I have no idea who they play or when they play (although I think it's Atlanta) and they stink on ice, but watching Barkley is so damn entertaining. He just needs the OL to not be awful. Just be average and Barkley will put on a show. Be above average to great. My Lord, it will be fun to watch.
but I stumbled upon that on Twitter and enjoyed listening to it. Barkley has surpassed even the highest of expectations placed on him - it's incredible what he's doing.
why people say Sam Darnold was the pick for the Giants and even though Saquon is great, they made a mistake. You'd think Darnold is a hall of fame lock and there will never be a QB like him ever again..
Every Giants fan would have been happy with the pick ... Â
... if they knew DG's master plan in advance. That is, the 2018 Giants would be God awful and they will have the opportunity to go QB in 2019. Everyone wins! I wanted Darnold but he is so damn awesome and fun to watch that I'm glad he's a Giant.
My assumption is there will never be a right or wrong answer Â
to the Barkley/Darnold debate. This isn't Sam Bowie/Michael Jordan. The pressure is on the Giants, however, to find a suitable replacement for Eli in time to maximize Barkley's impact.
I was just saying to a Raiders fan friend of mine that... Â
to the Barkley/Darnold debate. This isn't Sam Bowie/Michael Jordan.
It ain't Hakeem Olajuwon vs Michael Jordan either. I'm unconvinced that Darnold will be anything special, but hey I could be wrong. I haven't really followed his games with the Jets other than to look at the box score.
and for those BBIers that mock the stupid “hand of god” comment and beat it to death, well...jokes on you. He’s that fucking good. If the Giants fuck up gettijg Eli’s replacement, that’s on them. They’ve laid a foundation for a QB to come in an excel right away.
I'm a big fan of his. I've never thought of him as some legendary player in the making - more of an Eli/Simms type, which is why I thought he'd be a perfect fit for us (obviously).
I agree, however, this narrative being pushed that the Giants missed their only chance to secure a franchise QB is quite the exaggeration. The media - and Jets fans - are enjoying the current doom and gloom, but things change quickly. Would it surprise anyone if the Giants are outperforming the Jets within a year or two? Good young QBs enter the league every year, and ours will have a damn good supporting cast to help him.
Not that it was anything special because a lot of scouts were using superlatives in their description of Barkley as well, but I had LaDainian Tomlinson as his only peer in the last 25 years coming out of the draft. I still believe that, he's been as good as advertised but frankly I know he isn't even having his best games yet. There will be video game numbers games for him...250-300 scrimmage yards and 3 or 4 TDs. I know that may sound crazy, but it's going to happen and there's a chance it happens on MNF in this game against the Falcons that are really hurting in the middle of their defense.
Because I just can’t wrap around my head how his body can move the way it does at his size. The
This is one of the reasons I preferred Rosen to Barkley in the draft even though the big knock on Rosen was durability. I watched a highlight reel of Barkley and thought this guy is not going to last running like that in the NFL. Fingers crossed, hope I was wrong about that.
The media - and Jets fans - are enjoying the current doom and gloom, but things change quickly. Would it surprise anyone if the Giants are outperforming the Jets within a year or two? Good young QBs enter the league every year
And good rookie years don't always translate to good careers. From Rick Mirer to RG3, the league has seen their share of one-hit wonders at the QB position.
Not that it was anything special because a lot of scouts were using superlatives in their description of Barkley as well, but I had LaDainian Tomlinson as his only peer in the last 25 years coming out of the draft.
looked like a Street Fighter II combo. Not one wasted movement. Each move flowed into the next, where the end of a move became the beginning of the next move. Incredible...incredible. lol
I think Darnold is going to be a very good Qb and possibly great GB. However Barkley is truly a special player and person. I don't think its an exaggeration to say he is the perfect running back.
I'm happy and surprised the Browns did not select him. Then either hope one of the QBs falls to 4 or move up to grab one...
I'm a big fan of his. I've never thought of him as some legendary player in the making - more of an Eli/Simms type, which is why I thought he'd be a perfect fit for us (obviously).
I agree, however, this narrative being pushed that the Giants missed their only chance to secure a franchise QB is quite the exaggeration. The media - and Jets fans - are enjoying the current doom and gloom, but things change quickly. Would it surprise anyone if the Giants are outperforming the Jets within a year or two? Good young QBs enter the league every year, and ours will have a damn good supporting cast to help him.
Exactly. The thing is, Winston and Mariota had great rookie seasons. They were both better than Darnold thus far in their rookie seasons. If the Rams had their pick of the two and took Gurley, would they regret it today? They might've during the season or the following season, but today? Not a chance in hell. Link - ( New Window )
Because I just can’t wrap around my head how his body can move the way it does at his size. The
At 6' tall amd 230 lbs, he may just be the perfect size for his position. Tyreek Hill might be the fastest human wearing a football helment right now, but he's 5'10 and 185 lbs. Nobody can keep up with him now, but check back in a few years.
Brandon Jacobs was the flip side case - in a way, he was too tall to play running back. Guys would tackle him low, and his knees would take the brunt of it. Nothing dirty about it, but that's what tackling a guy low means when the guy in question is 6'4.
If guys tackle Barkley low, he's catching them in his quads and thighs, probably the most muscularly dense parts of his body. And considering how athletic he is jumping over people, defenders may not even want to tackle him low.
looked like a Street Fighter II combo. Not one wasted movement. Each move flowed into the next, where the end of a move became the beginning of the next move. Incredible...incredible. lol
It's like watching a 233 lb Barishnikov. And he has the belly-fire!
At 6' tall amd 230 lbs, he may just be the perfect size for his position. Tyreek Hill might be the fastest human wearing a football helment right now, but he's 5'10 and 185 lbs. Nobody can keep up with him now, but check back in a few years.
Brandon Jacobs was the flip side case - in a way, he was too tall to play running back. Guys would tackle him low, and his knees would take the brunt of it. Nothing dirty about it, but that's what tackling a guy low means when the guy in question is 6'4.
If guys tackle Barkley low, he's catching them in his quads and thighs, probably the most muscularly dense parts of his body. And considering how athletic he is jumping over people, defenders may not even want to tackle him low.
I'm not worried about him getting hurt because of getting hit. I'm worried about him getting hurt when he plants his foot to make a jump-cut that no one else in the league can even think about making. Or when he lands awkwardly after a hurdling a defender with major air (already had a scare vs. Carolina).
Hopefully we can get him a better O-Line like Dallas or St. Louis so that he doesn't have to rely on crazy moves as much.
On his podcast Simmons also said that if Darnold ends up as good as Philip Rivers then it was a bad pick by the Giants.
It's not as simple as "Barkley is fun to watch". I agree that he looks incredible, but if it doesn't amount to wins then so what? In another thread yesterday Jerry in DC shared compelling statistical evidence that passing, not rushing, correlates to wins and playoff appearances.
Barkley looks amazing and right now he's the only thing we have that's good, but that doesn't mean he was the right pick. I'd rather be boring and win.
was not that he was hurdling bodies, but he was hurdling attempted tackles in a maze. it was like watching a skier slalom mogels that were moving. i'm sold. but also worried about his health. the Giants owe/owed Eli a credible O line and they owe Barkely the same. let's hope they get it right. it's not going to happen overnight. Eli's ulitmate replacement is going to need an O line as well.
Barkley has 40 receptions for 373 yards and 2 TD's through 6 games. He is on pace for a 100 catch year as a rookie.
I'd say he's doing his part in the pass game.
How much of that has come in garbage time after the game is set as a loss? Or how much of that is a 10 yard dump off on 3rd and 15?
Not his fault. He's doing fantastic things on a terrible team. It just doesn't equate to wins. I'm not blaming him, I'm pointing to the philosophy of the pick from a roster construction standpoint.
I expect he'll continue to make fantastic plays, and I expect it will continue to not matter.
On his podcast Simmons also said that if Darnold ends up as good as Philip Rivers then it was a bad pick by the Giants.
It's not as simple as "Barkley is fun to watch". I agree that he looks incredible, but if it doesn't amount to wins then so what? In another thread yesterday Jerry in DC shared compelling statistical evidence that passing, not rushing, correlates to wins and playoff appearances.
Barkley looks amazing and right now he's the only thing we have that's good, but that doesn't mean he was the right pick. I'd rather be boring and win.
Barkley makes big plays in the passing game too. I totally on board with the view the Jags wasted #4 on Fournette. Elliott was trickier because of the dominant OL being such a great fit. I think it's much trickier to say the Giants wasted #2.
Barkley is a significantly better player than either guy going #4 overall.
A QB wouldn't equate to wins either, though. Not this year.
That's the main issue.
We could have taken literally anyone in this draft and we'd almost certainly still be 1-5 or worse right now.
If we had Sam Darnold instead of Saquon Barkley, Darnold would still be running for his life, we'd have Wayne Gallman as our lead back and ??? behind him. We'd be turning the ball over like crazy, we'd have no running game and the offense would still be terrible.
Unless anyone is convinced that we won't be able to get a QB as good as Darnold in an upcoming draft.. which I don't buy.. then I don't see what makes it a bad pick.
I also realize that Barkley has a bunch of checkdown receptions and catches in garbage time - but he also has some pretty big ones. Including a huge 3rd down conversion in Houston on a pass down the right sideline.
He is fantastic as a dual threat and is one of the best players in the league. We need talent. No one player was going to fix this in one offseason even if it was a QB.
If we wind up with someone like Herbert, and he's on Darnold's level or better, then Barkley would appear to very much be the correct pick, in my opinion.
It's hard for me to agree that the best player in a draft could be a bad pick or a wrong pick because none of the alternatives would have improved the Giants any more than he has so far.
On his podcast Simmons also said that if Darnold ends up as good as Philip Rivers then it was a bad pick by the Giants.
It's not as simple as "Barkley is fun to watch". I agree that he looks incredible, but if it doesn't amount to wins then so what? In another thread yesterday Jerry in DC shared compelling statistical evidence that passing, not rushing, correlates to wins and playoff appearances.
Barkley looks amazing and right now he's the only thing we have that's good, but that doesn't mean he was the right pick. I'd rather be boring and win.
+1.
And it's simple math - if the Giants come away with a good QB from this draft (or FA, whatever) - it's fine.
If they don't - and it turns out they passed on a good or better QB in this draft, then it's irrelevant, since you don't win without a good QB in this league.
That's a myth we are perpetuating here because it feels good. He is super raw. We draft him and we're drafting tools that need to be refined and coached for the NFL game. You trust Shurmur and Shula to do that? I don't.
I say this as a guy that was skeptical about Darnold coming out... Herbert isn't close as a project, IMO. At least not on this team with these coaches.
A QB wouldn't equate to wins either, though. Not this year.
That's the main issue.
We could have taken literally anyone in this draft and we'd almost certainly still be 1-5 or worse right now.
If we had Sam Darnold instead of Saquon Barkley, Darnold would still be running for his life, we'd have Wayne Gallman as our lead back and ??? behind him. We'd be turning the ball over like crazy, we'd have no running game and the offense would still be terrible.
Unless anyone is convinced that we won't be able to get a QB as good as Darnold in an upcoming draft.. which I don't buy.. then I don't see what makes it a bad pick.
I also realize that Barkley has a bunch of checkdown receptions and catches in garbage time - but he also has some pretty big ones. Including a huge 3rd down conversion in Houston on a pass down the right sideline.
He is fantastic as a dual threat and is one of the best players in the league. We need talent. No one player was going to fix this in one offseason even if it was a QB.
If we wind up with someone like Herbert, and he's on Darnold's level or better, then Barkley would appear to very much be the correct pick, in my opinion.
It's hard for me to agree that the best player in a draft could be a bad pick or a wrong pick because none of the alternatives would have improved the Giants any more than he has so far.
That's a myth we are perpetuating here because it feels good. He is super raw. We draft him and we're drafting tools that need to be refined and coached for the NFL game. You trust Shurmur and Shula to do that? I don't.
I say this as a guy that was skeptical about Darnold coming out... Herbert isn't close as a project, IMO. At least not on this team with these coaches.
Absolutely no way of knowing that now. Cannot state opinions as facts.
Herbert has excellent size and tools. He's accurate, he can move, and he can be every bit as good as Sam Darnold.
Unless you're a qualified scout, what you put in your title field is bullshit. No one knows that.
On his podcast Simmons also said that if Darnold ends up as good as Philip Rivers then it was a bad pick by the Giants.
It's not as simple as "Barkley is fun to watch". I agree that he looks incredible, but if it doesn't amount to wins then so what? In another thread yesterday Jerry in DC shared compelling statistical evidence that passing, not rushing, correlates to wins and playoff appearances.
Barkley looks amazing and right now he's the only thing we have that's good, but that doesn't mean he was the right pick. I'd rather be boring and win.
But he’s not why it wouldn’t amount to wins. If the Giants can’t find a new QB they have failed. Sure, getting a QB is harder but I don’t buy hat they can’t put together a competitive team when almost every other franchise can.
I also care about being entertained and Barkley does that. Winning is fun too and of course I want that but I’ll take plenty of enjoyment watching Barkley play. If you won’t, hat sucks for you.
And if we don't trust Pat Shurmur or Mike Shula to develop a QB, it shouldn't matter who we take.
You'd trust them with Sam Darnold but not Justin Herbert?
You were gung ho on one of the rawest QB prospects in recent memory in Lamar Jackson... who might not even play QB in the NFL. You actually said you thought he was the best player in the draft, right? But Justin Herbert is where we draw the line as being too raw of a prospect?
He needs to improve in certain areas - he needs to cycle through reads faster. His progressions are where he needs the most work. But he's loaded with ability.
Maybe Herbert isn't even the guy we wind up with.
My point is - Sam Darnold looks pretty good. He doesn't look like a generational player that we'll never have another shot at.
You don't even know if he'll be available for us to draft, and yet you're comfortable using him to support an argument for drafting Barkley. The guy could be Joe Montana - assuming we'll get him in the draft is problematic.
Regarding Herbert I'll also add that he grew up in Eugene. I don't know if he's ever been spent significant time west of the Cascades, let alone in the New York metro area. As someone that's been out here from Jersey a couple years I can tell you it's a pretty damn different place. I'd expect it to be quite an adjustment for him. All while sharing a locker room with Beckham and a couple other first round offensive players.
And that's if we even get him, which is an enormous assumption in and of itself.
A QB wouldn't equate to wins either, though. Not this year.
That's the main issue.
We could have taken literally anyone in this draft and we'd almost certainly still be 1-5 or worse right now.
If we had Sam Darnold instead of Saquon Barkley, Darnold would still be running for his life, we'd have Wayne Gallman as our lead back and ??? behind him. We'd be turning the ball over like crazy, we'd have no running game and the offense would still be terrible.
Unless anyone is convinced that we won't be able to get a QB as good as Darnold in an upcoming draft.. which I don't buy.. then I don't see what makes it a bad pick.
I also realize that Barkley has a bunch of checkdown receptions and catches in garbage time - but he also has some pretty big ones. Including a huge 3rd down conversion in Houston on a pass down the right sideline.
He is fantastic as a dual threat and is one of the best players in the league. We need talent. No one player was going to fix this in one offseason even if it was a QB.
If we wind up with someone like Herbert, and he's on Darnold's level or better, then Barkley would appear to very much be the correct pick, in my opinion.
It's hard for me to agree that the best player in a draft could be a bad pick or a wrong pick because none of the alternatives would have improved the Giants any more than he has so far.
I'm confident that the Giants are bad enough right now that they will be able to draft Justin Herbert if they really want him.
The two teams who look worse than us right now are Arizona and Buffalo. They both just drafted QB's and neither are a threat to take him.
Tennessee is invested in Mariota still, so they won't either.
Unless the Raiders move Derek Carr, they are committed to him for a while.
IND has Andrew Luck. ATL will stick with Ryan. SF just paid Garropolo.
Outside of maybe Denver, we're not going to have much competition as far as QB suitors go in the upcoming draft.
If Gruden or the Tennessee GM love Herbert, having Carr and Mariota won't stop them from selecting him. It's actually a good year for both times to move on if they are unhappy with their QBs.
But more importantly, if the team with the #1 pick doesn't need a QB, they will sell the pick for a king's ransom, so it matters not who is #1 if it's not the Giants.
If I'm running the Giants I enter 2019 with Lauletta as the quarterback. I hopefully find someone that's in love with Herbert or Bosa or someone else and I trade down to accumulate picks.
If we still look this incompetent (which I am fairly sure we will), Lauletta should be playing as soon as Week 10 following the bye.
Only if they think Lauletta gives them a better chance to win. It's not all about the QB. There are ten other guys on offense who are still learning the system. If Eli is the QB who gives them a better chance of keeping the chains moving, keeping the defense off the field, then he should be the one out there.
On the other hand, if there should come a time when they are convinced that they it doesn't make sense to bring Eli (and the $17M in compensation he is due) back next year, it might make sense to give Lauletta two or three starts at the end of the season. But the 9th game is too soon to start the rookie if you don't truly believe he makes the offense better, not worse.
You were more than skeptical about Darnold. You compared him to Leftwich. It’s very early to tell who may work & not work in the NFL for any of these college QB’s.
We are at the point where everyone is overreacting now. I heard Colin Coeherd today say the Jets would own the town for 10 years. People talk like Barkley is a bust. I do think the next few weeks are crucial - can Gettleman trade some of these vets for draft picks?
I agree with your take on Lauletta, I’d rather play him with his cheap salary then settle/talk into a reach QB early (see Ereck Flowers). I know the NFL isn’t Madden, but this is what I’d do:
-Start Lauletta ASAP
-Trade anyone not named Barkley for picks
-I don’t know if it’s doable, but trade Beckham after the season. He’d be happier elsewhere & the team/culture would improve here.
-Use the draft to go BPA again, build up the trenches.
Those moves would go a long way in building a more cost effective team with a lot less drama. 1-5 with a bunch of high priced guys doesn’t work, if we are going to struggle, let’s at least root for a young/scrappy bunch of guys.
And if Lauletta stinks, maybe we have a shot at the Alabama QB in 2020 or whoever else comes about. If the 2019 QB class is uninspiring, maybe Lauletta does make the most sense.
I agree, however, this narrative being pushed that the Giants missed their only chance to secure a franchise QB is quite the exaggeration. The media - and Jets fans - are enjoying the current doom and gloom, but things change quickly. Would it surprise anyone if the Giants are outperforming the Jets within a year or two? Good young QBs enter the league every year, and ours will have a damn good supporting cast to help him.
Hopefully he has a long career with us because he is a truly special talent. Agree with those above, better than advertised
Try Gale Sayers instead - ( New Window )
I'm happy and surprised the Browns did not select him. Then either hope one of the QBs falls to 4 or move up to grab one...
I agree, however, this narrative being pushed that the Giants missed their only chance to secure a franchise QB is quite the exaggeration. The media - and Jets fans - are enjoying the current doom and gloom, but things change quickly. Would it surprise anyone if the Giants are outperforming the Jets within a year or two? Good young QBs enter the league every year, and ours will have a damn good supporting cast to help him.
Exactly. The thing is, Winston and Mariota had great rookie seasons. They were both better than Darnold thus far in their rookie seasons. If the Rams had their pick of the two and took Gurley, would they regret it today? They might've during the season or the following season, but today? Not a chance in hell.
Link - ( New Window )
At 6' tall amd 230 lbs, he may just be the perfect size for his position. Tyreek Hill might be the fastest human wearing a football helment right now, but he's 5'10 and 185 lbs. Nobody can keep up with him now, but check back in a few years.
Brandon Jacobs was the flip side case - in a way, he was too tall to play running back. Guys would tackle him low, and his knees would take the brunt of it. Nothing dirty about it, but that's what tackling a guy low means when the guy in question is 6'4.
If guys tackle Barkley low, he's catching them in his quads and thighs, probably the most muscularly dense parts of his body. And considering how athletic he is jumping over people, defenders may not even want to tackle him low.
There is no other remotely reasonable explanation. Not even close!
And screw rat claws and his Sling Blade personality. "I love them french fried pertaters, mmmm hmmm."
It's like watching a 233 lb Barishnikov. And he has the belly-fire!
Manish Mehta and Mike Francesa love Darnold, so no worries. Or as Mike would say, "werries".
At 6' tall amd 230 lbs, he may just be the perfect size for his position. Tyreek Hill might be the fastest human wearing a football helment right now, but he's 5'10 and 185 lbs. Nobody can keep up with him now, but check back in a few years.
Brandon Jacobs was the flip side case - in a way, he was too tall to play running back. Guys would tackle him low, and his knees would take the brunt of it. Nothing dirty about it, but that's what tackling a guy low means when the guy in question is 6'4.
If guys tackle Barkley low, he's catching them in his quads and thighs, probably the most muscularly dense parts of his body. And considering how athletic he is jumping over people, defenders may not even want to tackle him low.
I'm not worried about him getting hurt because of getting hit. I'm worried about him getting hurt when he plants his foot to make a jump-cut that no one else in the league can even think about making. Or when he lands awkwardly after a hurdling a defender with major air (already had a scare vs. Carolina).
Hopefully we can get him a better O-Line like Dallas or St. Louis so that he doesn't have to rely on crazy moves as much.
It's not as simple as "Barkley is fun to watch". I agree that he looks incredible, but if it doesn't amount to wins then so what? In another thread yesterday Jerry in DC shared compelling statistical evidence that passing, not rushing, correlates to wins and playoff appearances.
Barkley looks amazing and right now he's the only thing we have that's good, but that doesn't mean he was the right pick. I'd rather be boring and win.
I'd say he's doing his part in the pass game.
I'd say he's doing his part in the pass game.
How much of that has come in garbage time after the game is set as a loss? Or how much of that is a 10 yard dump off on 3rd and 15?
Not his fault. He's doing fantastic things on a terrible team. It just doesn't equate to wins. I'm not blaming him, I'm pointing to the philosophy of the pick from a roster construction standpoint.
I expect he'll continue to make fantastic plays, and I expect it will continue to not matter.
It's not as simple as "Barkley is fun to watch". I agree that he looks incredible, but if it doesn't amount to wins then so what? In another thread yesterday Jerry in DC shared compelling statistical evidence that passing, not rushing, correlates to wins and playoff appearances.
Barkley looks amazing and right now he's the only thing we have that's good, but that doesn't mean he was the right pick. I'd rather be boring and win.
Barkley makes big plays in the passing game too. I totally on board with the view the Jags wasted #4 on Fournette. Elliott was trickier because of the dominant OL being such a great fit. I think it's much trickier to say the Giants wasted #2.
Barkley is a significantly better player than either guy going #4 overall.
That's the main issue.
We could have taken literally anyone in this draft and we'd almost certainly still be 1-5 or worse right now.
If we had Sam Darnold instead of Saquon Barkley, Darnold would still be running for his life, we'd have Wayne Gallman as our lead back and ??? behind him. We'd be turning the ball over like crazy, we'd have no running game and the offense would still be terrible.
Unless anyone is convinced that we won't be able to get a QB as good as Darnold in an upcoming draft.. which I don't buy.. then I don't see what makes it a bad pick.
I also realize that Barkley has a bunch of checkdown receptions and catches in garbage time - but he also has some pretty big ones. Including a huge 3rd down conversion in Houston on a pass down the right sideline.
He is fantastic as a dual threat and is one of the best players in the league. We need talent. No one player was going to fix this in one offseason even if it was a QB.
If we wind up with someone like Herbert, and he's on Darnold's level or better, then Barkley would appear to very much be the correct pick, in my opinion.
It's hard for me to agree that the best player in a draft could be a bad pick or a wrong pick because none of the alternatives would have improved the Giants any more than he has so far.
It's not as simple as "Barkley is fun to watch". I agree that he looks incredible, but if it doesn't amount to wins then so what? In another thread yesterday Jerry in DC shared compelling statistical evidence that passing, not rushing, correlates to wins and playoff appearances.
Barkley looks amazing and right now he's the only thing we have that's good, but that doesn't mean he was the right pick. I'd rather be boring and win.
+1.
And it's simple math - if the Giants come away with a good QB from this draft (or FA, whatever) - it's fine.
If they don't - and it turns out they passed on a good or better QB in this draft, then it's irrelevant, since you don't win without a good QB in this league.
I say this as a guy that was skeptical about Darnold coming out... Herbert isn't close as a project, IMO. At least not on this team with these coaches.
That's the main issue.
We could have taken literally anyone in this draft and we'd almost certainly still be 1-5 or worse right now.
If we had Sam Darnold instead of Saquon Barkley, Darnold would still be running for his life, we'd have Wayne Gallman as our lead back and ??? behind him. We'd be turning the ball over like crazy, we'd have no running game and the offense would still be terrible.
Unless anyone is convinced that we won't be able to get a QB as good as Darnold in an upcoming draft.. which I don't buy.. then I don't see what makes it a bad pick.
I also realize that Barkley has a bunch of checkdown receptions and catches in garbage time - but he also has some pretty big ones. Including a huge 3rd down conversion in Houston on a pass down the right sideline.
He is fantastic as a dual threat and is one of the best players in the league. We need talent. No one player was going to fix this in one offseason even if it was a QB.
If we wind up with someone like Herbert, and he's on Darnold's level or better, then Barkley would appear to very much be the correct pick, in my opinion.
It's hard for me to agree that the best player in a draft could be a bad pick or a wrong pick because none of the alternatives would have improved the Giants any more than he has so far.
Stop making sense.
I say this as a guy that was skeptical about Darnold coming out... Herbert isn't close as a project, IMO. At least not on this team with these coaches.
Absolutely no way of knowing that now. Cannot state opinions as facts.
Herbert has excellent size and tools. He's accurate, he can move, and he can be every bit as good as Sam Darnold.
Unless you're a qualified scout, what you put in your title field is bullshit. No one knows that.
It's not as simple as "Barkley is fun to watch". I agree that he looks incredible, but if it doesn't amount to wins then so what? In another thread yesterday Jerry in DC shared compelling statistical evidence that passing, not rushing, correlates to wins and playoff appearances.
Barkley looks amazing and right now he's the only thing we have that's good, but that doesn't mean he was the right pick. I'd rather be boring and win.
But he’s not why it wouldn’t amount to wins. If the Giants can’t find a new QB they have failed. Sure, getting a QB is harder but I don’t buy hat they can’t put together a competitive team when almost every other franchise can.
I also care about being entertained and Barkley does that. Winning is fun too and of course I want that but I’ll take plenty of enjoyment watching Barkley play. If you won’t, hat sucks for you.
You'd trust them with Sam Darnold but not Justin Herbert?
You were gung ho on one of the rawest QB prospects in recent memory in Lamar Jackson... who might not even play QB in the NFL. You actually said you thought he was the best player in the draft, right? But Justin Herbert is where we draw the line as being too raw of a prospect?
He needs to improve in certain areas - he needs to cycle through reads faster. His progressions are where he needs the most work. But he's loaded with ability.
Maybe Herbert isn't even the guy we wind up with.
My point is - Sam Darnold looks pretty good. He doesn't look like a generational player that we'll never have another shot at.
Barkley actually does.
Regarding Herbert I'll also add that he grew up in Eugene. I don't know if he's ever been spent significant time west of the Cascades, let alone in the New York metro area. As someone that's been out here from Jersey a couple years I can tell you it's a pretty damn different place. I'd expect it to be quite an adjustment for him. All while sharing a locker room with Beckham and a couple other first round offensive players.
And that's if we even get him, which is an enormous assumption in and of itself.
The two teams who look worse than us right now are Arizona and Buffalo. They both just drafted QB's and neither are a threat to take him.
Tennessee is invested in Mariota still, so they won't either.
Unless the Raiders move Derek Carr, they are committed to him for a while.
IND has Andrew Luck. ATL will stick with Ryan. SF just paid Garropolo.
Outside of maybe Denver, we're not going to have much competition as far as QB suitors go in the upcoming draft.
That's the main issue.
We could have taken literally anyone in this draft and we'd almost certainly still be 1-5 or worse right now.
If we had Sam Darnold instead of Saquon Barkley, Darnold would still be running for his life, we'd have Wayne Gallman as our lead back and ??? behind him. We'd be turning the ball over like crazy, we'd have no running game and the offense would still be terrible.
Unless anyone is convinced that we won't be able to get a QB as good as Darnold in an upcoming draft.. which I don't buy.. then I don't see what makes it a bad pick.
I also realize that Barkley has a bunch of checkdown receptions and catches in garbage time - but he also has some pretty big ones. Including a huge 3rd down conversion in Houston on a pass down the right sideline.
He is fantastic as a dual threat and is one of the best players in the league. We need talent. No one player was going to fix this in one offseason even if it was a QB.
If we wind up with someone like Herbert, and he's on Darnold's level or better, then Barkley would appear to very much be the correct pick, in my opinion.
It's hard for me to agree that the best player in a draft could be a bad pick or a wrong pick because none of the alternatives would have improved the Giants any more than he has so far.
This
The two teams who look worse than us right now are Arizona and Buffalo. They both just drafted QB's and neither are a threat to take him.
Tennessee is invested in Mariota still, so they won't either.
Unless the Raiders move Derek Carr, they are committed to him for a while.
IND has Andrew Luck. ATL will stick with Ryan. SF just paid Garropolo.
Outside of maybe Denver, we're not going to have much competition as far as QB suitors go in the upcoming draft.
But more importantly, if the team with the #1 pick doesn't need a QB, they will sell the pick for a king's ransom, so it matters not who is #1 if it's not the Giants.
On the other hand, if there should come a time when they are convinced that they it doesn't make sense to bring Eli (and the $17M in compensation he is due) back next year, it might make sense to give Lauletta two or three starts at the end of the season. But the 9th game is too soon to start the rookie if you don't truly believe he makes the offense better, not worse.
We are at the point where everyone is overreacting now. I heard Colin Coeherd today say the Jets would own the town for 10 years. People talk like Barkley is a bust. I do think the next few weeks are crucial - can Gettleman trade some of these vets for draft picks?
I agree with your take on Lauletta, I’d rather play him with his cheap salary then settle/talk into a reach QB early (see Ereck Flowers). I know the NFL isn’t Madden, but this is what I’d do:
-Start Lauletta ASAP
-Trade anyone not named Barkley for picks
-I don’t know if it’s doable, but trade Beckham after the season. He’d be happier elsewhere & the team/culture would improve here.
-Use the draft to go BPA again, build up the trenches.
Those moves would go a long way in building a more cost effective team with a lot less drama. 1-5 with a bunch of high priced guys doesn’t work, if we are going to struggle, let’s at least root for a young/scrappy bunch of guys.
And if Lauletta stinks, maybe we have a shot at the Alabama QB in 2020 or whoever else comes about. If the 2019 QB class is uninspiring, maybe Lauletta does make the most sense.