 1992-1999 type of stretch for the Giants coming up.
Russell Wilson isn’t a great QB?
I think we would all do hand springs if Barkley has the career that AP had.
Unfortunately the second a running back comes into the league his prime starts. His best years start immediately. If the Giants take 5 years to find an answer at QB, they will likely have wasted Barkley's prime years. A lot rides on Eli turning the clock back for a couple of seasons. I don't think it's out of the question for him to do that, I just worry that the last few seasons have taken their toll on him and he's also what, 37?
Barkley should be great if he stays healthy, just not sure any of it will matter if Eli continues to suck or they can't find a good QB in the next 3 years.
This debate won't be decided until well down the road.
But making statements that good players are better picks than great players or that a HoF pick is the wrong one are mind-numbingly stupid.
Not sure why that type of drivel keeps getting repeated.
Quote:
You are completely missing the point, though it’s not surprising. The question isn’t can you start a thread day after day bitching about not taking a QB. The question is, why the hell would you want to? It’s over. They didn’t take one. At what point do we move on and focus on this team and what we have to do from this point forward?
We all know the answer. The QB at all costs crowd want to be right. They want to say “I told you so”. They want to believe that they are the smartest guys in the room. In most cases, their parents basements. Guys like you will deny it all day long, but it is incredibly obvious that you’d rather see Darnold succeed and Barkley fail because it’s more gratifying for you to be right than it is for the Giants to succeed. You don’t appear to ebe enjoying any of this. You wanted a QB and it’s more important for your weird ass ego that we regret the move than it is to actually support the team on the field.
Don’t bother denying it. We all know you will claim it’s bullshit. But you and all the other QB at all costs guys are proving the point on a daily basis. Many times, multiple times a day. Good luck in your endeavor
I don't know how old you are but that's a pretty immature post.
You open with a needless insult and then include a tired "living in your parents basement" burn and I'm supposed to take you seriously?
I don't for one minute think that if the Giants had decided to go with a QB @ 2, that the BBIers who wanted Barkley or some other non-QB would be rooting against the team because the Giants didn't take their guy. It's an idiotic narrative. We are ALL Giants fans and we ALL want them to succeed.
Posters will return to claim that they were right, there's no denying that. But nobody is rooting against them just so they can run to BBI and "win" a debate.
Are you new around here? Lol
Quote:
russell wilson, nick foles, joe flacco 3 qbs who have won superbowls recently and none are great qbs...
Russell Wilson isn’t a great QB?
wilson is a good player who makes a lot happen with his legs but i dont think he is a great quarterback at all
This debate won't be decided until well down the road.
But making statements that good players are better picks than great players or that a HoF pick is the wrong one are mind-numbingly stupid.
Not sure why that type of drivel keeps getting repeated.
i made this point yesterday and got killed for it...
See how stupid the titles argument is?
However, between the two, I think its fairly easy to understand that a HOF-type QB contributes more to the overall equation of reaching that goal versus a HOF-type RB.
Time is the only thing that will tell us if Gettleman's view of reaching that goal was sound...
Quote:
In comment 14037050 nygiants16 said:
Quote:
russell wilson, nick foles, joe flacco 3 qbs who have won superbowls recently and none are great qbs...
Russell Wilson isn’t a great QB?
wilson is a good player who makes a lot happen with his legs but i dont think he is a great quarterback at all
Struggle immensely with the view of not characterizing Wilson as a great QB with his immense level of talent, production and wins. Not to say anything of the fact he has never missed a start in his career...
See how stupid the titles argument is?
Competing for titles consistently is damn near impossible without a franchise QB.
When Andrew Luck went down, the Colts went from being in the AFC title game to being one of the worst teams in the entire sport.
The idea is to build a team that can compete for super bowls consistently. It takes a lot of things coming together to win even one.
Fatman, again, the last time the Giants won the Super Bowl they had the worst running game in the league during the regular season. The offensive line point is a good one, you need a serviceable line to compete. A solid running game is the least important component to building a team to compete for titles. It's not all that hard to put together a running back corps that can help you win a title. Look at the Eagles. Undrafted rookie free agent, Blount who they signed in the off-season on a team friendly deal because he was not highly sought after, traded for Ajayi mid season who the Dolphins didn't want anymore. They literally put their entire backfield together in the matter of a few months.
Tomlinson and Peterson are by far the two best running backs of the last decade. Neither one even played in a Super Bowl. Total I think they only played in 15 playoff games combined.
Barkley can stand on his head every game for the next 5 years but it's not going to matter if the guy under center plays like shit.
How any of you are comfortable with the quarterback position right now is beyond me. They have no chance to even sniff competing for a title if that position isn't figured out.
It's not Super Bowl or bust, but when you're building a team that has to be your goal, putting a team together that can compete for Super Bowls.
DG made large bets on Eli and Webb. He also made a large bet that the QB's he passed on would not be franchise quarterbacks.
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
Unfortunately, this topic seems to have become too polarizing to allow for much in the way of meaningful conversation.
I for one will never understand why people would want to go the first option. Are you really going to piss and moan for the next decade? What’s the end game? You get to say “I told you so!”? We get it. You thought Gettleman should have thrown a dart and just picked a QB, regardless of their evaluations, simply because you wanted a QB. At what point do we move on? It’s not our fault he didn’t take a QB but we are the ones that have to live with it. Twice over. First on the field and secondly on these incessant posts. Lucky us!
Unfortunately, this topic seems to have become too polarizing to allow for much in the way of meaningful conversation.
Good post. Darnold proves the Giants wrong or not. SB proves the Giants wrong or not. Regardless, the only meaningful conversation that would resonate with me is how they look after the season plays out and beyond
Quote:
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
Quote:
The decision to use the #2 overall pick as an investment in Eli's successor or not was a franchise altering decision. The decision not to take a QB was controversial --right or wrong. There were a lot of strong statements made, such as there being no franchise QBs in this draft. We will see. But this debate is going to fade away anytime soon, and the fact that the most likely QB prospect will start his career in NY is going to keep this front and center for a long time. Better get used to it.
Unfortunately, this topic seems to have become too polarizing to allow for much in the way of meaningful conversation.
Good post. Darnold proves the Giants wrong or not. SB proves the Giants wrong or not. Regardless, the only meaningful conversation that would resonate with me is how they look after the season plays out and beyond
Quote:
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
But the timing was perfect now. New coach, new GM, new offense, #2 pick in a stacked QB draft, a potential out in Eli's contract, and the opportunity to free up a lot of cap space for Beckham's impending deal. A lot of things had to align, and they did. In terms of moving from one franchise QB to the next (one of the hardest managerial feats to execute in sports) it didn't get any cleaner than that.
Quote:
isn't just one way to get a QB:
Quote:
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
Your last point is the most important, in my opinion.
At this point, I think whining over Darnold is pointless. As stated above, do we even know if he is who they would have taken? Basically, all we need to see is if Barkley is a great player. As FatMan pointed out, if the answer is yes, then he is a good pick.
But here's the thing not many people are discussing - if Barkley is great and Darnold sucks then we just avoided a minefield.
I think when it all came down to picking Barkley the Giants thinking was a combination of Barkley being a generational back and none of the other QB's looked at as being long-term franchise players.
Struggle immensely with the view of not characterizing Wilson as a great QB with his immense level of talent, production and wins. Not to say anything of the fact he has never missed a start in his career...
When someone says something like Russell Wilson is a good but not great QB, they've already ignored a ton of evidence on the way to their position. Providing more evidence to the contrary isn't going to change anything.
Obviously nothing is certain about any player at this early stage. But we do know about the roles quarterbacks and running backs play, as well as the attritional effect of football on the careers of running backs. We also know how hard it is to find quarterbacks versus running backs.
I wanted a QB. I don’t know enough about them to have a favorite, but four QBs going top four makes me think it was a decent pool to pick from. I also think having a high pick locked up at a relatively low cap number is valuable - and that’s mitigated by picking a RB who is already paid as a top five player at his position. I always go back to 04 - Fitzgerald was the best player in that draft, but AZ probably would have been better served by picking Rivers or Big Ben.
But there are a number of ways for this to work out really well for the Giants. We’ll see.
agree wholeheartedly...
Quote:
over just about every QB in the NFL other than Rodgers (I think he’s got good enough mileage left) to build my team. He’s a fantastic player. “Good” is a fucking criminal description of his level of play.
agree wholeheartedly...
But he's just a system quarterback......
Obviously nothing is certain about any player at this early stage. But we do know about the roles quarterbacks and running backs play, as well as the attritional effect of football on the careers of running backs. We also know how hard it is to find quarterbacks versus running backs.
Question for you Terps. I’m not being confrontational at all, just genuinely curious. You are on record saying that you’d like to get away from the franchise QB model. You are also incredibly against handing out elite contracts to non elite players, particularly QB because they take up such a huge portion of the cap. So with that said, I’m legitimately curious why you’re all on board with taking a QB that high? It goes against everything you’ve failed against. Put it this way, you have said that you wouldn’t pay any QB franchise money unless they are Brady or Rodgers. So where does that leave this team when Darnold is up for his first post rookie contract? It’s incredibly unlikely, if not altogether impossible that he ends up anywhere in the stratosphere of Brady or Rodgers, so what’s your plan? Say his upside is Matt Ryan. A very good, but not great QB. Are you paying him top 5 QB money? Based on your previous posts, the answer is hell no. So basically, unless he’s a top 5 elite QB, you’re letting him walk and now you have completely wasted the 2nd overall pick. If you don’t have every intention of signing a QB to a top 5 NFL contract in his contract year, then how is that good for the long term of the team? Are you paying Darnold $30 Million per if he’s not a HOF QB on Brady’s level? Nope. You’re not. So what’s the end game here? Hope and pray he becomes Aaron Rodgers?
I wanted a QB. I don’t know enough about them to have a favorite, but four QBs going top four makes me think it was a decent pool to pick from. I also think having a high pick locked up at a relatively low cap number is valuable - and that’s mitigated by picking a RB who is already paid as a top five player at his position. I always go back to 04 - Fitzgerald was the best player in that draft, but AZ probably would have been better served by picking Rivers or Big Ben.
But there are a number of ways for this to work out really well for the Giants. We’ll see.
There were several “insiders” on here that suggested that if Barkley were gone, they’d have taken Chubb. Yes, they liked Darnold more than the others, but he supposedly still wasn’t their pick. No idea how accurate it was, but that’s what several of the guys we rely on here were saying
Quote:
If that's the case is question our talent evaluators.
Obviously nothing is certain about any player at this early stage. But we do know about the roles quarterbacks and running backs play, as well as the attritional effect of football on the careers of running backs. We also know how hard it is to find quarterbacks versus running backs.
Question for you Terps. I’m not being confrontational at all, just genuinely curious. You are on record saying that you’d like to get away from the franchise QB model. You are also incredibly against handing out elite contracts to non elite players, particularly QB because they take up such a huge portion of the cap. So with that said, I’m legitimately curious why you’re all on board with taking a QB that high? It goes against everything you’ve failed against. Put it this way, you have said that you wouldn’t pay any QB franchise money unless they are Brady or Rodgers. So where does that leave this team when Darnold is up for his first post rookie contract? It’s incredibly unlikely, if not altogether impossible that he ends up anywhere in the stratosphere of Brady or Rodgers, so what’s your plan? Say his upside is Matt Ryan. A very good, but not great QB. Are you paying him top 5 QB money? Based on your previous posts, the answer is hell no. So basically, unless he’s a top 5 elite QB, you’re letting him walk and now you have completely wasted the 2nd overall pick. If you don’t have every intention of signing a QB to a top 5 NFL contract in his contract year, then how is that good for the long term of the team? Are you paying Darnold $30 Million per if he’s not a HOF QB on Brady’s level? Nope. You’re not. So what’s the end game here? Hope and pray he becomes Aaron Rodgers?
Wow. Sorry about the formatting. Paragraphs are not my friend apparently
Aaron Rodgers was 24th overall. Tom Brady, we know, was a sixth round pick. Jimmy Garapolo, 2nd round. Russell Wilson, 3rd round. Kirk Cousins, 4th round. Hell, Ben Roethlisberger was 11th overall, a pick we've been near for several years now. Josh Rosen went 10th.
Alot of those guys above are better than the past five years of top 5 pick QB's.
Aaron Rodgers was 24th overall. Tom Brady, we know, was a sixth round pick. Jimmy Garapolo, 2nd round. Russell Wilson, 3rd round. Kirk Cousins, 4th round. Hell, Ben Roethlisberger was 11th overall, a pick we've been near for several years now. Josh Rosen went 10th.
Alot of those guys above are better than the past five years of top 5 pick QB's.
It isn't. But it's as good a shot as we're likely to get in, possibly, decades.
This isn't about Danold, Rosen or Barkley any more. It is about Eli. No, I am not going to come tell you I told you so if he plays poorly again this year. But the amount of posters on here that are completely denying even the possibility that Eli just isn't good anymore is alarming.
I hope I am wrong, and will admit it if he plays great. I just don't see the guy that was capable of winning superbowls anymore. Attack all you want, I don't care. At this point he needs to prove he can still play at a high level, or the Giants are in trouble.
1: JaMarcus Russell, Raiders
22: Brady Quinn, Browns
2008
3: Matt Ryan, Falcons
18: Joe Flacco, Ravens
2009
1: Matthew Stafford, Lions
5: Mark Sanchez, Jets
17: Josh Freeman, Buccaneers
2010
1: Sam Bradford, Rams
25: Tim Tebow, Broncos
2011
1: Cam Newton, Panthers
8: Jake Locker, Titans
10: Blaine Gabbert, Jaguars
12: Christian Ponder, Vikings
2012
1: Andrew Luck, Colts
2: Robert Griffin III, Redskins
8: Ryan Tannehill, Dolphins
22: Brandon Weeden, Browns
2013
16: EJ Manuel, Bills
2014
3: Blake Bortles, Jaguars
22: Johnny Manziel, Browns
32: Teddy Bridgewater, Vikings
2015
1: Jameis Winston, Buccaneers
2: Marcus Mariota, Titans
2016
1: Jared Goff, Rams
2: Carson Wentz, Eagles
26: Paxton Lynch, Broncos
2017
2: Mitchell Trubisky
10: Patrick Mahomes
12: Deshaun Watson
Out of that list of 29 Quarterbacks taken in the first round, how many can truly be considered a successful franchise QB? For every 1, there are two or three more failures/busts.
There are no guarantees. Picking number 2 doesn't guarantee you anything.
Alas, it won’t. But it should
Stunt in growth is also on the team surrounding the QB.
Alas, it won’t. But it should
Take away the number one overalls (which we didn't have access to, anyway), and the list gets really ugly.
Any list of drafted quarterbacks in any era is going to have more misses than hits. In a draft like this you improve your odds of hitting, just like we did in 2004 and just like the teams in '83. Yeah there might be a Tony Eason or a JP Losman in the group, but your chances of hitting are better than they normally would be.
That's not bending the narrative, that's just the reality of the situation. That list above is reality.
That doesn't mean Darnold or any of the others won't be good.
But the odds are that not all four of the sure thing QB's from this draft (Mayfield, Darnold, Allen, Rosen) will pan out. But which one/s?
Any list of drafted quarterbacks in any era is going to have more misses than hits. In a draft like this you improve your odds of hitting, just like we did in 2004 and just like the teams in '83. Yeah there might be a Tony Eason or a JP Losman in the group, but your chances of hitting are better than they normally would be.
Since April? Alot of that has been going on for the past 6 years..
1: JaMarcus Russell, Raiders
22: Brady Quinn, Browns
2008
3: Matt Ryan, Falcons
18: Joe Flacco, Ravens
2009
1: Matthew Stafford, Lions
5: Mark Sanchez, Jets
17: Josh Freeman, Buccaneers
2010
1: Sam Bradford, Rams
25: Tim Tebow, Broncos
2011
1: Cam Newton, Panthers
8: Jake Locker, Titans
10: Blaine Gabbert, Jaguars
12: Christian Ponder, Vikings
2012
1: Andrew Luck, Colts
2: Robert Griffin III, Redskins
8: Ryan Tannehill, Dolphins
22: Brandon Weeden, Browns
2013
16: EJ Manuel, Bills
2014
3: Blake Bortles, Jaguars
22: Johnny Manziel, Browns
32: Teddy Bridgewater, Vikings
2015
1: Jameis Winston, Buccaneers
2: Marcus Mariota, Titans
2016
1: Jared Goff, Rams
2: Carson Wentz, Eagles
26: Paxton Lynch, Broncos
2017
2: Mitchell Trubisky
10: Patrick Mahomes
12: Deshaun Watson
Out of that list of 29 Quarterbacks taken in the first round, how many can truly be considered a successful franchise QB? For every 1, there are two or three more failures/busts.
There are no guarantees. Picking number 2 doesn't guarantee you anything.
What makes the #2 pick so special is the Giants had their choice of any QB except Mayfield, and if they loved Mayfield they were close enough to at least open up legitimate conversations to get him. Odds are, in the future, they are going to have no where near the opportunity. They are going to have to settle for someone falling to them, or offer typically a huge ransom to trade up. And most likely if someone the actually like might fall to them, very often another team who also likes him will trade up to steal the guy from you. So picking later, it is much less likely your top QB will fall to your pick and even if he does, the odds are even worse that he will pan out. You are at the mercy of the draft unless you are willing to invest several picks to trade up, but even if you do get lucky and your guy is there, odds of a QB panning out get even worse after the first one or two picks.
This is why when you have your chance, you need to think real hard about pulling the trigger. Teams spend years praying for the opportunity the Giants just passed up on.
I get it if none of the QBs in this draft are any good. But DG was paid a lot of money to get that evaluation right and it was likely the most critical decision of his career, which many GMs will never have such an opportunity. There were legitimate prospects available (no one would have said Darnold was a reach for a need), and the initial look for two of the prospects looked pretty darn good. So that along with Webb looking like shit was not encouraging. But I guess we will have to wait and see how it continues to unfold.
Good times BBI.
This isn't about Danold, Rosen or Barkley any more. It is about Eli. No, I am not going to come tell you I told you so if he plays poorly again this year. But the amount of posters on here that are completely denying even the possibility that Eli just isn't good anymore is alarming.
I hope I am wrong, and will admit it if he plays great. I just don't see the guy that was capable of winning superbowls anymore. Attack all you want, I don't care. At this point he needs to prove he can still play at a high level, or the Giants are in trouble.
Like reading my mind. Good post...
Aaron Rodgers was 24th overall. Tom Brady, we know, was a sixth round pick. Jimmy Garapolo, 2nd round. Russell Wilson, 3rd round. Kirk Cousins, 4th round. Hell, Ben Roethlisberger was 11th overall, a pick we've been near for several years now. Josh Rosen went 10th.
Alot of those guys above are better than the past five years of top 5 pick QB's.
Good post. There is absolutely variation of where good QBs arise from in the draft. The risk comes more from how many reasonable quality prospects come out each year and when teams decide to pull the trigger...
Quote:
Quote:
I could make an argument that if Barkley is great and Darnold is just a good qb that it was the wrong pick.
No you can't.
Barkley becomes the wrong pick if the Giants fail when Eli moves on and Barkley cannot help them be any better.
It isn't even tied to Darnold - it is tied to Eli's successor and whether or not getting Barkley this year kept us from a better QB.
What if Darnold becomes "good" like Andy Dalton. That would make Barkley the "wrong pick"?
Bullshit.
I think you even said that if Barkley and Darnold both are HoF'ers that it was the wrong pick. Complete bullshit!
A HOF QB and a hall of fame RB do not have even close to the same value to a team.
Let's say he's Ladanian Tomlinson and Darnold is Ben Roethlisberger.
This team isn't going anywhere unless Eli turns the clock back or they find a QB. Regardless of how good Barkley is. Let's just hope DG is right. He went the safe route, we'll see if he made the right decision over the next few years.
Big Ben had a Hall of Fame RB’s and WR’s, Eli immediately becomes a
Better QB because of Barkley. If Barkley makes Eli better and we win another Championship before he retires then Barkley was the right choice.
However, between the two, I think its fairly easy to understand that a HOF-type QB contributes more to the overall equation of reaching that goal versus a HOF-type RB.
Time is the only thing that will tell us if Gettleman's view of reaching that goal was sound...
rinse...repeat
I for one will never understand why people would want to go the first option. Are you really going to piss and moan for the next decade? What’s the end game? You get to say “I told you so!”? We get it. You thought Gettleman should have thrown a dart and just picked a QB, regardless of their evaluations, simply because you wanted a QB. At what point do we move on? It’s not our fault he didn’t take a QB but we are the ones that have to live with it. Twice over. First on the field and secondly on these incessant posts. Lucky us!
This thread is probably the first time I have said anything about it since the week of the draft. It's not my job to make the team better with what they have, it's the GM's job. Fans talking about that decision still isn't helping or hurting the actual team so why do you care so much? It's a debate, which is what message boards are for. It's pretty annoying to hear people act like you can't ever question a move ever again after it actually happens. If it happens every day on here, then sure, I get why it could be annoying. But this decision was a franchise altering decision, it will be talked about often for years.
It wasn't brought up out of the blue. The way Darnold plays will be closely followed by many Giants fans.
I'm not going to throw it in other peoples face and say "I told you so". All of us want the same thing. But it is fair to question the decision they made in April, it wont be truly answered for a few years at least, but its more than fair to still question it.
It's Gettlemans job to get this decision correct. His job likely will hinge on this decision. Acting like picking a QB there would have been just randomly throwing darts at a dartboard is absurd.
DG clearly didn't love Darnold. We'll see if he is right in his evaluation of him.
One thing that does concern me when hearing DG talk is I think he values running the football too much. I think he places much more importance on running the football than other GM's do. Maybe he'll be proven right for having that belief, but it does concern me a bit. His "touched by the hand of God" comment about SB is also ridiculous.
We all want the same thing here, the Giants to win. If all of us just sat here with our pom poms out and never questioned anything the front office did there wouldn't be any point in having a message board.
That being said, he can't play much worse than he has in the last couple seasons. There have been many reasons for that beyond just Eli, but the bottom line is Eli has been piss poor the last couple of years. I'm sure Saquon will help him, and having Solder and a better line will help, but it's also possible that he's just not any good anymore. I think he will bounce back a bit this year, but I don't think Eli has enough left in the tank to make this team a true contender before he retires, even if he does bounce back a bit. DG seems to believe that Eli has enough left to lead the Giants into contention the next 2-3 years. His job is likely going to come down to Eli bouncing back and Webb being the QB of the future.
That being said, he can't play much worse than he has in the last couple seasons. There have been many reasons for that beyond just Eli, but the bottom line is Eli has been piss poor the last couple of years. I'm sure Saquon will help him, and having Solder and a better line will help, but it's also possible that he's just not any good anymore. I think he will bounce back a bit this year, but I don't think Eli has enough left in the tank to make this team a true contender before he retires, even if he does bounce back a bit. DG seems to believe that Eli has enough left to lead the Giants into contention the next 2-3 years. His job is likely going to come down to Eli bouncing back and Webb being the QB of the future.
My only disagreement with you is Eli's numbers in the 3 games Odell started last season were pretty darn good (that includes the San Diego game I thought he played terribly in). If we extrapolated those numbers over a full 16 game season, they would be tremendous (65% completions, 37 TDs, 4600+ passing yards). Heck, even on a terrible team, the Giants had the lead with 4 minutes left to go in all 3 of those games and it can be argued the defense/special teams were the main culprits for losing. In fairness to Eli, he was a good NFL QB in 2017 when he had his full compliment of weapons.
As I said a thousand times prior to the draft, I would've taken Darnold. But, put me in the group that doesn't really care what Darnold does because it's pretty much a fruitless exercise.
Quote:
isn't just one way to get a QB:
Quote:
I hope he is right. I'm not all that confident that he will be, but I'll root every sunday for him to be right. We all want the same thing here, but some of you refuse to question DG for not taking a QB.
If a QB answer isn't found, it doesn't matter if Saquon is Marshall Faulk, the Giants aren't competing for titles.
That's why it is asinine to say that a good Darnold will make a great Barkley a wrong pick. Even in your examples, "good" QB's aren't winning consistently, franchise QB's are.
I'm not questioning DG for picking Barkley if he turns out great. And again the point that is eluding you is that it isn't picking Darnold or bust.
It is picking Darnold, or drafting a 1st rounder two years from now, or getting a vet pickup like the Redskins did, or having a mid to late-round pick develop. Darnold is just one of many possible ways to get the next QB.
And the larger point is that this discussion really should be tabled until Eli isn't here and the next guy is because until then, it isn't about Darnold vs. Barkley. It is about the next QB vs. Darnold - if Darnold is even still around then.
How fast do you win with the rookie QB.
Now you have the rookie QB, Odell signed no running game, and guys like Snacks, Jenkins deals ending along with Solder. Or you have a QB you still believe in get him a RB improve the line and see what happens. Guess which one DG tried
But the timing was perfect now. New coach, new GM, new offense, #2 pick in a stacked QB draft, a potential out in Eli's contract, and the opportunity to free up a lot of cap space for Beckham's impending deal. A lot of things had to align, and they did. In terms of moving from one franchise QB to the next (one of the hardest managerial feats to execute in sports) it didn't get any cleaner than that.
Any list of drafted quarterbacks in any era is going to have more misses than hits. In a draft like this you improve your odds of hitting, just like we did in 2004 and just like the teams in '83. Yeah there might be a Tony Eason or a JP Losman in the group, but your chances of hitting are better than they normally would be.
That said, I can't see how anyone could suggest that we made the right pick. Many pundits have called this the strongest QB draft in decades. Four GMs made the decision to take QBs in the top 10; in fact, three traded up to do it. Despite having Darnold, Rosen, and Allen on the board for us - three guys expected to go in the top 5 when the college football season started - we passed on all of them. And we did so because...
DSG looked at what, two games of Eli Manning's season last year and decided to ignore all evidence to the contrary that he is in - or even could be - in decline. He is an Eli apologist hand picked by the GM who drafted Eli in a fake GM search for a team that refuses to ever go outside the organization for new ideas. He has an antiquated approach - believing this is 1960s football. Worse yet, he refuses to even consider modern analytics, and he mocked the reporter who even asked him the question. He thinks he is the smartest guy in the room; in my experience, those people typically end up being the dumbest.
DSG wants to win now, and he completely ignored the future of a franchise that was coming off a 3-13 season. Even if you don't think they were truly that bad, there is nothing to suggest that the Giants are good enough to compete, as they have been terrible for years, and even the 11-5 season was a mirage. The top four teams in the conference - the Eagles, Vikings, Rams, and Saints - all are SB contenders and all improved in the offseason. At best, there is room for us to sneak in as the 5 or 6 seed and promptly get hammered in the 1st round. And that's ignoring that teams like the Falcons, Packers, Cowboys, and probably Niners are all favored to make the playoffs after us.
The guy has no clue what he is doing or talking about. It is insane to believe that there wasn't a QB out there that he thought could be a franchise guy. It's patently ridiculous. And for those of you in the Webb camp, there is a good chance that ship has sailed already.
We can try to get guys in the fourth round or later, and we will need a wing and a prayer to even hope one of them becomes a serviceable starter, let alone a franchise QB. But DSG's motto is you set your team back years if you pick a QB and don't get it right. But, isn't he tasked with actually hitting on one? All he has done is bring the Panthers to the Giants. And if he thought QB hell was picking the wrong QB, he ain't seen nothing yet if Darnold hits while the Giants go 8-8 every year because of subpar QB play.
"He has no idea what he's talking about".
When people say that about a football GM, I just cringe at the cluelessness being exhibited
That said, I can't see how anyone could suggest that we made the right pick. Many pundits have called this the strongest QB draft in decades. Four GMs made the decision to take QBs in the top 10; in fact, three traded up to do it. Despite having Darnold, Rosen, and Allen on the board for us - three guys expected to go in the top 5 when the college football season started - we passed on all of them. And we did so because...
DSG looked at what, two games of Eli Manning's season last year and decided to ignore all evidence to the contrary that he is in - or even could be - in decline. He is an Eli apologist hand picked by the GM who drafted Eli in a fake GM search for a team that refuses to ever go outside the organization for new ideas. He has an antiquated approach - believing this is 1960s football. Worse yet, he refuses to even consider modern analytics, and he mocked the reporter who even asked him the question. He thinks he is the smartest guy in the room; in my experience, those people typically end up being the dumbest.
DSG wants to win now, and he completely ignored the future of a franchise that was coming off a 3-13 season. Even if you don't think they were truly that bad, there is nothing to suggest that the Giants are good enough to compete, as they have been terrible for years, and even the 11-5 season was a mirage. The top four teams in the conference - the Eagles, Vikings, Rams, and Saints - all are SB contenders and all improved in the offseason. At best, there is room for us to sneak in as the 5 or 6 seed and promptly get hammered in the 1st round. And that's ignoring that teams like the Falcons, Packers, Cowboys, and probably Niners are all favored to make the playoffs after us.
The guy has no clue what he is doing or talking about. It is insane to believe that there wasn't a QB out there that he thought could be a franchise guy. It's patently ridiculous. And for those of you in the Webb camp, there is a good chance that ship has sailed already.
We can try to get guys in the fourth round or later, and we will need a wing and a prayer to even hope one of them becomes a serviceable starter, let alone a franchise QB. But DSG's motto is you set your team back years if you pick a QB and don't get it right. But, isn't he tasked with actually hitting on one? All he has done is bring the Panthers to the Giants. And if he thought QB hell was picking the wrong QB, he ain't seen nothing yet if Darnold hits while the Giants go 8-8 every year because of subpar QB play.
Thank you for that post. It’s was a giant waste of time.
I'm not going to be a hypocrite or pretend I didn't strongly want a quarterback. I feel the same way today as I did in April. When I feel the team makes a mistake it bothers me, and admittedly it will bother me as a fan until I'm (likely inevitably) proven wrong.
I don't think Eli has it left in him, I think quarterbacks are much more valuable than RBs, I think RBs bust as commonly as QBs, and I think if you have a shot at the best QB in a draft you take it for myriad reasons.
I clearly hope I'm wrong. I hope Manning has championship football left in him. I hope he and Barkley raise a trophy together.
And what the hell does the 'S' in DSG stand for? Is it something only a complete asshole would come up with?
Stay grounded and shorten it up...less is more on this type of minefield.
That said, I hope Barkley has a long successful career here.
Eli at this stage isn’t a top tiered QB. The only aspect of “franchise qb” that applies to him is the cap hit.
Good times BBI.
QB class sucks this year in college. Look to 2020.
/sarcasm off
This should be NGT.
Quote:
2007
1: JaMarcus Russell, Raiders
22: Brady Quinn, Browns
2008
3: Matt Ryan, Falcons
18: Joe Flacco, Ravens
2009
1: Matthew Stafford, Lions
5: Mark Sanchez, Jets
17: Josh Freeman, Buccaneers
2010
1: Sam Bradford, Rams
25: Tim Tebow, Broncos
2011
1: Cam Newton, Panthers
8: Jake Locker, Titans
10: Blaine Gabbert, Jaguars
12: Christian Ponder, Vikings
2012
1: Andrew Luck, Colts
2: Robert Griffin III, Redskins
8: Ryan Tannehill, Dolphins
22: Brandon Weeden, Browns
2013
16: EJ Manuel, Bills
2014
3: Blake Bortles, Jaguars
22: Johnny Manziel, Browns
32: Teddy Bridgewater, Vikings
2015
1: Jameis Winston, Buccaneers
2: Marcus Mariota, Titans
2016
1: Jared Goff, Rams
2: Carson Wentz, Eagles
26: Paxton Lynch, Broncos
2017
2: Mitchell Trubisky
10: Patrick Mahomes
12: Deshaun Watson
Out of that list of 29 Quarterbacks taken in the first round, how many can truly be considered a successful franchise QB? For every 1, there are two or three more failures/busts.
There are no guarantees. Picking number 2 doesn't guarantee you anything.
But this is exactly the point. Good QBs are very hard to come by. Yes, picking one at #2 doesn't guarantee you will get a good one. But the list gets a lot uglier after that.
What makes the #2 pick so special is the Giants had their choice of any QB except Mayfield, and if they loved Mayfield they were close enough to at least open up legitimate conversations to get him. Odds are, in the future, they are going to have no where near the opportunity. They are going to have to settle for someone falling to them, or offer typically a huge ransom to trade up. And most likely if someone the actually like might fall to them, very often another team who also likes him will trade up to steal the guy from you. So picking later, it is much less likely your top QB will fall to your pick and even if he does, the odds are even worse that he will pan out. You are at the mercy of the draft unless you are willing to invest several picks to trade up, but even if you do get lucky and your guy is there, odds of a QB panning out get even worse after the first one or two picks.
This is why when you have your chance, you need to think real hard about pulling the trigger. Teams spend years praying for the opportunity the Giants just passed up on.
I get it if none of the QBs in this draft are any good. But DG was paid a lot of money to get that evaluation right and it was likely the most critical decision of his career, which many GMs will never have such an opportunity. There were legitimate prospects available (no one would have said Darnold was a reach for a need), and the initial look for two of the prospects looked pretty darn good. So that along with Webb looking like shit was not encouraging. But I guess we will have to wait and see how it continues to unfold.
Bravo Uber, nice way to encapsulate what many here are thinking/feeling.
He hasn't had a kind word to say about Gettleman and continues to use the "S". For what I'm thinking is some fucked up slam on him.
For those who were wondering, Gettleman's middle name is Alan.
We'll have to wait and watch it play out, well beyond one exhibition game. There's a good chance NYG will get another opportunity high in the draft, and there's also the element of Shurmur owning some pelts in deploying less than stellar QBs with success.
We'll have to wait and watch it play out, well beyond one exhibition game. There's a good chance NYG will get another opportunity high in the draft, and there's also the element of Shurmur owning some pelts in deploying less than stellar QBs with success.
there's also the element of Shurmur owning some pelts in deploying less than stellar QBs with success.
A very strong element, imv
And while his post takes some unnecessary extremes (like saying DG only looked at 2 games to assess Eli and some others), what he wrote could be how this whole thing shakes out.
Or he could be wrong just like many others here...
Jimmy Googs : 8:49 am : link : reply
you throw a fit again about it.
The ultimate contrarian who pops into threads to discuss how others are always on threads.
Get over the knucklehead stuff and talk football...
I'll talk football when it is actually pertinent, like I've already done on this thread in quite a few posts.
Why should I try to validate the position of posters who use ridiculous monikers and the like? DSG?? Great. Let me engage in a serious discussion with a fuckhead who has some secret bash against Gettleman?
Why would I engage in serious football discussion with Les who call people "fanboys", or bw who calls the front office "Jints Central"?
I want focus of those posts to be put squarely on the inane aspect they bring. They don't deserve to be looked at any further from an analysis standpoint.
But then again - if talking football is so important to you, why make absolutely disgusting comments about "goosestepping" instead of focusing just on football? And calling out others for responding to morons?
Because you do exactly the same thing you accuse others of and don't even see it.
Quote:
should one present himself, but there's more than one way to build a championship caliber football team, especially in this watered down era.
Jon -You are 100% correct with that statement.
I firmly believe that the league is circling back around towards offenses built on strong running games.
Why? Because I just don't believe colleges are producing pro ready QB's at the same rate it used to.
Why? Spread offense and quarterbacks struggling to make the transition to the pros due to not being able to read defenses as well, and therefore not having the ability to audible at the line of scrimmage out of a bad play. Also, having more limited options due to having not taken snaps from under center.
Sitting a guy like Aaron Rodgers doesn't happen anymore. I'm not sure how much more pro ready QB's were years ago, most of them got to sit and learn for a year or two.
Teams aren't waiting to throw the highly touted QB into the fire anymore. Not sure why, probably many factors at play here, one being that there have been so many bad QB's recently that teams can't afford to be patient.
A lot of it gets blamed on the college game, but the NFL having zero patience and not letting guys sit and learn is just as big of a problem.
Sitting a guy like Aaron Rodgers doesn't happen anymore. I'm not sure how much more pro ready QB's were years ago, most of them got to sit and learn for a year or two.
Teams aren't waiting to throw the highly touted QB into the fire anymore. Not sure why, probably many factors at play here, one being that there have been so many bad QB's recently that teams can't afford to be patient.
A lot of it gets blamed on the college game, but the NFL having zero patience and not letting guys sit and learn is just as big of a problem.
I would counter that the teams that throw their highly drafted QB's into the fire right away do so because they don't have an established QB to sit him behind to begin with.
If Darnold was drafted by us, he absolutely would have sat this year. It's a situation to situation, team by team basis.
In any one given year, you can build a team a few different ways to win a title. Still much easier to do it if you have the QB in place than if you don't. You're way behind right from the start if you dont have the franchise QB in place.
I don't see any way to build a championship contender consistently over a number of years unless you have a franchise QB. If you look around at the teams that have had sustained success and had a legit chance to win a title every year, every single one of them has had a franchise QB.
What's wrong with building a team around that? Because it makes it that much easier when the new guys does finally step in. With a great team around him.
And, this is coming from one who touted Darnold for 18 months prior to the draft.
Quote:
are playing the QB's a lot earlier than they used to, even the high drafted ones.
Sitting a guy like Aaron Rodgers doesn't happen anymore. I'm not sure how much more pro ready QB's were years ago, most of them got to sit and learn for a year or two.
Teams aren't waiting to throw the highly touted QB into the fire anymore. Not sure why, probably many factors at play here, one being that there have been so many bad QB's recently that teams can't afford to be patient.
A lot of it gets blamed on the college game, but the NFL having zero patience and not letting guys sit and learn is just as big of a problem.
I would counter that the teams that throw their highly drafted QB's into the fire right away do so because they don't have an established QB to sit him behind to begin with.
If Darnold was drafted by us, he absolutely would have sat this year. It's a situation to situation, team by team basis.
I made that point in my post above, teams can't afford to be patient because they have such shit at QB in the first place.
And its usually the same teams doing it regularly. My biggest fear is turning into one of those teams. The teams that have been laughingstocks for a while have one thing in common: instability at the quarterback position.
I'm worried the Giants are going to wind up in that position soon.
Part of the appeal with Darnold for me was that I thought it was a perfect situation for the Giants. He could sit a year and learn behind Eli. Let Eli make one last run at it this year, then let him go in the 2019 off-season, save a bunch of money on the cap, and start Darnold next year.
If Webb or Lauletta don't pan out, the Giants will likely be one of those teams that has no choice but to throw a QB into the fire early on, which I don't believe is a good idea for any team.
Last year was a perfect storm of suck and injuries and just awful luck. The Giants had much more talent than a 3-13 team, just everything went wrong all at the same time. Chances are they won't pick that high for a long time. I would have used that to try to set up the franchise with a long term answer at QB.
As I said earlier, DG made big bets on Eli and Webb. I hope and pray he hits on those bets. I don't want another 1992-1999 situation.
What's wrong with building a team around that? Because it makes it that much easier when the new guys does finally step in. With a great team around him.
They certainly are banking on that. I think it's a very, very risky gamble. Eli needs to bounce back in a huge way. He's not young by any stretch and just has not played good football at all in a while.
I hope I'm wrong about Eli, but I fear that his best football is way behind him.
Bringing in Darnold would not have been throwing in the towel on 2018, either. Let's not forget that this is a team that people were picking to go to the Super Bowl last year. Obviously Saquon is a special talent, but they still could have gone for it this year while having a potential franchise QB waiting in the wings.
DG made a big bet on Eli and Webb and if he's wrong it will almost certainly cost him his job.
He looks to me like he can still make all the throws. I don't see a physical decline like others.
Also, he just turned 37. He played all of last season at 36. They way people talk about him, you'd think he was turning 40.
Not to mention he's coming off two career years in 2014 and 2015. His only down years were under McAdoo as head coach, and we all saw how bad that offensive design was.
Besides, even if he was coming off 5 straight MVP years it would be prudent to actively be trying to replace him with someone younger and cheaper. The Giants aren't the only team in this position. Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rivers - all these guys are playing well but the end could come at any moment. Their respective teams should actively be looking for replacements.
One thing that was telling was the recent interview given by Louis Riddick. Besides sounding profoundly smart and qualified for the Giants' GM position, Riddick also implied that he thought Eli's time might be done.
Here's a basic fact: though he thankfully appears to be beating his illness, Gettleman is 67 years old. The moment he was hired he was not long for the Giants' GM position. His planning horizon isn't likely to extend as far out as Riddick's would have. I know many would disagree but I believe Gettleman's hiring occurred in part because he would keep Eli at QB whereas Riddick might not have.
The Giants are all in for these next couple years. After that - uncertainty.
Besides, even if he was coming off 5 straight MVP years it would be prudent to actively be trying to replace him with someone younger and cheaper. The Giants aren't the only team in this position. Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rivers - all these guys are playing well but the end could come at any moment. Their respective teams should actively be looking for replacements.
One thing that was telling was the recent interview given by Louis Riddick. Besides sounding profoundly smart and qualified for the Giants' GM position, Riddick also implied that he thought Eli's time might be done.
Here's a basic fact: though he thankfully appears to be beating his illness, Gettleman is 67 years old. The moment he was hired he was not long for the Giants' GM position. His planning horizon isn't likely to extend as far out as Riddick's would have. I know many would disagree but I believe Gettleman's hiring occurred in part because he would keep Eli at QB whereas Riddick might not have.
The Giants are all in for these next couple years. After that - uncertainty.
Stats may be for losers, but he had the highest TD total of his career by far in 2015, and 2nd highest yardage total of his career. We're talking physical decline here, and in that season, he showed he had a very live arm.
Yeah, we were 6-10, but we lost 7 games when we were either tied or gained the lead in the final two minutes. That was a defensive failure, and that's what they addressed in 2016, and they rebounded. Eli's play sunk because they left the O-line as is/was, and McAdoo's scheme was absolute shit. That was not coincidence that Eli's and the offense's play fell off a cliff after Coughlin left. I think a better scheme (remains to be seen) this year you'll see a huge bounceback. All we can do is wait and see.
Now I'm not talking the next ten years, I'm talking the next two years. He can still win, and he can still make all the throws. Give him just average protection and a better scheme, and you will see a successful offense/QB in 2018.
On a good team I think Eli can still play at a Super Bowl level. Unfortunately I don't think this is or will be a good team in the next two years. Not Super Bowl level, anyway. And then...what?
Quote:
Now I'm not talking the next ten years, I'm talking the next two years. He can still win, and he can still make all the throws. Give him just average protection and a better scheme, and you will see a successful offense/QB in 2018.
On a good team I think Eli can still play at a Super Bowl level. Unfortunately I don't think this is or will be a good team in the next two years. Not Super Bowl level, anyway. And then...what?
My hope is that at the end of two years we will have a strong offensive and defensive line, and running game. So that the new QB can step in and not be asked to do much. A much more comfortable situation. That is my hope.
Quote:
I completely agree with this statement:
Quote:
Now I'm not talking the next ten years, I'm talking the next two years. He can still win, and he can still make all the throws. Give him just average protection and a better scheme, and you will see a successful offense/QB in 2018.
On a good team I think Eli can still play at a Super Bowl level. Unfortunately I don't think this is or will be a good team in the next two years. Not Super Bowl level, anyway. And then...what?
My hope is that at the end of two years we will have a strong offensive and defensive line, and running game. So that the new QB can step in and not be asked to do much. A much more comfortable situation. That is my hope.
Then the search begins...
Hopefully its not filled with paying Case Keenums or Kirk Cousins exhorbitant sums. Or watching Brown, Kanell, Graham, Palmer, Collins flounder for 10 years. Or even worse, a run like the Jets. O'Donnell, Foley, Testaverde, Lucas, Pennigton, Bollinger, Sanchez, Smith, Fitzpatrick. Not that easy to find the guy.
It wouldnt surprise you if darnold out plays Eli this season?
It would shock the crap out of me.
I wanted mayfield or Rosen. Darnold will be an average player in the nfl in my view.
I’m more curious to know if the giants would have drafted a qb if only two hot shots existed rather than four. For some reason I feel like they over thought things because there were so many qbs in this draft. Shit they even said as much after the draft. That scares me. Of course no one in the media asked the million dollar question..if all the scouts and coaches loved a different qb and there was no consensus, didn’t you guys grade all the qbs and if so, didn’t one of the qbs still have a higher grade than everyone else?
We might never know. But the stupid questions the media talkies asked gettleman brought nothing to the table.
More than likely it was a combination of things. They still love Eli, they really loved Barkley, and they weren’t Gaga over any of the qbs. It is what it is... this topic has already pushed me further and further away from even talking football with many because it’s such a beaten to death topic and it’s not even September year 1 yet. It’s also a popular or easy talking point for idiots. Many here share good insight. Many here don’t.
And that's the problem...we didn't have to move heaven and earth. The guy was sitting there for us, and at the draft he wasn't old enough to buy a beer.
Quote:
I have no doubt that the Giants, whoever the GM is, will move heaven & earth to get a franchise QB, be it trading up in the draft or FA.
And that's the problem...we didn't have to move heaven and earth. The guy was sitting there for us, and at the draft he wasn't old enough to buy a beer.
We'll see. I think Darnold will be good, but a franchise QB? That's TBD. I'm not getting worked up over one preseason game.
Quote:
I have no doubt that the Giants, whoever the GM is, will move heaven & earth to get a franchise QB, be it trading up in the draft or FA.
And that's the problem...we didn't have to move heaven and earth. The guy was sitting there for us, and at the draft he wasn't old enough to buy a beer.
Eh, what did we give up for Eli? What did the Redskins give up for RGIII? What did the Eagles give up for Wentz? The Redskins traded all that for RGIII & he was essentially a bust, the more successful QB was taken in the 4th round.
I think both sides of the argument are getting too worked up. If there is a QB NYG covets, they’ll trade up for him, fans will be outraged & it will turn out they didn’t give up much. That doesn’t concern me.
Quote:
are playing the QB's a lot earlier than they used to, even the high drafted ones.
Sitting a guy like Aaron Rodgers doesn't happen anymore. I'm not sure how much more pro ready QB's were years ago, most of them got to sit and learn for a year or two.
Teams aren't waiting to throw the highly touted QB into the fire anymore. Not sure why, probably many factors at play here, one being that there have been so many bad QB's recently that teams can't afford to be patient.
A lot of it gets blamed on the college game, but the NFL having zero patience and not letting guys sit and learn is just as big of a problem.
I would counter that the teams that throw their highly drafted QB's into the fire right away do so because they don't have an established QB to sit him behind to begin with.
If Darnold was drafted by us, he absolutely would have sat this year. It's a situation to situation, team by team basis.
Absolutely true. The Packers had Favre who was strong as an ox. But they knew they had to move on to a younger, and smarter QB eventually. Rodgers was a top prospect, a great talent who got all the time he needed to work out ever single kink. He was a good QB with the attitude of a seasoned vet his first season. By year two he was great
Another thing to take into consideration, a lot of these young hotshots coming out of college probably wouldn't even accept sitting 3 years. Somebody like Rosen and Mayfield may put up a stink
Josh Norman impressed by Darnold - ( New Window )