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
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?