No-brainer. Let him go to FA for what reason? Would he sign here? Fuck no. So, claim him at his contract. If we don't want him then we cut/trade him at any point for no cap hit whatsoever.
Rob, I just looked up our cap space and we have over $8M in space so there is plenty of room to take on Irvin's $3.7M for this year. If I was to make room for him, I would release Tanney. There is no sense for Alex to occupy a roster spot anymore.
RE: RE: RE: You're the dumb fuck who brought it up Â
in the first place. Yet those of us who call your chicken shit bitch ass out are homophobic?
Your grasp of reality and irony is piss poor, weirdo.
I did? Scroll up. All I said was Bruce Irvin is good but not a good fit for Giants. You brought this all up. What is downright creepy is that it isn't the first time. Kinda giving me the heeby jeebys.
You brought the Midwest Gay Club scene, bozo.
Just forget it. Let's just agree that you're a jackass and that statement you made was utter horseshit. Admit that and no one will bust your balls about it.
No I didn't. Again scroll up.
I'm not going to stoop down to your level with the name calling and all that.
It's over but just understand that between this time and the last time you did this it isn't a good look for B in ALb. The regurgitation of the dumb joke is one thing but the undercurrent is just a real indication of your feelings on the topic.
You should probably take Eric's advice from last time and just ignore my posts and don't start dumb flame wars.
No-brainer. Let him go to FA for what reason? Would he sign here? Fuck no. So, claim him at his contract. If we don't want him then we cut/trade him at any point for no cap hit whatsoever.
Rob, I just looked up our cap space and we have over $8M in space so there is plenty of room to take on Irvin's $3.7M for this year. If I was to make room for him, I would release Tanney. There is no sense for Alex to occupy a roster spot anymore.
Also, while digging around on Irvin's situation, it struck me as odd timing of his release. If he would have been released before the trade deadline, he would have been a FA as a vested veteran. The Raiders holding on to him until after the deadline exposes Irvin to waivers. Then I tried to reconcile the release being on a Saturday. Typically, if there were to be a release, an org. would drop the news at the end of the day on Friday to avoid the news cycle over the weekend. Something happened to abruptly release him.
It still baffles the fucking crap out of me that this guy thinks it's everyone else who is homophobic when he's the one who brought the stupid rumor here to begin with.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Exactly, arc. Dude is a complete homophobe evidenced by the fact that he brought up the Bullshit club scene nonsense to begin with. Hilarity.
It still baffles the fucking crap out of me that this guy thinks it's everyone else who is homophobic when he's the one who brought the stupid rumor here to begin with.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Ah. The other half.
The answer is because if someone is so bothered by that post 3 years later it obviously hits a nerve somewhere in their own thought process on the issue. My position remains now what it was then. Who cares? It's 2018 grow up.
It still baffles the fucking crap out of me that this guy thinks it's everyone else who is homophobic when he's the one who brought the stupid rumor here to begin with.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Ah. The other half.
The answer is because if someone is so bothered by that post 3 years later it obviously hits a nerve somewhere in their own thought process on the issue. My position remains now what it was then. Who cares? It's 2018 grow up.
See? Computes just fine
I don't see how mocking a post is the same as "being bothered" by it.
It still baffles the fucking crap out of me that this guy thinks it's everyone else who is homophobic when he's the one who brought the stupid rumor here to begin with.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Ah. The other half.
The answer is because if someone is so bothered by that post 3 years later it obviously hits a nerve somewhere in their own thought process on the issue. My position remains now what it was then. Who cares? It's 2018 grow up.
See? Computes just fine
Well, obviously you cared - because you were the one who brought it to the board to begin with and it was entirely unsolicited. It wasn't any of us.
There was a part of you that felt like a rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality was important enough to bring up in a place where it wasn't even being discussed.
That's the part you've been mocked for. I can't figure out why you aren't getting that. It didn't "strike a nerve" at all. The only thing that is striking a nerve is you somehow arriving at the conclusion that everyone else is homophobic.
It's like bizarro world. We were mocking you for even caring in the first place. What Aaron Rodgers does on his own time is not something I've ever looked for information on or given a shit about because it doesn't matter to me at all. I'm not interested in tabloids or back page gossip.
I'll leave you alone about it, I haven't even said anything in months. But it is annoying to see you keep labeling other people homophobes when it's completely unwarranted.
I click here to see what folks are saying about the Giants possibly picking up Irvin and THIS is the discussion?
I think you guys have all had your say. Why don't you all ignore each other at this point?
I would love that. All I did was come here to comment on Irvin. I'd love nothing more than to just have a normal conversation without the stupidity. That isn't on me.
You are trying to rewrite history. You originally brought it up out of nowhere, not once but in multiple threads. Then you argued and defended it. You can debate whether people should bring it up in trying to get you to own up to it, but don't deny that you started it.
that Irvin has been ticked off at Gruden and was the veteran voice in the locker room talking to the media and leading a quasi revolt. Supposedly he may have had an in your face moment with Gruden recently.
Curious timing with the move which comes across as the Raiders trying to shove Irvin onto another bad team. Could see the Jets taking a look.
that Irvin has been ticked off at Gruden and was the veteran voice in the locker room talking to the media and leading a quasi revolt. Supposedly he may have had an in your face moment with Gruden recently.
Curious timing with the move which comes across as the Raiders trying to shove Irvin onto another bad team. Could see the Jets taking a look.
I didn't want to substantiate any rumors, but I had read a rumor that the "in your face moment" might have been a bit more physical. Not implying that they came to blows, but the insinuation was that Irvin had shoved Gruden while vociferously disagreeing with the direction of the team.
I would hope that we put a claim on him. If we could unload OV's contract before the draft while keeping Irvin, it would likely be an overall net savings on the cap while also getting equal or more production.
You are trying to rewrite history. You originally brought it up out of nowhere, not once but in multiple threads. Then you argued and defended it. You can debate whether people should bring it up in trying to get you to own up to it, but don't deny that you started it.
You are trying to rewrite history. You originally brought it up out of nowhere, not once but in multiple threads. Then you argued and defended it. You can debate whether people should bring it up in trying to get you to own up to it, but don't deny that you started it.
You are trying to rewrite history. You originally brought it up out of nowhere, not once but in multiple threads. Then you argued and defended it. You can debate whether people should bring it up in trying to get you to own up to it, but don't deny that you started it.
Hey Steve! Hope you're doing well, my man.
Thanks, hanging in there. Nice to see you back.
Thanks bud. I was rooting for your state school today at Kroger. They played hard.
At a minimum, it will cost his $3.7M to see if he has any gas left in the tank. It will literally cost us less to evaluate him over the remaining 8 games as it cost us while OV rehabbed his ankle.
At a minimum, it will cost his $3.7M to see if he has any gas left in the tank. It will literally cost us less to evaluate him over the remaining 8 games as it cost us while OV rehabbed his ankle.
That would give the Giants less cap room to carry over into next season.
At a minimum, it will cost his $3.7M to see if he has any gas left in the tank. It will literally cost us less to evaluate him over the remaining 8 games as it cost us while OV rehabbed his ankle.
That would give the Giants less cap room to carry over into next season.
There will be more blood-letting this off-season. The cap isn't an issue. We have $8+M in room. Without doing a single thing and an increase in the cap, we will have an estimated $31M in cap space - Plenty to eat bad contracts and sign others. Projected 2019 Cap Figures - ( New Window )
Plus there's that whole West Coast gay club scene thing.
I don't care who he likes to have sex with if he can improve the Giants' defense.
He wouldn't be the first gay Giant, either. Heard an interview with Phil Simms where he said he had a teammate the players knew was gay. They didn't talk about it, but they knew. They didn't care. He didn't out the guy by the way, so I don't know who it was.
(I think there are lots of gay men in the NFL, always have been. They were just closeted. Now, not always.)
Yes there are but there is a weird obsession from guys like B in ALb about them. It isn't so much of an "inside joke" as it is a strange homophobia that some guys on here have that they cover up by "joking" about it
Think of the guy who constantly stands around and tells everyone without any context or prodding how not racist he is. What do we think is probably going on in that guys head?
Here comes that by the way. Enjoy.
I don't feel like engaging it tonight more than this but just note how I came on to write about Bruce Irvin and somehow the conversation became a personal attack on me and gays. That is just weird however you want to slice it.
Actually, you're the homophobe who can't resist bringing up players' sexuality on a message board. Don't let your version of things interfere with the facts.
It still baffles the fucking crap out of me that this guy thinks it's everyone else who is homophobic when he's the one who brought the stupid rumor here to begin with.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Ah. The other half.
The answer is because if someone is so bothered by that post 3 years later it obviously hits a nerve somewhere in their own thought process on the issue. My position remains now what it was then. Who cares? It's 2018 grow up.
See? Computes just fine
It doesn't hit a nerve other than you being a weird, unabashed attention whore, desperate for some sort of validation. Whoever or whatever made you like this, I'm sorry - it's not your fault.
Plus there's that whole West Coast gay club scene thing.
I don't care who he likes to have sex with if he can improve the Giants' defense.
He wouldn't be the first gay Giant, either. Heard an interview with Phil Simms where he said he had a teammate the players knew was gay. They didn't talk about it, but they knew. They didn't care. He didn't out the guy by the way, so I don't know who it was.
(I think there are lots of gay men in the NFL, always have been. They were just closeted. Now, not always.)
to waste 4M on Irvin, if you don't plan on keeping him next year....you roll that money over for next year....
Who goes into a situation of obtaining a player saying you won't keep them next year. Pass rushers are expensive. This is a no-brainer to bring him in and see how it works out. There is zero downside. We aren't finding a pass rusher for 3.7 mil next year worth a damn in FA.
All of the focus up until now has been the team trying to divest Â
itself of older assets that won't last through a rebuild.
So signing a 31 year old Bruce Irvin is different from that how, exactly?
Says who? Solder, Omameh, Stewart, keeping Eli, etc. say otherwise. Reese had the same mentality with FA and admitted that was the reason they didn't go after Whitworth. The objective should be to get talent. We need pass rushers. If he helps bridge the gap then so be it. If he playes well and you want to get rid of him in the offseason then he'll have trade value and you basically just picked up a draft pick for nothing.
RE: RE: All of the focus up until now has been the team trying to divest Â
itself of older assets that won't last through a rebuild.
So signing a 31 year old Bruce Irvin is different from that how, exactly?
Says who? Solder, Omameh, Stewart, keeping Eli, etc. say otherwise. Reese had the same mentality with FA and admitted that was the reason they didn't go after Whitworth. The objective should be to get talent. We need pass rushers. If he helps bridge the gap then so be it. If he playes well and you want to get rid of him in the offseason then he'll have trade value and you basically just picked up a draft pick for nothing.
Says moving Snacks and JPP and trying to trade Jenkins. The Giants are now looking at a rebuild, and the Solder and Omameh moves are albatrosses.
Whitworth was 36 - it's amazing that he's continuing to play at a high level, on average NFL players simply don't last that long.
RE: RE: RE: All of the focus up until now has been the team trying to divest Â
itself of older assets that won't last through a rebuild.
So signing a 31 year old Bruce Irvin is different from that how, exactly?
Says who? Solder, Omameh, Stewart, keeping Eli, etc. say otherwise. Reese had the same mentality with FA and admitted that was the reason they didn't go after Whitworth. The objective should be to get talent. We need pass rushers. If he helps bridge the gap then so be it. If he playes well and you want to get rid of him in the offseason then he'll have trade value and you basically just picked up a draft pick for nothing.
Says moving Snacks and JPP and trying to trade Jenkins. The Giants are now looking at a rebuild, and the Solder and Omameh moves are albatrosses.
Whitworth was 36 - it's amazing that he's continuing to play at a high level, on average NFL players simply don't last that long.
You are drawing conclusions based on what you want. JPP was traded for a couple of reasons. Age was not near the top. Snacks was traded but that doesn't mean it was because of age. There was a stat that showed how ineffective we were with Snacks. He is older and had injury concerns so it was smart to move on but that doesn't mean age was the driving force. If age was the driving force then why was Apple traded?
The point is that this team is in desperate need of talent. You don't pass on talent because of some self imposed age limit when you are basically getting a guy for free. If we had to give up a draft pick then no but he costs nothing. Age is definitely a factor but to think that is the driving force is not true. How do you explain Tanney over Webb? There are many moves that don't support your theory.
Well if the point you're making is their moves don't make Â
How do you explain Tanney over Webb? Beats the fuck out of me. I could see cutting Webb, but sticking with Tanney? Pointless.
RE JPP, the only logic anyone can try to use around here is the 'doesn't fit in a 3-4' one, and that's pretty weak to begin with. The only thing that justifies moving JPP out was he was expensive, oft injured and older.
Snacks was ineffective? I'd love to see that stat.
It's pretty clear that in Oakland, Irvin was just riding Mack's coattails. They've been reducing his role there for some time. The trade deadline came and went, and he's still with the team.
Get the bad locker room guys out of the building and establish a new culture. I don't think Irvin is a guy that fits the culture they are trying to bring.
RE: Well if the point you're making is their moves don't make Â
How do you explain Tanney over Webb? Beats the fuck out of me. I could see cutting Webb, but sticking with Tanney? Pointless.
RE JPP, the only logic anyone can try to use around here is the 'doesn't fit in a 3-4' one, and that's pretty weak to begin with. The only thing that justifies moving JPP out was he was expensive, oft injured and older.
Snacks was ineffective? I'd love to see that stat.
It's pretty clear that in Oakland, Irvin was just riding Mack's coattails. They've been reducing his role there for some time. The trade deadline came and went, and he's still with the team.
The Giants shipped off Apple presumably because he was a distraction or didn't give a shit about football. Here's a quote from Irvin after an Oakland loss - which he didn't seem too broken up about. https://sports.yahoo.com/setting-mood-raiders-lineman-wants-go-home-make-babies-another-loss-221018110.html - ( New Window )
Yes, I'm saying their moves have been all over the place and there isn't one driving guideline for them. I said age was a factor but not at the expense of talent. I do think Gettleman wanted to clean up the locker room. JPP saved the Giants 2.5 mil in cap space this year which was pretty much needed. I also think he would have been perfectly fine in a 3-4. Snacks can play in a 3-4 but in this system there was speculation that Bettcher wants more penetrating players up front.
Here was the stat on Snacks in this defense:
The Giants allowed 5.19 ypc on 117 run plays when Damon Harrison was on the field. They allowed 2.75 on 69 runs without Harrison on the field. Last year was 3.89 when he was on tbe field.
I also agree that Snacks is a very good player but he wasn't a good fit for this scheme. I am also not huge on this scheme right now as our corners have just been punching bags all season and we aren't getting pressure. My point is that there are more factors at play than just age.
Now, if Irvin is an asshole then I think we pass but I think he was voted a captain by his teammates this year and Gruden wasn't using him because he didn't fit the 4-3 mold. Gettleman said he doesn't want guys that want to win. He has guys that hate to lose and that is what Irvin is pissed off about. Gruden has totally fucked that teamm up so is anybody surprised a player had an issue with how the coach has handled the entire year? If his little spat with Gruden was all then imo he'll be claimed. If this is a pattern then I think we pass.
Man!!! I never thought we would be debating waiver wire pickups Â
We aren't looking for rental players this year so it comes down to do we want to spend $12m on Irvin for next year.
The draft is strong on pass rushers allegedly. We also need to see what Carter (and maybe even Moss) can do the rest of this year. Even if we don't draft an edge rusher, there are probably younger/cheaper options in free agency for the longer term considering many might focus on the draft.
For those interested in picking him up, what box does he check for the Giant current needs.
- Young veteran who will be reaching his prime in a year or two who will be around for the rebuild? No.
- Veteran player who can serve as a bridge for a year until a younger player develops? That is most possible but I don't see it. Again, I think it would impede Carter's progress and if we draft a pass rusher early (1st 3 rounds), he needs to play.
- Good locker room presence? I don't see this.
- Clear upgrade on a position of need? We need to have one young guy develop as my premise is that you can't have a huge number invested into 1 position. We have OV making a lot of money and I discussed the other end. Cutting OV and taking a cap hit to pay Irvin $12m for the next year and a half doesn't seem to be a good use of money.
I"ll pass. We need to get younger, faster, hungerier and cheaper.
We aren't looking for rental players this year so it comes down to do we want to spend $12m on Irvin for next year.
The draft is strong on pass rushers allegedly. We also need to see what Carter (and maybe even Moss) can do the rest of this year. Even if we don't draft an edge rusher, there are probably younger/cheaper options in free agency for the longer term considering many might focus on the draft.
For those interested in picking him up, what box does he check for the Giant current needs.
- Young veteran who will be reaching his prime in a year or two who will be around for the rebuild? No.
- Veteran player who can serve as a bridge for a year until a younger player develops? That is most possible but I don't see it. Again, I think it would impede Carter's progress and if we draft a pass rusher early (1st 3 rounds), he needs to play.
- Good locker room presence? I don't see this.
- Clear upgrade on a position of need? We need to have one young guy develop as my premise is that you can't have a huge number invested into 1 position. We have OV making a lot of money and I discussed the other end. Cutting OV and taking a cap hit to pay Irvin $12m for the next year and a half doesn't seem to be a good use of money.
I"ll pass. We need to get younger, faster, hungerier and cheaper.
What if we picked him up now and traded him for a third or fourth next year? Are we smitten with pass rushers that he is going to prevent a young guy from developing? No. And we aren't paying him 12 mil next year. It is 3.7 thks year and 9.25 next if we go that route. Cap space isn't an issue n3xt year as we will probably be trading off Vernon and Jenkins next year as well. This is a minimum of a 2 year rebuild. Acquire as many assets as possible. This is a free pick that just dropped in our laps.
He was just released by the Raiders, who were in fire sale mode too. How on Earth would we get a lofty return like a 3rd or a 4th next year, when they couldn't get *anything* for him this year?
I put him in the same category as Mario Edwards at this point - if you can get him cheap, you've got squat on the roster so why not. But keep your expectations managed so you won't be disappointed.
No-brainer. Let him go to FA for what reason? Would he sign here? Fuck no. So, claim him at his contract. If we don't want him then we cut/trade him at any point for no cap hit whatsoever.
Rob, I just looked up our cap space and we have over $8M in space so there is plenty of room to take on Irvin's $3.7M for this year. If I was to make room for him, I would release Tanney. There is no sense for Alex to occupy a roster spot anymore.
If the giants do that I wouldn’t think that would sit well with potential back up quarterbacks signing with us in the future .... I think that’s easy to say but in reality I think it’s hard enough to get players to come play in NY
and Irvin has had complaints about his work ethic and his effort all year.
I didn't like the AO trade either, because we ended up giving up a high 4th round pick (just out of the 3rd it'll turn out) for the rights to pay a guy a high salary on a team that's going nowhere. This could turn out even worse, since the guy already comes in with the knock that he's not trying hard.
and Irvin has had complaints about his work ethic and his effort all year.
I didn't like the AO trade either, because we ended up giving up a high 4th round pick (just out of the 3rd it'll turn out) for the rights to pay a guy a high salary on a team that's going nowhere. This could turn out even worse, since the guy already comes in with the knock that he's not trying hard.
How can it be worse? If he is an asshole we cut him for nothing. Olgetree had a bad contract that we made worse.
Rob, I just looked up our cap space and we have over $8M in space so there is plenty of room to take on Irvin's $3.7M for this year. If I was to make room for him, I would release Tanney. There is no sense for Alex to occupy a roster spot anymore.
Quote:
In comment 14163490 B in ALB said:
Quote:
in the first place. Yet those of us who call your chicken shit bitch ass out are homophobic?
Your grasp of reality and irony is piss poor, weirdo.
I did? Scroll up. All I said was Bruce Irvin is good but not a good fit for Giants. You brought this all up. What is downright creepy is that it isn't the first time. Kinda giving me the heeby jeebys.
You brought the Midwest Gay Club scene, bozo.
Just forget it. Let's just agree that you're a jackass and that statement you made was utter horseshit. Admit that and no one will bust your balls about it.
No I didn't. Again scroll up.
I'm not going to stoop down to your level with the name calling and all that.
It's over but just understand that between this time and the last time you did this it isn't a good look for B in ALb. The regurgitation of the dumb joke is one thing but the undercurrent is just a real indication of your feelings on the topic.
You should probably take Eric's advice from last time and just ignore my posts and don't start dumb flame wars.
Let's just leave it at that ok friend?
Quote:
No-brainer. Let him go to FA for what reason? Would he sign here? Fuck no. So, claim him at his contract. If we don't want him then we cut/trade him at any point for no cap hit whatsoever.
Rob, I just looked up our cap space and we have over $8M in space so there is plenty of room to take on Irvin's $3.7M for this year. If I was to make room for him, I would release Tanney. There is no sense for Alex to occupy a roster spot anymore.
Also, while digging around on Irvin's situation, it struck me as odd timing of his release. If he would have been released before the trade deadline, he would have been a FA as a vested veteran. The Raiders holding on to him until after the deadline exposes Irvin to waivers. Then I tried to reconcile the release being on a Saturday. Typically, if there were to be a release, an org. would drop the news at the end of the day on Friday to avoid the news cycle over the weekend. Something happened to abruptly release him.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Exactly, arc. Dude is a complete homophobe evidenced by the fact that he brought up the Bullshit club scene nonsense to begin with. Hilarity.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Ah. The other half.
The answer is because if someone is so bothered by that post 3 years later it obviously hits a nerve somewhere in their own thought process on the issue. My position remains now what it was then. Who cares? It's 2018 grow up.
See? Computes just fine
Just remember all I wanted to do was post a quick comment on Bruce Irvin. I'm not the bad guy here.
Quote:
It still baffles the fucking crap out of me that this guy thinks it's everyone else who is homophobic when he's the one who brought the stupid rumor here to begin with.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Ah. The other half.
The answer is because if someone is so bothered by that post 3 years later it obviously hits a nerve somewhere in their own thought process on the issue. My position remains now what it was then. Who cares? It's 2018 grow up.
See? Computes just fine
I don't see how mocking a post is the same as "being bothered" by it.
Seems like he would fit in well with this group then
Just remember all I wanted to do was post a quick comment on Bruce Irvin. I'm not the bad guy here.
Fine. But don't act like you didn't originate the Gay Club Scene Bullshit about Rodgers, then claim EVERYONE ELSE is a homophobe.
It's one of the most absurd things ever posted on BBI - hence the shit you get for it. Acknowledge that you screwed up and we'll all leave it alone.
Quote:
It still baffles the fucking crap out of me that this guy thinks it's everyone else who is homophobic when he's the one who brought the stupid rumor here to begin with.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Ah. The other half.
The answer is because if someone is so bothered by that post 3 years later it obviously hits a nerve somewhere in their own thought process on the issue. My position remains now what it was then. Who cares? It's 2018 grow up.
See? Computes just fine
Well, obviously you cared - because you were the one who brought it to the board to begin with and it was entirely unsolicited. It wasn't any of us.
There was a part of you that felt like a rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality was important enough to bring up in a place where it wasn't even being discussed.
That's the part you've been mocked for. I can't figure out why you aren't getting that. It didn't "strike a nerve" at all. The only thing that is striking a nerve is you somehow arriving at the conclusion that everyone else is homophobic.
It's like bizarro world. We were mocking you for even caring in the first place. What Aaron Rodgers does on his own time is not something I've ever looked for information on or given a shit about because it doesn't matter to me at all. I'm not interested in tabloids or back page gossip.
I'll leave you alone about it, I haven't even said anything in months. But it is annoying to see you keep labeling other people homophobes when it's completely unwarranted.
I think you guys have all had your say. Why don't you all ignore each other at this point?
I think you guys have all had your say. Why don't you all ignore each other at this point?
I would love that. All I did was come here to comment on Irvin. I'd love nothing more than to just have a normal conversation without the stupidity. That isn't on me.
Curious timing with the move which comes across as the Raiders trying to shove Irvin onto another bad team. Could see the Jets taking a look.
Curious timing with the move which comes across as the Raiders trying to shove Irvin onto another bad team. Could see the Jets taking a look.
I didn't want to substantiate any rumors, but I had read a rumor that the "in your face moment" might have been a bit more physical. Not implying that they came to blows, but the insinuation was that Irvin had shoved Gruden while vociferously disagreeing with the direction of the team.
I would hope that we put a claim on him. If we could unload OV's contract before the draft while keeping Irvin, it would likely be an overall net savings on the cap while also getting equal or more production.
Hey Steve! Hope you're doing well, my man.
Quote:
You are trying to rewrite history. You originally brought it up out of nowhere, not once but in multiple threads. Then you argued and defended it. You can debate whether people should bring it up in trying to get you to own up to it, but don't deny that you started it.
Hey Steve! Hope you're doing well, my man.
Thanks, hanging in there. Nice to see you back.
Quote:
In comment 14163569 steve in ky said:
Quote:
You are trying to rewrite history. You originally brought it up out of nowhere, not once but in multiple threads. Then you argued and defended it. You can debate whether people should bring it up in trying to get you to own up to it, but don't deny that you started it.
Hey Steve! Hope you're doing well, my man.
Thanks, hanging in there. Nice to see you back.
Thanks bud. I was rooting for your state school today at Kroger. They played hard.
At a minimum, it will cost his $3.7M to see if he has any gas left in the tank. It will literally cost us less to evaluate him over the remaining 8 games as it cost us while OV rehabbed his ankle.
Quote:
Should kick the tire
At a minimum, it will cost his $3.7M to see if he has any gas left in the tank. It will literally cost us less to evaluate him over the remaining 8 games as it cost us while OV rehabbed his ankle.
That would give the Giants less cap room to carry over into next season.
Quote:
In comment 14163598 spike said:
Quote:
Should kick the tire
At a minimum, it will cost his $3.7M to see if he has any gas left in the tank. It will literally cost us less to evaluate him over the remaining 8 games as it cost us while OV rehabbed his ankle.
That would give the Giants less cap room to carry over into next season.
There will be more blood-letting this off-season. The cap isn't an issue. We have $8+M in room. Without doing a single thing and an increase in the cap, we will have an estimated $31M in cap space - Plenty to eat bad contracts and sign others.
Projected 2019 Cap Figures - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 14163323 B in ALB said:
Quote:
In comment 14163318 ThatLimerickGuy said:
Quote:
Not a giant though. Kind of a chucklehead.
Plus there's that whole West Coast gay club scene thing.
I don't care who he likes to have sex with if he can improve the Giants' defense.
He wouldn't be the first gay Giant, either. Heard an interview with Phil Simms where he said he had a teammate the players knew was gay. They didn't talk about it, but they knew. They didn't care. He didn't out the guy by the way, so I don't know who it was.
(I think there are lots of gay men in the NFL, always have been. They were just closeted. Now, not always.)
Yes there are but there is a weird obsession from guys like B in ALb about them. It isn't so much of an "inside joke" as it is a strange homophobia that some guys on here have that they cover up by "joking" about it
Think of the guy who constantly stands around and tells everyone without any context or prodding how not racist he is. What do we think is probably going on in that guys head?
Here comes that by the way. Enjoy.
I don't feel like engaging it tonight more than this but just note how I came on to write about Bruce Irvin and somehow the conversation became a personal attack on me and gays. That is just weird however you want to slice it.
Actually, you're the homophobe who can't resist bringing up players' sexuality on a message board. Don't let your version of things interfere with the facts.
Quote:
It still baffles the fucking crap out of me that this guy thinks it's everyone else who is homophobic when he's the one who brought the stupid rumor here to begin with.
Poster posts a completely unsolicited rumor about Aaron Rodgers' sexuality and involvement in some bizarre midwest "scene" one day, and then when people mock him for it, he calls them homophobes.
Does. Not. Compute.
Ah. The other half.
The answer is because if someone is so bothered by that post 3 years later it obviously hits a nerve somewhere in their own thought process on the issue. My position remains now what it was then. Who cares? It's 2018 grow up.
See? Computes just fine
It doesn't hit a nerve other than you being a weird, unabashed attention whore, desperate for some sort of validation. Whoever or whatever made you like this, I'm sorry - it's not your fault.
Quote:
In comment 14163318 ThatLimerickGuy said:
Quote:
Not a giant though. Kind of a chucklehead.
Plus there's that whole West Coast gay club scene thing.
I don't care who he likes to have sex with if he can improve the Giants' defense.
He wouldn't be the first gay Giant, either. Heard an interview with Phil Simms where he said he had a teammate the players knew was gay. They didn't talk about it, but they knew. They didn't care. He didn't out the guy by the way, so I don't know who it was.
(I think there are lots of gay men in the NFL, always have been. They were just closeted. Now, not always.)
Who goes into a situation of obtaining a player saying you won't keep them next year. Pass rushers are expensive. This is a no-brainer to bring him in and see how it works out. There is zero downside. We aren't finding a pass rusher for 3.7 mil next year worth a damn in FA.
So signing a 31 year old Bruce Irvin is different from that how, exactly?
So signing a 31 year old Bruce Irvin is different from that how, exactly?
Says who? Solder, Omameh, Stewart, keeping Eli, etc. say otherwise. Reese had the same mentality with FA and admitted that was the reason they didn't go after Whitworth. The objective should be to get talent. We need pass rushers. If he helps bridge the gap then so be it. If he playes well and you want to get rid of him in the offseason then he'll have trade value and you basically just picked up a draft pick for nothing.
Quote:
itself of older assets that won't last through a rebuild.
So signing a 31 year old Bruce Irvin is different from that how, exactly?
Says who? Solder, Omameh, Stewart, keeping Eli, etc. say otherwise. Reese had the same mentality with FA and admitted that was the reason they didn't go after Whitworth. The objective should be to get talent. We need pass rushers. If he helps bridge the gap then so be it. If he playes well and you want to get rid of him in the offseason then he'll have trade value and you basically just picked up a draft pick for nothing.
Says moving Snacks and JPP and trying to trade Jenkins. The Giants are now looking at a rebuild, and the Solder and Omameh moves are albatrosses.
Whitworth was 36 - it's amazing that he's continuing to play at a high level, on average NFL players simply don't last that long.
Quote:
In comment 14163688 jcn56 said:
Quote:
itself of older assets that won't last through a rebuild.
So signing a 31 year old Bruce Irvin is different from that how, exactly?
Says who? Solder, Omameh, Stewart, keeping Eli, etc. say otherwise. Reese had the same mentality with FA and admitted that was the reason they didn't go after Whitworth. The objective should be to get talent. We need pass rushers. If he helps bridge the gap then so be it. If he playes well and you want to get rid of him in the offseason then he'll have trade value and you basically just picked up a draft pick for nothing.
Says moving Snacks and JPP and trying to trade Jenkins. The Giants are now looking at a rebuild, and the Solder and Omameh moves are albatrosses.
Whitworth was 36 - it's amazing that he's continuing to play at a high level, on average NFL players simply don't last that long.
You are drawing conclusions based on what you want. JPP was traded for a couple of reasons. Age was not near the top. Snacks was traded but that doesn't mean it was because of age. There was a stat that showed how ineffective we were with Snacks. He is older and had injury concerns so it was smart to move on but that doesn't mean age was the driving force. If age was the driving force then why was Apple traded?
The point is that this team is in desperate need of talent. You don't pass on talent because of some self imposed age limit when you are basically getting a guy for free. If we had to give up a draft pick then no but he costs nothing. Age is definitely a factor but to think that is the driving force is not true. How do you explain Tanney over Webb? There are many moves that don't support your theory.
How do you explain Tanney over Webb? Beats the fuck out of me. I could see cutting Webb, but sticking with Tanney? Pointless.
RE JPP, the only logic anyone can try to use around here is the 'doesn't fit in a 3-4' one, and that's pretty weak to begin with. The only thing that justifies moving JPP out was he was expensive, oft injured and older.
Snacks was ineffective? I'd love to see that stat.
It's pretty clear that in Oakland, Irvin was just riding Mack's coattails. They've been reducing his role there for some time. The trade deadline came and went, and he's still with the team.
The Giants shipped off Apple presumably because he was a distraction or didn't give a shit about football. Here's a quote from Irvin after an Oakland loss - which he didn't seem too broken up about.
https://sports.yahoo.com/setting-mood-raiders-lineman-wants-go-home-make-babies-another-loss-221018110.html - ( New Window )
How do you explain Tanney over Webb? Beats the fuck out of me. I could see cutting Webb, but sticking with Tanney? Pointless.
RE JPP, the only logic anyone can try to use around here is the 'doesn't fit in a 3-4' one, and that's pretty weak to begin with. The only thing that justifies moving JPP out was he was expensive, oft injured and older.
Snacks was ineffective? I'd love to see that stat.
It's pretty clear that in Oakland, Irvin was just riding Mack's coattails. They've been reducing his role there for some time. The trade deadline came and went, and he's still with the team.
The Giants shipped off Apple presumably because he was a distraction or didn't give a shit about football. Here's a quote from Irvin after an Oakland loss - which he didn't seem too broken up about. https://sports.yahoo.com/setting-mood-raiders-lineman-wants-go-home-make-babies-another-loss-221018110.html - ( New Window )
Yes, I'm saying their moves have been all over the place and there isn't one driving guideline for them. I said age was a factor but not at the expense of talent. I do think Gettleman wanted to clean up the locker room. JPP saved the Giants 2.5 mil in cap space this year which was pretty much needed. I also think he would have been perfectly fine in a 3-4. Snacks can play in a 3-4 but in this system there was speculation that Bettcher wants more penetrating players up front.
Here was the stat on Snacks in this defense:
The Giants allowed 5.19 ypc on 117 run plays when Damon Harrison was on the field. They allowed 2.75 on 69 runs without Harrison on the field. Last year was 3.89 when he was on tbe field.
I also agree that Snacks is a very good player but he wasn't a good fit for this scheme. I am also not huge on this scheme right now as our corners have just been punching bags all season and we aren't getting pressure. My point is that there are more factors at play than just age.
Now, if Irvin is an asshole then I think we pass but I think he was voted a captain by his teammates this year and Gruden wasn't using him because he didn't fit the 4-3 mold. Gettleman said he doesn't want guys that want to win. He has guys that hate to lose and that is what Irvin is pissed off about. Gruden has totally fucked that teamm up so is anybody surprised a player had an issue with how the coach has handled the entire year? If his little spat with Gruden was all then imo he'll be claimed. If this is a pattern then I think we pass.
The draft is strong on pass rushers allegedly. We also need to see what Carter (and maybe even Moss) can do the rest of this year. Even if we don't draft an edge rusher, there are probably younger/cheaper options in free agency for the longer term considering many might focus on the draft.
For those interested in picking him up, what box does he check for the Giant current needs.
- Young veteran who will be reaching his prime in a year or two who will be around for the rebuild? No.
- Veteran player who can serve as a bridge for a year until a younger player develops? That is most possible but I don't see it. Again, I think it would impede Carter's progress and if we draft a pass rusher early (1st 3 rounds), he needs to play.
- Good locker room presence? I don't see this.
- Clear upgrade on a position of need? We need to have one young guy develop as my premise is that you can't have a huge number invested into 1 position. We have OV making a lot of money and I discussed the other end. Cutting OV and taking a cap hit to pay Irvin $12m for the next year and a half doesn't seem to be a good use of money.
I"ll pass. We need to get younger, faster, hungerier and cheaper.
The draft is strong on pass rushers allegedly. We also need to see what Carter (and maybe even Moss) can do the rest of this year. Even if we don't draft an edge rusher, there are probably younger/cheaper options in free agency for the longer term considering many might focus on the draft.
For those interested in picking him up, what box does he check for the Giant current needs.
- Young veteran who will be reaching his prime in a year or two who will be around for the rebuild? No.
- Veteran player who can serve as a bridge for a year until a younger player develops? That is most possible but I don't see it. Again, I think it would impede Carter's progress and if we draft a pass rusher early (1st 3 rounds), he needs to play.
- Good locker room presence? I don't see this.
- Clear upgrade on a position of need? We need to have one young guy develop as my premise is that you can't have a huge number invested into 1 position. We have OV making a lot of money and I discussed the other end. Cutting OV and taking a cap hit to pay Irvin $12m for the next year and a half doesn't seem to be a good use of money.
I"ll pass. We need to get younger, faster, hungerier and cheaper.
What if we picked him up now and traded him for a third or fourth next year? Are we smitten with pass rushers that he is going to prevent a young guy from developing? No. And we aren't paying him 12 mil next year. It is 3.7 thks year and 9.25 next if we go that route. Cap space isn't an issue n3xt year as we will probably be trading off Vernon and Jenkins next year as well. This is a minimum of a 2 year rebuild. Acquire as many assets as possible. This is a free pick that just dropped in our laps.
He was just released by the Raiders, who were in fire sale mode too. How on Earth would we get a lofty return like a 3rd or a 4th next year, when they couldn't get *anything* for him this year?
I put him in the same category as Mario Edwards at this point - if you can get him cheap, you've got squat on the roster so why not. But keep your expectations managed so you won't be disappointed.
Quote:
No-brainer. Let him go to FA for what reason? Would he sign here? Fuck no. So, claim him at his contract. If we don't want him then we cut/trade him at any point for no cap hit whatsoever.
Rob, I just looked up our cap space and we have over $8M in space so there is plenty of room to take on Irvin's $3.7M for this year. If I was to make room for him, I would release Tanney. There is no sense for Alex to occupy a roster spot anymore.
If the giants do that I wouldn’t think that would sit well with potential back up quarterbacks signing with us in the future .... I think that’s easy to say but in reality I think it’s hard enough to get players to come play in NY
How did Olgetree net what he did? The point is there is no downside. It is a hypothetical. What is the downside of bringing him in?
I didn't like the AO trade either, because we ended up giving up a high 4th round pick (just out of the 3rd it'll turn out) for the rights to pay a guy a high salary on a team that's going nowhere. This could turn out even worse, since the guy already comes in with the knock that he's not trying hard.
I didn't like the AO trade either, because we ended up giving up a high 4th round pick (just out of the 3rd it'll turn out) for the rights to pay a guy a high salary on a team that's going nowhere. This could turn out even worse, since the guy already comes in with the knock that he's not trying hard.
How can it be worse? If he is an asshole we cut him for nothing. Olgetree had a bad contract that we made worse.