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.
No one was giving the Giants that type of haul. That type of haul is dead for a while.
The Giants need to start nailing some of their own picks. That would be a great place to start. Imagine if Hernandez is a bust?
That's exactly right. And there really haven't been any like that since that draft.
That's the drum I've been banging this offseason.
it was not an RG3 haul but that is not the barometer of value that was just a trade rape.
it was not an RG3 haul but that is not the barometer of value that was just a trade rape.
They traded a 1st and a 3rd to move up from 27 to 10 for Mahomes. That ain't much to jump 17 spots in the draft.
Houston traded a single 1st round pick to move from 25 to 12.
We had the number 2 pick. There were no takers. Cleveland was shopping the number 1 pick with no takers. Denver was shopping the number 5 pick with no takers.
The Jets moved from 6 to 3 for only 3 2nd round picks.
The Bills traded up from 12 to 7 for only 2 2nd round picks.
The Cardinals traded from 15 to 10 for only a 3rd and 7th.
So those three quarterbacks, all which were traded up for in this draft, yielded a combined 5 2nd round picks, a 3rd, and a 7th.
Think about that. That's how the teams valued them.
That's the drum I've been banging this offseason.
If you never draft a QB until a generational prospect comes along that makes the pick "easy", then you'll never end up with a QB. Your way suggests to only take a chance on a QB if he's a once a decade type player that appears to be an obvious hit.
Quote:
That's the drum I've been banging this offseason.
If you never draft a QB until a generational prospect comes along that makes the pick "easy", then you'll never end up with a QB. Your way suggests to only take a chance on a QB if he's a once a decade type player that appears to be an obvious hit.
No, that's twisting my words. In context, I said there are no sure fire lock franchise QB's in this draft, like there were in that draft so you better have a damn good conviction if there is a guy sitting there that he can be that guy for you.
They did not, and they passed. That's it.
Reese had been pretty much lockdown in the 1st/2nd rounds until the past few years, where he went off the rails. Flowers and Apple both look like pretty big misses relative to their draft position. And that's without getting into the record in the later rounds, which hadn't been great and was only worsening.
So what do we do? We fire them. OK, good start. Next? We bring in a guy who worked in that same FO, with many of the same scouts, and retain most of them.
If your problem is talent acquisition - how does keeping the scouting department intact and bringing back in a guy who until a few years prior was a big part of it give you any confidence in their assessment of the draft class? I know scouts don't normally get the ax until after the season, but bringing in an outsider would have at least brought in new perspective, if not a few extra sets of eyes to look over what those guys were doing.
It’s odd how people insight on pumping up the likes of darnold. He’s a good qb prospect. He’s not Andrew luck coming out. He’s not Eli or Bledsoe coming out. Doesn’t mean he won’t be great but he was never the cant miss once every 3-4 year collegiate/pro qb prospect no matter how much some might insist.
Move the fuck on already. We can find a qb.
We trade down or up in round 1 and take the qb relatively high. We’d have that young qb, lauletta, maybe Eli for one more year and a good crop of offensive talent. Ok fine Eli is dumped. Lauletta and rookie qb.
What is wrong with the above?
When did Sam darnold turn into John Elway or Peyton Manning? This isn’t a generational talent we passed on. Barkley is.
We trade down or up in round 1 and take the qb relatively high. We’d have that young qb, lauletta, maybe Eli for one more year and a good crop of offensive talent. Ok fine Eli is dumped. Lauletta and rookie qb.
What is wrong with the above?
When did Sam darnold turn into John Elway or Peyton Manning? This isn’t a generational talent we passed on. Barkley is.
Nothing wrong only this season was sacrificed without developing a young QB. In the long run it makes no difference. Just another year of torture watching this offense and then the QB hopefully will be drafted
It’s odd how people insight on pumping up the likes of darnold. He’s a good qb prospect. He’s not Andrew luck coming out. He’s not Eli or Bledsoe coming out. Doesn’t mean he won’t be great but he was never the cant miss once every 3-4 year collegiate/pro qb prospect no matter how much some might insist.
Move the fuck on already. We can find a qb.
What makes you confident that you can "find" a QB as easily as you make it sound? How many years has this franchise been looking for a QB before Eli Manning? Or the 25 other teams in the league that don't have one despite looking for years?
You're in a rush to dismiss something that's actually pretty directly related to doing the kind of winning that every wants.
If this QB class is so historical and generational, why wasn't a single first round pick surrendered to trade up for one of these guys, despite the fact that three teams traded up to get them?
If this QB class is so historical and generational, why wasn't a single first round pick surrendered to trade up for one of these guys, despite the fact that three teams traded up to get them?
That's a good question. It may be that the league is healthier than ever with good, quality QBs...
Quote:
the more I wonder how...
If this QB class is so historical and generational, why wasn't a single first round pick surrendered to trade up for one of these guys, despite the fact that three teams traded up to get them?
That's a good question. It may be that the league is healthier than ever with good, quality QBs...
And why is that? All I keep seeing on BBI is how impossible QBs are to find. But now you’re saying the opposite.
Nope. The top 4 QBs in the draft each had significant warts.
Nothing wrong only this season was sacrificed without developing a young QB. In the long run it makes no difference. Just another year of torture watching this offense and then the QB hopefully will be drafted
So you have already determined that Lauletta is worthless like Webb?
That's a good question. It may be that the league is healthier than ever with good, quality QBs...
And why is that? All I keep seeing on BBI is how impossible QBs are to find. But now you’re saying the opposite.
Those are your words not mine. I certainly think it's easier than ever to play the position - per the rules.
Quote:
the more I wonder how...
If this QB class is so historical and generational, why wasn't a single first round pick surrendered to trade up for one of these guys, despite the fact that three teams traded up to get them?
That's a good question. It may be that the league is healthier than ever with good, quality QBs...
So you're saying that starting QB's are easy to find then, if the league is full of healthy, good quarterbacks that are keeping teams from needing to draft them?
Meaning....?
Good GM's aren't willing to risk future things like 1st round picks on risky things like high draft QB's?
Before the draft, the following were universally accepted truths:
1. Finding a running back in the draft is easier than perhaps any other position
2. Finding a franchise QB in the draft is exceptionally difficult and can take years or even decades
3. There were 6 or 7 blue chip prospects in this draft: Mayfield, Darnold, Allen, Rosen, Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson
After the draft, those previously accepted truths were frequently challenged by BBIers that wanted to talk themselves into Barkley being the right pick.
If Gettleman truly thought this was a rebuilding year, then drafting Barkley at #2 and wasting a year of him is a fireable offense. If this was not intended to be a rebuilding year, then a 5-11/6-10 type year is a fireable offense.
So you're saying that starting QB's are easy to find then, if the league is full of healthy, good quarterbacks that are keeping teams from needing to draft them?
No. I'm saying this - a large majority of the teams seem content with their QB position. Whether they obtained one in prior drafts or used the free agency route.
So the demand for moving aggressively in the draft to get one may not be there. Per your question...
If GMs on both sides become more even-keeled, the bid-ask converge closer and closer...
Quote:
So you're saying that starting QB's are easy to find then, if the league is full of healthy, good quarterbacks that are keeping teams from needing to draft them?
No. I'm saying this - a large majority of the teams seem content with their QB position. Whether they obtained one in prior drafts or used the free agency route.
So the demand for moving aggressively in the draft to get one may not be there. Per your question...
Are those teams run by incompetent fools as well? I mean after all, this is a historical draft, right up there with 1983 and 2004. A class like this seemingly only comes around every 20 years or so. Gotta strike while the iron is hot.
Before the draft, the following were universally accepted truths:
1. Finding a running back in the draft is easier than perhaps any other position
2. Finding a franchise QB in the draft is exceptionally difficult and can take years or even decades
3. There were 6 or 7 blue chip prospects in this draft: Mayfield, Darnold, Allen, Rosen, Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson
After the draft, those previously accepted truths were frequently challenged by BBIers that wanted to talk themselves into Barkley being the right pick.
This place gets more and more strange by the year. Like it's scary how people will deny things just to get an opinion out.
All those things are true, by the way. Unless you read this website in april.
Are those teams run by incompetent fools as well? I mean after all, this is a historical draft, right up there with 1983 and 2004. A class like this seemingly only comes around every 20 years or so. Gotta strike while the iron is hot.
I don't get the incompetent fool part.
Whether this 2018 draft is historical or not remains to be seen. But I think the quality was very deep and comparable to those years you mentioned. So for a team like us, with an aging QB on the back nine of his career, it would have made great sense to pounce on the opportunity.
And what about finding a RB? How much was given up for Matt Breida and Phillip Lindsay?
The concepts of roster construction and resource allocation only seem to apply to other teams. But I would bet my mortgage that if we had drafted Darnold there wouldn't be anyone here saying we should have drafted Barkley.
And what about finding a RB? How much was given up for Matt Breida and Phillip Lindsay?
The concepts of roster construction and resource allocation only seem to apply to other teams. But I would bet my mortgage that if we had drafted Darnold there wouldn't be anyone here saying we should have drafted Barkley.
Actually, there were a lot of people that were on board with Gallery and Sean Taylor that were fine with keeping Kerry Collins.
The notion that we will only find a QB at the number two overall pick in 2018, and only there kinda pisses me off too.
Quote:
The notion that we can "find a QB" really pisses me off. This very team moved up in a loaded draft in 2004 to get a QB...how many people were saying we can "find a QB" then?
And what about finding a RB? How much was given up for Matt Breida and Phillip Lindsay?
The concepts of roster construction and resource allocation only seem to apply to other teams. But I would bet my mortgage that if we had drafted Darnold there wouldn't be anyone here saying we should have drafted Barkley.
Actually, there were a lot of people that were on board with Gallery and Sean Taylor that were fine with keeping Kerry Collins.
The notion that we will only find a QB at the number two overall pick in 2018, and only there kinda pisses me off too.
That's one hell of a bad example to work with, since that ton of people would be proven horribly wrong a few years later.
It's easy to look back now and say it was wrong. Hindsight is 20/20.
Why don't we wait a couple years then, instead of 2 games.
Before the draft, the following were universally accepted truths:
1. Finding a running back in the draft is easier than perhaps any other position
2. Finding a franchise QB in the draft is exceptionally difficult and can take years or even decades
3. There were 6 or 7 blue chip prospects in this draft: Mayfield, Darnold, Allen, Rosen, Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson
After the draft, those previously accepted truths were frequently challenged by BBIers that wanted to talk themselves into Barkley being the right pick.
If Gettleman truly thought this was a rebuilding year, then drafting Barkley at #2 and wasting a year of him is a fireable offense. If this was not intended to be a rebuilding year, then a 5-11/6-10 type year is a fireable offense.
+1.
It's easy to look back now and say it was wrong. Hindsight is 20/20.
Why don't we wait a couple years then, instead of 2 games.
You just have to pick a QB at #2 because the odds are so much greater in your favor. Otherwise, like we did, it's basically a dereliction of duty.
The miss rate is probably still 50/50, but that's still worth the stretch, especially, and most significantly, because if you hit on the good 50% that contract is an enormous benefit under the cap.
How silly this all is.
It's easy to look back now and say it was wrong. Hindsight is 20/20.
Why don't we wait a couple years then, instead of 2 games.
If we're waiting a couple years why aren't we waiting with a young QB?
Are you really OK with an organizational strategy that involves waiting 2 years to rebuild the roster AND hoping you find a QB in that time?
No. NO.
So you're either:
a. going to waste two of those years with him sitting the bench
b. throwing him right out of the wolves and possibly ruining his development by making him a sitting duck out there behind that high school level offensive line that you say is going to take at least two years to fix.
Pick your poison.
Come in buddy, please stop. The other years we had a different GM, Coach and personnel (33 new this year?) and just 2 games in with a new GM, New HC and 3 new OL. The results may “be the same” to date, but prior years are irrelevant
And what about finding a RB? How much was given up for Matt Breida and Phillip Lindsay?
The concepts of roster construction and resource allocation only seem to apply to other teams. But I would bet my mortgage that if we had drafted Darnold there wouldn't be anyone here saying we should have drafted Barkley.
And you talk about “bending the narrative”. From almost everything I’ve seen of the guys defending the Barkley pick, almost every single one of them have said that they were on board with taking a QB if the team had conviction with one. They didn’t, and took Barkley. So that leaves two choices:
1. Accept the fact that we aren’t going back and redrafting, move on and figure out the next moves to make this team better.
2. Continue to whine, bitch, moan and complain about it, hope that the league decides to redraft, and if they don’t, continue to throw hissy fits on 7000 threads a day pretending that Darnold is some guaranteed Hall of Fame QB that can never, ever be replaced again.
You’ve decided choice two is the best route to take, as a fan. But believe it or not, there are some that actually did want a QB, have admitted so even today, but are still ok with the decision to take Barkley. Nobody is moving goal posts here. I’m not sure why you think everybody on here should be throwing shit fits like you when not one of us have a clue about how Darnold or anybody else in this draft turns out. Hell, I wanted Darnold. Have no problem saying it and have said it a thousand times. They didn’t take him. Wtf can I do about it now? Barkley is an amazing player too. And I can absolutely see why they chose him if they didn’t have conviction on one of the QBs.
You obviously don’t care about conviction and just wanted a QB. Any QB. Just to say you had a QB. Feel free to continue your outrage. It should really change the outcome. Maybe sign a petition to get the league to consider a redraft.
c. you build the roster around Eli Manning, so that when you finally do draft that young guy or however you get that QB of the future, he comes right in to a good situation set up to succeed, not fail.
Wouldn't it be nice for the rookie QB to take the field with a fixed offensive line, Barkley, Beckham, Engram, and Sheppard all a well oiled machine at that point?
That's what I think they're doing, and I don't think it's wrong. It's just a different approach.
BB'56 - I'm sorry but you've got your head in the sand if you think this year is independent from the previous.
c. you build the roster around Eli Manning, so that when you finally do draft that young guy or however you get that QB of the future, he comes right in to a good situation set up to succeed, not fail.
Wouldn't it be nice for the rookie QB to take the field with a fixed offensive line, Barkley, Beckham, Engram, and Sheppard all a well oiled machine at that point?
That's what I think they're doing, and I don't think it's wrong. It's just a different approach.
But they didn't build the roster around Eli. A roster built around Eli focuses first and foremost on the OL - not on shiny toys that won't get the ball in positions to succeed because Eli is scrambling for his life.
I just can't believe the willingness to turn a blind eye to this level of incompetence.
There are two ways to view this situation: what you hope it will become, and what it actually is. Those lines have been pretty clearly drawn.
Quote:
The point is a ton of people were not saying that we had to take a QB and only QB at all costs. It just didn't happen.
It's easy to look back now and say it was wrong. Hindsight is 20/20.
Why don't we wait a couple years then, instead of 2 games.
If we're waiting a couple years why aren't we waiting with a young QB?
Are you really OK with an organizational strategy that involves waiting 2 years to rebuild the roster AND hoping you find a QB in that time?
No. NO.
The problem with your rebuild idea is if you decide to do a complete rebuild like you wanted, you almost have to take the QB as the final piece of the puzzle to get the most out of his first contract. What good would it have done the Giants to draft a QB and break this all down? You wanted Beckham gone, no Solder, Vernon, there would be no Barkley, etc. so essentially you have a rookie QB and the worst roster in football to go with him. So, how long do you think this rebuild would take? If you’re literally replacing every player on the field, how many years of picks is that going to take? Historically speaking, you’re likely to get one or two quality starters in each draft. So how many drafts before you hit on enough to be competitive? 5? 6? More?
By the time the team around the QB is ready to compete, that QB you drafted is either up for a huge contract or out of the league because his confidence got destroyed playing on such a shitty team.
Quote:
and I know this is unconventional....
c. you build the roster around Eli Manning, so that when you finally do draft that young guy or however you get that QB of the future, he comes right in to a good situation set up to succeed, not fail.
Wouldn't it be nice for the rookie QB to take the field with a fixed offensive line, Barkley, Beckham, Engram, and Sheppard all a well oiled machine at that point?
That's what I think they're doing, and I don't think it's wrong. It's just a different approach.
But they didn't build the roster around Eli. A roster built around Eli focuses first and foremost on the OL - not on shiny toys that won't get the ball in positions to succeed because Eli is scrambling for his life.
I just can't believe the willingness to turn a blind eye to this level of incompetence.
There are two ways to view this situation: what you hope it will become, and what it actually is. Those lines have been pretty clearly drawn.
They have cut and signed 33 new players. It's been two games. They have completely turned the offensive line over except for one player who likely won't be brought back next year.
Rome wasn't built in a day.
BB'56 - I'm sorry but you've got your head in the sand if you think this year is independent from the previous.
Disagree. It is nearly a complete overhaul. The only resemblance are the 2 game results, an extremely small sample size. Agree to disagree. No minds will be changed until most, if not all, of the season is in the books, imv
The roster they inherited was a complete and utter disaster.
They only get one offseason and 2 games to fix it?