Daily, there is a group of posters who state as fact that Mara mandated that Eli stay, the team be built around him and that the new GM and coach be on board with that strategy.
I have a couple questions for these conspiracy theorists:
1) Why would Gettleman, a man who could retire, take a job as a puppet, especially since it contradicts his entire personality as well as his tenure in Carolina
2) Why would Shurmur, a failed coach in Cleveland, sign up to take a job that would effectively end his dreams of ever being a successful NFL coach, since two-time failures don't get other chances.
Basically, to believe that Mara is calling the shots and it was a mandate to keep Eli, two men are banking their career and reputation on something they don't control. Why would they do that?
bw has said numerous times that Gettleman accepted the terms because he needed a job. And while there isn't a shred of evidence of that, it still doesn't explain Shurmur. In fact, Shurmur doesn't check any of the boxes the conspirators say:
- No ties to the team
- Not hand picked by Mara
basically, because we picked Barkley and not a QB is the only thing they can tangibly point to, and that pick is looking like we indeed got the guy who was the best player in the draft and one that Gettleman saw as a generational talent
I'd really like to hear how the fuck this ridiculous premise gets repeated here daily.
My question is (and the point of this thread), why is is posted so often here that keeping Eli was a condition for this year?
It is literally posted here daily. Isn't that the exact same thing you are bitching about?
Quote:
If you have no interest in hearing out the other side?
You post just to call people idiots and jump down their throats.
If the shoe fits wear it pal...!!!!
Cool story bro.
I actually even agree that their wasn’t a mandate but more likely Gettleman/Shurmur saying what they thought Mara wanted to hear, but posting this non stop to point and laugh “morons” is childish.
In fact, that also has been stated here that DG was the hire from Day 1 and everything else was a smoke screen.
Two completely different things.
To be honest one of the biggest problems in bad teams are owners hiring guys their familiar with or think the same.
But hiring people who still believed in Eli (or at least said they did) isn't much different than a "Eli stays" mandate.
The end result is the same.
But, I agree that the end result may all work out if we can draft Herbert.
Some of them I've tried to counter in the past couple of weeks include that we couldn't run block at all against NO. That Snacks didn't play the 4Q (and even more) of the CAR game, and that's why we couldn't stop the run.
In the past year we've had all kinds of speculation about what went down with the Eli benching, with opinion and speculation slowly becoming accepted fact about what really happened.
And now we regularly hear all kinds of variations on an Eli mandate.
For those more reasonable opinions - like that DG or PS told the owners what they wanted to hear - this isn't about you.
This place has literally seen more than a handful of posters putting out there as fact that there was a requirement that whoever came in as coach must believe in and play Eli as a condition for their hire.
It is not a reasonable viewpoint. It is irrational. It may not be a majority opinion, but to pretend that it isn't regularly stated around here as fact is wrong. If you spend much time reading here you could literally see it posted every day.
FMiC is definitely doing his best to put an end to that viewpoint. He's right to do so.
In fact, that also has been stated here that DG was the hire from Day 1 and everything else was a smoke screen.
My thoughts on the hiring process...
Mara did not wake up one day and decide to fire Reese. It was something that he probably began to consider from the time he fired Coughlin. So the man was thinking about possible replacements for a while. So, that being said...
1. I believe DG was on Mara's short list for a while along with 1 or 2 others who may or may not have been available when the Giants finally made a move on Reese.
2. I believe Mara was sincere in his interviews with the other candidates.
3. I believe Acorsi's endorsement tipped the scales towards Gettleman.
Stop painting things in absolutes. Sure, there are people who claim Mara is a puppet master, pulling the strings, and those under him are toady lackeys doing his bidding. But there are a lot more who see Mara as a guy who is involved in running the team and is involved in setting the direction of the team. It's not that far fetched to think Mara started out with a notion of how things should go and then bring in like minded guys. Instead of looking at it with a view that Gettleman and Shurmur came in at odds with Mara and took the job anyway because, hey, it's a prestigious job, look at it from a point of view that they agreed with the idea that they could improve the team while keeping Eli for now.
My wife came up with the idea of going on vacation to Greece. I said, hey, good idea. Does that mean she mandated the trip?
Two completely different things.
Yeah, I was only giving my opinion on how it went down.
Hey, there's been alot of crazy posted over the past year. As recent as a couple of weeks ago, there have been people posting that Eli has "4-5 years left" and will "get extended." That this is same as prime Eli.
I mean. What are you gonna do? It's clearly been a rough period of Giants football and it's making some folks a bit wacky.
(1) He is not ready for retirement and no other team was knocking on his door.
(2) He is unhappy with how things turned out in Carolina and wants another chance to redeemed himself.
(3) The Giants GM job is his dream job.
(4) He believed that he can kick the can down the road with Eli for the next year or two. .
The bottom line is the team sucks. The “Eli sucks” crowd is miserable so is the “Eli walks on water” crowd. At this point, there can be only one conclusion, we need to move on from Eli.
They aren’t able to change the GM/coach after one year. The OL takes years to rebuild. What’s left to change besides Eli?
Let’s be frank, none of us thought the season would turn out this way. It is shocking that Eli would continue to play like this with all these changes around him.
Will try to suggest a plausible explanation to your other questions.
I dont think Mara said if I hire you then you must keep Eli and you cannot draft a QB. I would say he indicated that he preferred with stay with Eli for this year and do what we can to get this team back on track now without a repeat of what we experienced last season. Drafting a QB in the first round will provide longer term dividends and the kid would most likely sit behind Eli for at least a year.
I dont think Mara told Shurmur that he had to start Eli either. Shurmur took the job and he is not making decisions on who we draft. Input? Sure.. but in the end he is playing the cards he is dealt.
One of the reasons why I feel it is very possible that Mara has his hands in this is because I listened closely to one of his press conferences late last right after the Eli benching. He indicated that he and Jerry basically said to McAdoo that they wanted to see someone else in there. He also said he did not expect the fans to get so emotional over the decision. This tells me he is not an owner that just sits back and has no voice. He is not Jerry Jones but he is involved to some extent.
Mara is selling football hope to the fans. The best way to do that coming into this season was...
1. Assure the fans that Eli is the starting QB
2. Draft an exciting player who can come in and make an immediate impact.
3. Bring in a few free agents to also give the fans some hope about the teams future
4. Show a significant improvement on the field in 2018 even if they do not make the playoffs
Think this is most plausible if it was even the case.
Obviously this guy can't handle the fact that management including DG and PS decided want to stay with Eli for now.
2. Gettleman has shown he can tell the boss to go screw. He's no one's puppet. He's also not a beginner at refashioning teams. He is doing that with the Giants now. He is not error-free. No one is.
3. Schumer is not worrying about his next job. He has a good one now if he can keep it. He showed how to improve and revive a damaged, ineffective offense with Minny and deal with loss of a starting QB. He did a similarly good job with the Eagles offense twice. At Cleveland he was just one of a long line of six (count 'em) "failed" Head Coaches. That mess was not a result of poor team management and leadership at the Head Coach level. (I'd look up the ladder there.)
I’d still be critical of certain moves, but a failure at the top to face reality is even more worrisome. You can analyze the team through a different lens. Look at the Rangers - they’ve committed to a rebuild, communicated it to the fans. You can enjoy seeing a team grow and develop despite fully expecting a bad season.
I’m not sure what the Giants internal expectations were this year. I view moves as signing Solder to a huge deal and even trading for Ogletree as moves more consistent with an immediate competitive window. I view Stewart the same way - coupled with just awful player analysis by Gettleman in his case.
The front office did not change over that much. Reese is gone. Ross is gone. Mark Koncz is new. But everyone else listed on the Giants site under “Football Operations” has been with the franchise for years. And yes, I understand that franchises don’t usually turnover their entire front office in one off-season, but the Giants seem to have significantly more stability than the results have warranted. This off-season was not the gutting of the franchise that I felt was needed after failing post-2011. Was everyone else doing a great job but Reese was overruling everyone and leading the team into disaster? That’s doubtful.
I don’t think the franchise deserves a leash from fans because it’s a new regime because it’s really not all that new. And more importantly, there haven’t been sufficient signals to suggest they thought they needed more time to put together a winning team. Maybe the wrong thread for it (I concur with the original post, I think it’s unlikely the owner mandated Eli start), but an alternative where Gettleman thought Eli was going to be a good QB again is a concerning and more plausible scenario to me.
I’d still be critical of certain moves, but a failure at the top to face reality is even more worrisome. You can analyze the team through a different lens. Look at the Rangers - they’ve committed to a rebuild, communicated it to the fans. You can enjoy seeing a team grow and develop despite fully expecting a bad season.
I’m not sure what the Giants internal expectations were this year. I view moves as signing Solder to a huge deal and even trading for Ogletree as moves more consistent with an immediate competitive window. I view Stewart the same way - coupled with just awful player analysis by Gettleman in his case.
The front office did not change over that much. Reese is gone. Ross is gone. Mark Koncz is new. But everyone else listed on the Giants site under “Football Operations” has been with the franchise for years. And yes, I understand that franchises don’t usually turnover their entire front office in one off-season, but the Giants seem to have significantly more stability than the results have warranted. This off-season was not the gutting of the franchise that I felt was needed after failing post-2011. Was everyone else doing a great job but Reese was overruling everyone and leading the team into disaster? That’s doubtful.
I don’t think the franchise deserves a leash from fans because it’s a new regime because it’s really not all that new. And more importantly, there haven’t been sufficient signals to suggest they thought they needed more time to put together a winning team. Maybe the wrong thread for it (I concur with the original post, I think it’s unlikely the owner mandated Eli start), but an alternative where Gettleman thought Eli was going to be a good QB again is a concerning and more plausible scenario to me.
Very well said.
Of course no one "knows" whether Mara explicitly mandated to potential GM and coaching candidates they keep Manning.
If you need a qualifier to understand quips on the internet are opinions, that's a rough world for you cowboys.
Here are some totally true, not so tough to diagnose fact from opinion takes:
- The owner tapped the old GM who drafted the QB to help pick the new GM
- The old GM picked a dude who used to work for him, who was on the staff when they picked the QB, to be the new GM
- The new GM from go was defending the QB
- The new GM and coach didn't pick a QB with a top 2 pick, the highest they picked since the old GM picked the QB
- The new coach as of today is sticking with the QB, even though he's playing terrible football and getting beat like a bag
Maybe Mara didn't write it on a piece of paper and slip it to them in the interviews, but he effectively mandated it by putting into motion a cast of characters and events who were sure to make it happen.
Don't believe me as an Eli hater? Ask Britt how as clear as day it was Manning was staying from the moment Gettleman got behind mic.
-John Mara said he wanted Eli back when DG was hired.
-DG mentioned how well Eli played against Philly during his introductory press conference. He also said, “Eli put 2 rings on my fingers.”
I think the fan backlash shocked Mara & he didn’t *mandate* Eli return, but it is what he wanted to hear.
-John Mara said he wanted Eli back when DG was hired.
-DG mentioned how well Eli played against Philly during his introductory press conference. He also said, “Eli put 2 rings on my fingers.”
I think the fan backlash shocked Mara & he didn’t *mandate* Eli return, but it is what he wanted to hear.
I couldn't agree more. Mara threw the ingredients in the pot, and we're all supposed to believe he wasn't cooking soup. Chief's a big spoofer.
christian and Brett have this one covered.
In particular, Brett covers my biggest concern - that the organization's ability to select talent has been in question for some time, and much of the staff responsible for doing so is still in place (and we brought back the head of pro personnel to take over as GM). Not sure why anyone is expecting different results with almost entirely the same set of scouts.
Quote:
Maybe Mara didn't write it on a piece of paper and slip it to them in the interviews, but he effectively mandated it by putting into motion a cast of characters and events who were sure to make it happen.
christian and Brett have this one covered.
In particular, Brett covers my biggest concern - that the organization's ability to select talent has been in question for some time, and much of the staff responsible for doing so is still in place (and we brought back the head of pro personnel to take over as GM). Not sure why anyone is expecting different results with almost entirely the same set of scouts.
That said, I already like a lot of what I see from the new front office. We had a very solid draft by early measures; our best top to bottom draft in a long time.
But, also because of one factor. Eli. In 2014 and 2015 Eli had arguably his 2 best seasons as a pro; almost certainly his finest back to back seasons. But, the D was terrible, so we spent a lot of money that off season and while 2016 was still a very good season for him, the story was Collins and the D and the playoffs. So, only 1 year removed some very excellent football, it was perfectly reasonable for anyone to say Manning could still play; he just needs a better OL in front of him.
Now, for the first time, I am beginning to question that decision. I don't blame anyone for making it. I'm just now starting to come around that it was probably wrong. First, yes the OL was terrible and isn't much better this year. But, that is really part of the reason the logic was flawed. Even in 2014 and 2015, the OL was more or less the same talent and almost the same exact personnel as last year. So, why did he flourish in front of the same shitty line for 3 years and then all of a sudden he needs an OL? I still don't believe the talent has diminished significantly. But, I do think several years of being a sitting duck finally started to take a toll. It was especially bad last year as the injuries mounted. They had nothing on offense.
Now, in 2014-2015, McAdoo was the OC and by most accounts the O was a collaborative effort between him and Coughlin to combat a bad OL. It worked. But, as HC, McAdoo seemed to take more control of the O and did a much worse job of combatting the OL. He also was one of those HC's that was stubborn to a fault, refusing to adapt or adjust. During those 2 years, Eli still flourished with OBJ, but had nothing else and when OBJ got hurt, the whole thing really fell apart. The whole benching became a PR nightmare, but I really don't think that is why we are where we are.
I only hope, that this neww regime handles the situation better. For example, it would be nice to see Lauletta as opposed to Tanney, if they should bench Eli. But, the reality is regardless of what happens this year, it is making more and more sense for this to be Eli's last year here. IF the accounts are correct that cutting him would save $17M against the cap, giben everything we have seen, how can they not do that? That's the money for whomoever is the best OL out there, for example. The only other alternative is to restructure his deal, which at his age just doesn't add up.
All this said, I still don't think they made a mistake taking Barkley. Every week he proves he was the best player in the draft. He more than hit the ground running (literally and figuratively); he may even be the best RB in the league. Yes, they will still be looking for Eli's successor. But, I have yet to see anything from the top 4 that says they will be legitimate decade plus franchise QBs. There have been flashes in this young season and they should all get better. But, I don't see anyone truly special. Certainly, none of them are even nearly as good as Barkley. So, now improving the OL is about Barkley, not Eli. Keep Barkley healthy and he is the generational player. From the looks of it, we just may be in line for the top QB this year, who really isn't less special than any of the 4 from last year. The only difference is there isn't a cluster of 4 good, but not great QBs. Frankly, I'm still not convinced that Jackson won't be as good or better than the 4 QBs taken ahead of him.
I still believe there is enough talent on this team to be optimistic for the future. There still are just enough holes and not enough depth for that future to begin now. But, an offseason with that extra cap money and a concentration on OL, LB, FS, and CB (probably in that order) could really make this a good team as early as next year. Let's not forget, we will still have OBJ, Barkley, Shepard, Snacks, Engram, Collins (likely, but not a given) and some promising talent in Hill, Tomlinson, among others. Hell, even Apple is looking promising.
It's sad to think they may be better as soon as next season without Eli, but it just may be true. And, no matter what, I will wish him the best. If he thinks he can still play, I hope he lands on a team with an OL so he can shine for another season or two. Whether he continues elsewhere or hangs them up, I really want him to finally get the credit and recognition he deserves. He has been a whipping boy for too much of the media, NFL fans, and even too many Giants fans for far too long. He may be one of those guys that is never really fully appreciated until they are gone.
Just don't sell me the baloney about decisions made for PR or the backlash for fans. For a few years, there really was that glimpse of how much better he could have been stats-wise in a less risk averse system than what he played in for the first 3/4 of his career. I for one, will always recognize his greatness and will really miss him. But, at some point this season, it will be time to finally move on. Thank you Eli. You are a true professional.
-John Mara said he wanted Eli back when DG was hired.
-DG mentioned how well Eli played against Philly during his introductory press conference. He also said, “Eli put 2 rings on my fingers.”
I think the fan backlash shocked Mara & he didn’t *mandate* Eli return, but it is what he wanted to hear.
Correct.
And any of the candidates in the "sham GM search" that provided a different view of that were NOT going to be given any consideration for the job.
So the owner already had his mind made up. He just needed someone that went along with his idea. I was not a mandate at all, but at that point it is just semantics.
SCENARIO:
Mara to Gettleman: "I really believe Eli can still play and we can win with him. What do you think?"
Gettleman to Mara: "Absolutely. If we can make some changes to the o-line and get a running game in here around Eli, we can help out the defense and we can make a run at the playoffs next season."
Mara to Gettleman: "You want the job?"
Gettleman to Mara: "I'll take it."
END OF SCENARIO
Just like that, I can see how it went down. No mandate. A simple conversation that doesn't forced anything. Just two like minded folk coming to the same conclusion.
This thread is not needed to disparage some "secretly-designed conspiracy plot". What went down was natural thinking of the guys in charge of making the decisions. However, it didn't work out and they fucked up. So now they have to fix it.
Bw is not out of bounds with his thinking, he just amplifies it enough in his posts to get you chuckleheads fired up.
And sure enough some of you take the bait every time...
Everyone keep saying we “wasted” a year which also doesn’t fully make sense. Getting a generational talent on the roster isn’t a waste, and having that in place can expedite how quickly Eli’s replacement can come into his own.
We didn't waste a year by selecting generational-talent Barkley, we wasted a year if not two years, keeping Eli under center.
wake up...
Quote:
Everyone keep saying we “wasted” a year which also doesn’t fully make sense. Getting a generational talent on the roster isn’t a waste, and having that in place can expedite how quickly Eli’s replacement can come into his own.
We didn't waste a year by selecting generational-talent Barkley, we wasted a year if not two years, keeping Eli under center.
wake up...
What was your solution?
Well you have said it’s been years coming of his decline. So let’s say after 2015 when he threw for over 4400 yards and 35 TDS.
In early 2016 it was pretty apparent there were differences in his game and they were coming on quickly. The offense was dead as door-nail in most games only waiting for the 70 yard run and catch from OBJ. Eli turned mostly into game manager as he rode the hot defense. Downhill from there.
Based on his age and these eroding skills, there were clear cut risks in keeping him under center for "one more run".
In early 2016 it was pretty apparent there were differences in his game and they were coming on quickly. The offense was dead as door-nail in most games only waiting for the 70 yard run and catch from OBJ. Eli turned mostly into game manager as he rode the hot defense. Downhill from there.
Based on his age and these eroding skills, there were clear cut risks in keeping him under center for "one more run".
So lets get this straight?
1. In a year which the Giants went 11-5 and a playoff berth, you wanted to upgrade the most important position on the team or at least rebuild it?
2. You keep mentioning he was a game manager and relied on OBJ - well wasnt a problem the rest of the offensive weapons (who I believe are ALL out of football outside SS) had nothing to do with ineptness of the offense?
3. The Giants ranked 29th in YPG in rushing and 30th YPA in rushing. Despite being in every game and winning a lot of them. Again, huge problem.
The time to find his successor was not after 2016, it was after 2017.
Here is where the problem has been for years. Eli sure wasnt great in 2016. We agree there. But in a year after we couldnt run the ball, Eli getting older, and the OL wasnt good to begin with.... ad Ryan Ramcyzk sitting right there for them to take. Plug him right iin and the OL is upgraded. Instead, Reese went with a shiny new toy. Then in the 2nd round, they drafted another a solid player who has yet to make a big impact than a guy like Dion Dawkins who again was sitting there right for the taking.
Eli's fading skills were there. You are right about that. But instead of investing where we needed help or even building for the future..... Reese just failed miserably in the 2017 draft. I believe the rebuild would be much quicker if he invested in the spot where we needed the most help.
The 2017 draft is going to look as an object failure in a few years. Lets not even get into Webb - if you see who was taken after him.... not only are there quality starters but pro bowl type players who went right after him (Golladay, and a whole slew of corners who are impacting their current teams.)
We also traded up for a guy and gave away a pick to a guy who didnt even make the team and is already gone. We had 6 picks in that draft and 3 of them didnt even make the tam this year.
Quote:
the rebirth/extension in his game from having OBJ around each week.
In early 2016 it was pretty apparent there were differences in his game and they were coming on quickly. The offense was dead as door-nail in most games only waiting for the 70 yard run and catch from OBJ. Eli turned mostly into game manager as he rode the hot defense. Downhill from there.
Based on his age and these eroding skills, there were clear cut risks in keeping him under center for "one more run".
So lets get this straight?
1. In a year which the Giants went 11-5 and a playoff berth, you wanted to upgrade the most important position on the team or at least rebuild it?
2. You keep mentioning he was a game manager and relied on OBJ - well wasnt a problem the rest of the offensive weapons (who I believe are ALL out of football outside SS) had nothing to do with ineptness of the offense?
3. The Giants ranked 29th in YPG in rushing and 30th YPA in rushing. Despite being in every game and winning a lot of them. Again, huge problem.
The time to find his successor was not after 2016, it was after 2017.
If you agree that the signs of decline were there, than after 2016 was the right time. It's better to be early than late.
2017 should have been used to groom the new QB with the taking the helm midway through the season.
2017 was already too late, as we're witnessing now.
And even if you wanted to get the successor..... Mahomes and Watson were gone. So they were not an option. The 3rd QB taken was a disaster and their team gave up on him after year one. The 4th QB taken (Webb) has already been cut.
So even if you wanted to find the successor - was one even there?
Apple was a reach. Engram, who I like, was a reach. Both could have been had in my mind by moving around a bit in Rd 1/Rd 2 if they were so important AND we could have picked add'l draft collateral to invest in the OL. Reese didn't.
After watching Eli in 2017, doubling down on the risk with staying with him was a colossal mistake. Love SB...dont get me wrong but we are wasting time without a QB.
See, this is why we cannot see eye-to-eye. Nobody said Eli wax awful in 2016, but he certainly wasn't winning us games. Our offense with him at the helm was putrid. His big time throws that season were earlier and few and far between.
Don't mistake one half of a game in Green Bay as "he still has it"...
I just really hated the 2017 draft from top to bottom. And its not that I hate either Engram or Tomlinson. I think they can be good players - but we werent addressing DIRE needs: whether it be OL/QB. I think small decisions like these set franchises back.
And its a shame for Saquan. He is an amazing player so we did get a great player. I just hope whoever suceeds Eli can produce quickly. Because he will have prime Bark and a great OBJ.
Quote:
here on BBI. He wasnt awful in 2016. He just wasnt as good as he was the 2 years before. Plus, he did have some big time drives and throws that won a lot of games. And of course he played really well in the playoff game.
See, this is why we cannot see eye-to-eye. Nobody said Eli wax awful in 2016, but he certainly wasn't winning us games. Our offense with him at the helm was putrid. His big time throws that season were earlier and few and far between.
Don't mistake one half of a game in Green Bay as "he still has it"...
Let me rephrase. He made big throws to win us games. Maybe not played that won games. I mean he did have big throws that set us up with wins against Dallas, NO, Baltimore. Had some big moments in other games. Yes OBJ was the main reason for it. But there were games we won despite not being able to run the ball.
Based solely on his QBing though, my view was the NYG were not going to be winners again after 2016 with him under center.
Its bizarre and ponderous to think otherwise....(a little fun there)...
Wanting and getting are two different things. In order to get Mahomes, we would have had to give up our 2017 first and our first in this year drafts. Mahomes would be set up for direct failure. Wanting a player would have been nice - but with all the holes this team has..... they would be even greater with that trade.
I am not sure the options were there. We took the 4th picked QB and it was a disaster.
Quote:
into the complexities of Eli's contract, what younger more athletic QBs in the league could have been pursued
I am not sure the options were there. We took the 4th picked QB and it was a disaster.
If the GM and the coaches developed non-1st rd picks anyway like they did their primary jobs, its no wonder...
Quote:
into the complexities of Eli's contract, what younger more athletic QBs in the league could have been pursued
I am not sure the options were there. We took the 4th picked QB and it was a disaster.
didnt just mean the draft...
Quote:
I don't think it's incredibly improbable or clarevoyant to posit the Giants should have looked QB after 2016. It was an incredibly poorly kept secret McAdoo wanted Mahomes.
Wanting and getting are two different things. In order to get Mahomes, we would have had to give up our 2017 first and our first in this year drafts. Mahomes would be set up for direct failure. Wanting a player would have been nice - but with all the holes this team has..... they would be even greater with that trade.
I'm just commenting on the wisdom and desire for a QB after Manning's good 2016 season.
I susbcribe to the Belichick school of drafting QBs frequently, even when the incumbent is playing well.
Manning playing well in 2016 should not have been a disuading factor to find a replacement.