Saquon Barkley is a terrific talent. I have zero doubts that he will be a great player in this league.
That being said, is there anyone still left on BBI who actually believes he was the correct pick for this franchise? I'm not being a smart ass, I'd legitimately like to hear why if you believe that.
This franchise has no real plan for the future right now. Gettleman has not earned the benefit of the doubt. He very clearly was wrong in his evaluation of the current team. He clearly believed they were ready to win now, which is obviously very far from the truth. He clearly believed Eli had a lot left in the tank. That doesn't seem to be the case.
The single most important job of a new GM is properly evaluating your current roster. A lot of people on BBI will say this is hindsight, but it's really not. Many of us on BBI didn't believe this team was ready to win now. A lot of our worst fears have been realized. Some will point to 2016 as a reason to go for it this year that they are actually more talented than they were in 2016. The problem I have with that is 2016 is the only year in the last what, 5 years, that the team hasn't sucked shit. That entire season seemed very flukey. They won a shit load of close games. The defense played way above their heads. Eli did not have a great year.
It's more than fair to be worried about the direction of this franchise with John Mara and Gettleman running the show. Most of the decisions John Mara has made have blown up in his face. There is no way to know this for sure, but I'd guess that DG is the only GM that the Giants could have hired that would have taken Barkley. His comments in the press are the most frightening of all. Ripping analytics and talking as if we're still in the 1980's.
Right or wrong, I also think DG's age played a role in the decisions made in the off-season. He's 67 years old. He's unlikely to be thinking of where this franchise will be in a decade.
It's still hard to fathom that anyone could watch the Giants the last 4-5 years and thought that taking a running back #2 overall was a smart business decision.
A lot of people on BBI in the off-season also thought that Davis Webb was the legitimate future of the Giants. Yet another thing i'll never be able to wrap my head around. He couldn't get off the bench last year and play over Geno Smith for a regime that drafted him. That told me all I needed to know about him.
Eli Manning is not the main problem with this team. But the fact is he's 37 years old, has not played well in years, and with the current roster it's not going to get any better. He could have Barry Sanders in his prime back there and it wouldn't make much difference. The line is a total train wreck. Eli is clearly shot mentally playing behind this line for the last 5 years. Physically he still has something left but each year that passes he's going to have less and less left.
I actually feel bad for Barkley. It's not his fault that the roster sucks.
The Giants desperately need a QB of the future. 2019 doesn't look to be a good year to need a QB, the likely top QB has a lot of character concerns. Barkley could stand on his head every game and without a QB for the future and a new offensive line none of it will ever matter.
John Mara has really put this franchise in a terrible situation. There is a legitimate argument to be made that the New York Giants are in the worst shape for the future of any team in the sport.
Yes, it's only 2 games into the season. But we've seen this movie too many times in the last 5 years.
The owner can't be fired, but he hasn't given any Giants fan reason to be confident in any decision that he makes. He totally botched the Eli situation last year, made the wrong hire at HC in McAdoo, kept Jerry Reese as the GM for way too long, stayed within his comfort zone when he hired Gettleman. His batting average is close to .00 in the last 5 years when it comes to decision making.
I'm genuinely interested in hearing from people who still believe that Barkley was the correct pick for this franchise. Every season that goes by without being a contender is a season wasted of Barkley's prime.
This really was not that hard to see coming.
Nobody on this board knows what Sam Darnold or Josh Rosen are going to become. But if Gettleman and Shurmur did not believe they were likely franchise QBs, they should not have drafted them. Maybe they were wrong, but I don't see how anyone can think they know definitively after two games.
they made the Cowboys D line look like DaBears and Jacksonville Dline -- and I don't think the Cowboys are really all that good
I have no idea what Gettleman and Shurmur had planned to correct this team long term (and yes there is a plan). But it is obvious that Darnold did not peak their interest or give them pause to select a QB.
How can one watch the past two games, see the talent that Barkley has and go on unhinged rants that he's not the right pick?
And in doing so, why is this being debated strictly as Barkley vs. a QB?
If you are concerned after the 1st two games, the real issue is still the OL. So if you really want to debate the pick, it isn't Barkley vs. Darnold. It is Barkley vs. trading down to amass a bunch of picks to be used on the OL.
It is a fucking joke at this point. "Win now" should become a billboard hoisted over every fucking chucklehead who can't get past the fact we didn't pick a QB. Doesn't mean shit, but a truckload of people keep using it as some fucking mantra.
they made the Cowboys D line look like DaBears and Jacksonville Dline -- and I don't think the Cowboys are really all that good
Seeing as how the last three oline coaches failed, it may not be the cook, but the ingredients....
He also admittedly based his opinion on Eli's future based on one game last year....which is absurd. And he's so damn sure he's right that analytics are a joke....and he didn't seem to show any doubt that maybe one of the QB's in this years draft really was a franchise QB....disregarding the consensus of just about everyone else that this was a potentially historic draft for QB's.
Maybe I'm wrong about all this, but he just never seems to consider the possibility that he could be wrong about any of this, and he doesn't really seem to be interested in gathering consensus....he seems to have an attitude that he's forgotten more about football than anybody else in the league knows...to the point where he can openly mock the way just about all other teams are doing business.
Again, maybe I'm wrong about all this but that's sure the impression that he's putting out there.
Nobody on this board knows what Sam Darnold or Josh Rosen are going to become. But if Gettleman and Shurmur did not believe they were likely franchise QBs, they should not have drafted them. Maybe they were wrong, but I don't see how anyone can think they know definitively after two games.
I dont think anyone believes the Giants would be anything other than 0-2 no matter who they took. You're missing the entire point of the post.
You don't take a running back #2 overall when you have holes all over the roster, and like it or not the Giants have a hole at QB right now and for the future.
What is the future of this team right now? Where is the path to being a contender? Without a QB to lead this team (and an offensive line to block), Saquon Barkley can stand on his head for 16 games and it won't matter. Barkley is not making this team a contender.
The goal for any franchise should be to build a team that can contend consistently. I don't see any way the Giants do that until they get a franchise QB and improve the line.
Eli's physical ability has diminished. I don't doubt that he can still play, but there is no way he can play behind this line. It's a recipe for disaster that DG should have seen coming and didn't.
Taking any RB #2 overall when you clearly aren't ready to win now and need a QB of the future and there were multiple QB's available is just bad business.
DG and Mara both somehow believed this team had a chance to contend this year.
Everyone judging draft picks after two games is occupying their lives with useless banter.
Agreed. Darnold was not a perfect prospect, especially given his propensity for INTs. But he was still excellent, and the positional value of the QB is greater than that of a RB. It's also unusual to be able to get a prospect like Darnold without having to surrender an enormous number of draft picks. The Jets in fact traded three second round picks just to move up a few spots to #3. But I was fine with either him or Barkley. We can already see that Barkley has awesome talent.
My concern is that we may have overpaid for Solder and Omameh. I am also puzzled why the OL has so many miscommunications, and seems confused on many plays about blocking assignments. The irony is that Barkley also needs work in that area, but that's pretty typical for rookie RBs.
I dont think anyone believes the Giants would be anything other than 0-2 no matter who they took. You're missing the entire point of the post.
You don't take a running back #2 overall when you have holes all over the roster, and like it or not the Giants have a hole at QB right now and for the future.
What is the future of this team right now? Where is the path to being a contender? Without a QB to lead this team (and an offensive line to block), Saquon Barkley can stand on his head for 16 games and it won't matter. Barkley is not making this team a contender.
No I think we got the point. Barkley was clearly the best player in the draft. He was the highest rated player ever in any draft.
I do not believe that the prototypical QB of the past will be the prototypical QB of the future in the NFL.
I also believe that until the line is corrected drafting a QB is useless.
I don't know if either are a franchise QB. Neither does Gettleman, the Jets, the Cardinals or you. But your question is based on the premise that these guys are franchise QBs, which is an opinion, not a fact.
But add in the fact that the average RB career is short and fhe average QB’s career is long should be enough.
It was a poor decision by a team that did not want to face waving goodbye to an icon. I hated when George Young cut Phil Simms but great GM’s make touch decisions.
Gettleman and Mara put the Giants just where they didn’t want to be, QB hell.
So, tell me how drafting a QB would have helped them this year.
I don't know if either are a franchise QB. Neither does Gettleman, the Jets, the Cardinals or you. But your question is based on the premise that these guys are franchise QBs, which is an opinion, not a fact.
You could say that about any QB. Nothing's a fact until it's established. It's all opinion. The question is whether the opinion turns out to be right or wrong.
So, tell me how drafting a QB would have helped them this year.
You don't do it for this year. You do it for the next 10-15 years.
Still more important to have a QB for the future. It's so much easier to find a path to being a contender regularly when you have a franchise QB. You
It would be a lot easier to swallow another shitty season if the franchise seemed to be moving in the right direction. Does anyone here believe that DG has this team moving in the right direction?
I have no idea what to think of Shurmur. DG scares the hell out of me. His comments in the off-season and his decisions clearly show that he actually believed this team could contend this year. I don't think it was just your usual coach or GM speak, his actions backed up that he actually believed that, and that is frightening.
His rant about how analytics about running backs being complete nonsense should scare the hell out of everyone on BBI. He fell in love with a player and wasn't going to let anything change his mind.
“You know what I say about that. It is a crock. At the end of the day, a great player is a great player. He is a touchdown maker. He is a threat to take it to the house every time he gets his hands on the ball,” Gettleman said. “I think a lot of that stuff is nonsense. I think it is someone who had decided to get into the analytics of it and went through whatever. Jonathan Stewart is in his 10th year and he has not lost anything. I don’t believe in that. I don’t care who you take, they can all get hurt.”
That above is an actual quote from DG. That's the guy who is leading this franchise right now. He actually said that Jonathan Stewart hasn't lost anything.
A lot of people like to rip on Greg for bringing up his "touched by the hand of God" comment, but DG's sound bytes should not make anyone comfortable. It's fricking weird to say shit like that. Believes that analytics are a crock, but says shit like Barkley was touched by the hand of God.
shitty teams don't just take QB's in the high picks, even if they aren't sold on a QB - they often take the best player or their top need.
Why is taking Barkley considered a "win now" move but taking somebody else indicates something completely different?
Was Leonard Fournette a win now move? Was Clowney? Eric Fisher? Jake Long? Mario Williams? Reggie Bush and Ronnie Brown weren't win now moves either.
It is a choice in how to build a roster, absent a functioning OL. How to build the team can be debated, but to act like picking a RB is a win now move while picking a QB isn't is just rationalization a lot of people are using because we didn't pick who we thought we should have.
And incessently whine about it.....
So, tell me how drafting a QB would have helped them this year.
It’s not about this year. This year was never going to be good. I’d rather be 0-2 (en route to 0-7) with all these problems and Gallman as RB1 and Darnold waiting in the wings.
Sounds a lot like the multitude of people who wanted Darnold, no?
They could have taken a QB and then fixed the offensive line over the next couple off-seasons.
This wasn't going to be a rebuild that happened overnight. The problem is DG has not treated it like a rebuild.
Having a QB who can actually move would also help the o-line. They'd still suck, but they wouldn't be as bad if they didn't have a statue back there.
Is this the last year of the Giants' existence?
Quote:
You are basing your entire post on one belief - Darnold or Rosen are franchise QBs who solve the QB problem for the future. If they aren't, drafting a QB at 2 is the worst possible thing you could have done.
I don't know if either are a franchise QB. Neither does Gettleman, the Jets, the Cardinals or you. But your question is based on the premise that these guys are franchise QBs, which is an opinion, not a fact.
You could say that about any QB. Nothing's a fact until it's established. It's all opinion. The question is whether the opinion turns out to be right or wrong.
That is exactly my point. After two games we have learned nothing about which was the better pick. Darnold could become Peyton Manning, or he could become Ryan Leaf. More likely he will be somewhere in between. But to think that there is now somehow proof or validation that one was a better pick is just silly. If Darnold becomes Ryan Leaf picking Barkley was a stroke of genius.
Quote:
drafted Darnold then they would still have a crappy offensive line, their main running back would be a mid-round draft pick (Gallman) and Eli would still be the starting QB.
So, tell me how drafting a QB would have helped them this year.
It’s not about this year. This year was never going to be good. I’d rather be 0-2 (en route to 0-7) with all these problems and Gallman as RB1 and Darnold waiting in the wings.
Which is why I’d probably feel better if the NYG were the Cards. They’re arguably the worst team in the nfl, but they have their future QB already on the roster. That also means they won’t panic and reach for an inferior QB prospect next April which is my concern for the NYG.
If the Chargers had taken Fred Taylor over Ryan Leaf would you still say two games in they made the wrong choice?
So why I say it's too soon is because you need to see how Darnold turns out.
If Darnold is Peyton Manning, then yes it's the wrong pick.
But if Darnold becomes Ryan Leaf 2.0 then no, Giants dodged a bullet and were lucky to get Barkley.
I would not expand beyond those two players, it's really Barkley vs Darnold.
And the only other way the Barkley picks turns out to be the right pick is if the Giants are so bad again this year they get a top pick in 2019 and get the QB then.
Because Barkley + Franchise QB is better than franchise QB + no Barkley.
So, again, in short, it's too soon, but it will come down to Barkley vs Darnold and of course I realize this is second guessing, because it's too soon to evaluate two games in to their respective careers.
2018 wasn’t the only year we could get a QB. There’s the next draft, trades, FA...we will get another QB after Eli and they will have a leg up on the learning curve due to the skill positions we have in place.
Bitching about it incessantly won’t change anyone’s mind. These daily posts are fucking dumb.
Picking a RB with no OL?
Is DG's plan to fix the OL, the correct one?
Passing over 5 QB's?
If Darnold turns out to be the "guy", he will be playing in our stadium for years, but he won't be on our team....talk about rubbing salt into the wound!
All this talk about Darnold behind this line....who says he would play this year? He learns the ropes by watching Eli.....he get into games in the fourth quarter this season, when there are blowouts...
And the money saved by releasing Eli next season(if his play continues like this), is used in free agency to fix the OL or other holes in this team....That is a plan.....and any one of the other 4 qb's could be inserted into it....but DG sold ownership on none of them being a franchise QB.....only time will tell.....
As for Barkley, he is on this team, and with all the pounding he is taking behind this OL, I hope we don't have another Rodney Hampton situation...
People freaked out when Webb was cut. (I wasn't happy) Shurmur said they do have a plan for QB, they are just not telling what it is.
Just because a team picks a QB doesn't mean their plan is correct. The Jets oline is decent, Darnold will survive.
So which new GM is winning the NFL after two games?
It was about the next decade.
DG can deny it all he wants, but the numbers don't lie, RB's primes are significantly shorter than most positions. Barkley's prime started 2 games ago.
It doesn't bother anyone in here when the Giants GM says that arguments backed up by numbers are a crock but then says that the RB was touched by the hand of God?
they made the Cowboys D line look like DaBears and Jacksonville Dline -- and I don't think the Cowboys are really all that good
This +1. And to answer Mook's question - Yes. Barkley was the correct pick. I think Darnold would have been an awful pick. Not considering Allen, but the only QB that should have been in consideration out of Mayfield, Darnold, or Rosen was Rosen.
He just didn't replace the QB. There's only so much that can be done in an offseason. They traded JPP and flipped the pick for Hill. They signed a couple seasoned LB's. The OL is gone except for Flowers. They drafted Barkley. The locker room malcontents from last year are history, as well as those terrible mid round picks.
Basically, he did about as much as one can do - he just didn't change the QB so people say it isn't a rebuild. The roster has turned over by like 40%!!
We get it - people wanted Darnold. But these false narratives are just fucking ridiculous at this point.
Win now moves would've been trading for Mack, signing Dez and mortgaging the future.
Teams draft BPA. Barkley was the BPA at #2, apparently by a wide margin. My understanding is that the Giants liked Darnold, Rudolph, and Lauletta. They got Lauletta, although I'd be surprised if a fourth round pick is Eli's long term successor.
Eli's immobility definitely magnifies the problems of the OL. He may also at 37 be shellshocked because of the constant beatings he's taken behind substandard OL. But Darnold would be killed behind this OL, escaping just a few times more than Eli. Two and three defenders are often on top of Eli within a matter of a few seconds. Teams are also getting pressure and stopping the run with just four or five DL, meaning that any QB would be throwing against six or seven defenders on almost every play.
If the argument was to continue to improve the OL, then I assume the Giants could have traded with the Browns at #4 and taken Nelson. I would have been fine with them doing that, contingent upon receiving a lot of draft picks. The only players I didn't want were Mayfield (size and off the field concerns), Rosen (injuries), and Allen (accuracy).
Quote:
In comment 14082831 Mike from Ohio said:
Quote:
You are basing your entire post on one belief - Darnold or Rosen are franchise QBs who solve the QB problem for the future. If they aren't, drafting a QB at 2 is the worst possible thing you could have done.
I don't know if either are a franchise QB. Neither does Gettleman, the Jets, the Cardinals or you. But your question is based on the premise that these guys are franchise QBs, which is an opinion, not a fact.
You could say that about any QB. Nothing's a fact until it's established. It's all opinion. The question is whether the opinion turns out to be right or wrong.
That is exactly my point. After two games we have learned nothing about which was the better pick. Darnold could become Peyton Manning, or he could become Ryan Leaf. More likely he will be somewhere in between. But to think that there is now somehow proof or validation that one was a better pick is just silly. If Darnold becomes Ryan Leaf picking Barkley was a stroke of genius.
You usually don't get instant results from a QB the first year. Eli was terrible in 2004.
Some, like me, would like to know the reasoning behind the Gettlemen pick. I have heard varying opinions:
He didn't believe in any of the quarterbacks
Mara didn t want to face the push back selecting a quarterback would bring
Barkley is a generational talent.
There is already a plan in place for getting the next quarterback.
They just didn t want to put Eli in that position.
Some, get pissed Off that we who wanted a quarterback, won t accept their opinion as to why our logic is flawed. They often state their opinion as if it is fact, and wonder how many times they are going to have to explain it to us.
I never felt Barkley was the correct pick, I was on Darnold well before the season ended, and was stunned at the pick.
However, as Phil Simms has stated, there are other quarterbacks out there. And even if the Giants have to pay a much steep price to get one, it will be nice to see the young kid have a weapon like Barkley
Not all is lost
Really good post.