I will reiterate this team hasn't accomplished anything yet, and they are still 3 games to go before the season can really be evaluated.
But....4-5 weeks ago, the NY media was murdering him for the Ogletree trade. Goes to show you that you need to wait for a full season to play out before jumping to conclusions. Gettleman has been silent and waiting in the wings...which I'm sure isn't easy to do. Ogletree clearly needed to get more confortable with Betcher's system and I would expect his play to be very solid and even better next year as he and alot of the guys will be a full year under the new system.
Some other moves appear to be playing out as well. Kareem Martin and Josh Mauro are providing solid depth. Antonio Hamilton is playing well on specials. B.W. Webb was a solid signing and so was Michael Thomas. Even Spencer Pulley has seemed to settle in , although his future is a backup. Russel Shepard has had a nice few weeks also. Guys like Elijah Penny, Tony Lippett, Grant Haley, may prove to be valuable players going forwrad. And most importantly the 2018 draft class appears to be a really good 1st draft class for Gettleman.
This is not to say he hasn't made mistakes, obviously. Omameh was a mistake, but he let him go. Connor Barwin and Jonathan Stewart weren't the right moves in hindsight, but my guess is Gettleman will admit is follies....as no GM has a perfect track record.
Leaping to conclusions works both ways.
I was going back and forth with Sy'56 on Twitter....Ogletree is probably the best LB Giants have had since Antonio Pierce, if you think about it.
Haley might be DG's best find. Looks like he could be a top 3 CB on a good team and he's looked good in run support too.
Corey Coleman's got some speed and made some plays with his opportunity yesterday. Could've had a huge game if that early deep ball didn't go thru his hands (might've been PI on this one anyway). He can certainly stretch a defense.
Penny looks like a great addition too. I'll leave it to the experts (Sy, et al) to grade his blocking, but he has good hands and is a decent runner for a FB. Certainly good enough to make the D pay if they ignore him out of the back field.
He was painlessly cuttable after the season before the restructure, and now he's not.
Based on the past couple weeks so what, he's been playing better, but having flexibility on the cap is a good thing IMO.
Quote:
Have never changed my mind. Still young enough to build around
I was going back and forth with Sy'56 on Twitter....Ogletree is probably the best LB Giants have had since Antonio Pierce, if you think about it.
Sy’s opinion?
Quote:
Have never changed my mind. Still young enough to build around
I was going back and forth with Sy'56 on Twitter....Ogletree is probably the best LB Giants have had since Antonio Pierce, if you think about it.
That's a pretty low bar...
Leaping to conclusions works both ways.
can't use the injury excuse any more. Prior to these past 2 years, Giants were as banged up as anyone and teams pounded on us for it. We still went up against a top defense yesterday and offense scored 33 point in 3 quarters. Ogletree is had 3 good games in a row. He's a good player. He may have been brutal earlier in year, but my point is, you gotta give him a pass, jumping into a new defensive scheme to lead it.
He was painlessly cuttable after the season before the restructure, and now he's not.
Based on the past couple weeks so what, he's been playing better, but having flexibility on the cap is a good thing IMO.
Eh, the restructure wasn't a big deal since you carry over unused cap space. They created $5.25M in 2018 cap space and if they chose to cut him they'd incur a $5.25M dead cap hit which nets to zero. It'd be problematic if they gave him more (guaranteed) money, but it doesn't look like that's the case (per OTC).
Quote:
In comment 14212539 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
Have never changed my mind. Still young enough to build around
I was going back and forth with Sy'56 on Twitter....Ogletree is probably the best LB Giants have had since Antonio Pierce, if you think about it.
Sy’s opinion?
he's the one that said it....Ogletree probably best LB since Pierce, in terms of his procutionon that last 4-5 years.
Gay Ramone : 9:42 am : link : reply
Will give credit when he figures a way to orchestrate a deal to correct another mistake made this past offseason ...
Nobody could have predicted the impact Barkley has made on this team, but it’s apparent he has made another player expendable and that player could return multiple players and/or picks ...
What's the motivation to continually and intentionally look like a fucking moron?
Quote:
In comment 14212555 Andy in Boston said:
Quote:
In comment 14212539 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
Have never changed my mind. Still young enough to build around
I was going back and forth with Sy'56 on Twitter....Ogletree is probably the best LB Giants have had since Antonio Pierce, if you think about it.
Sy’s opinion?
he's the one that said it....Ogletree probably best LB since Pierce, in terms of his procutionon that last 4-5 years.
Ah. Thank you
We had no Odell, No Colins, No Snacks, missing our starting center. Vernon, JackRabbit, Engram have been banged up all year.
Quote:
given the Redskins rolled out their 3rd string QB and have something like 20 players out with injuries.
Leaping to conclusions works both ways.
can't use the injury excuse any more. Prior to these past 2 years, Giants were as banged up as anyone and teams pounded on us for it. We still went up against a top defense yesterday and offense scored 33 point in 3 quarters. Ogletree is had 3 good games in a row. He's a good player. He may have been brutal earlier in year, but my point is, you gotta give him a pass, jumping into a new defensive scheme to lead it.
He's a good player, but a poor investment to pay an ILB $10M for what he's provided so far.
Fans are already starting to overrate the Giants based on recent play, and one blowout over a mega banged up fading Redskins team.
There have been countless threads calling Gettleman clueless and even two weeks ago one poster said that Ogletree isn't just bad, but he's one of the worst players in the entire league!! And it was said seriously.
We can debate how well some of DG's signings have been, but they all had an underlying theme - improve those units that have been deficient in recent years, whether it be OL, LB or RB. As well as improve the locker room.
He missed on Omameh and Stewart. Jury is out on Solder (but he's not nearly as poor as people were ripping him for being earlier), and the Ogletree signing is an overpay, but he's clearly contributed some excellent plays, especially in coverage. When DG has seen something not work out, he's cut bait and tried to improve, much to the chagrin of those who think he's old and set in his ways.
You are never as good as you appear at times nor as bad as it appears at times, and fans are continually fooled by this. Continually.
Quote:
In comment 14212551 JonC said:
Quote:
given the Redskins rolled out their 3rd string QB and have something like 20 players out with injuries.
Leaping to conclusions works both ways.
can't use the injury excuse any more. Prior to these past 2 years, Giants were as banged up as anyone and teams pounded on us for it. We still went up against a top defense yesterday and offense scored 33 point in 3 quarters. Ogletree is had 3 good games in a row. He's a good player. He may have been brutal earlier in year, but my point is, you gotta give him a pass, jumping into a new defensive scheme to lead it.
He's a good player, but a poor investment to pay an ILB $10M for what he's provided so far.
Fans are already starting to overrate the Giants based on recent play, and one blowout over a mega banged up fading Redskins team.
I'm not overblowing it....but he's more productive than any other recent LB we've had. I will take it.
There have been countless threads calling Gettleman clueless and even two weeks ago one poster said that Ogletree isn't just bad, but he's one of the worst players in the entire league!! And it was said seriously.
We can debate how well some of DG's signings have been, but they all had an underlying theme - improve those units that have been deficient in recent years, whether it be OL, LB or RB. As well as improve the locker room.
He missed on Omameh and Stewart. Jury is out on Solder (but he's not nearly as poor as people were ripping him for being earlier), and the Ogletree signing is an overpay, but he's clearly contributed some excellent plays, especially in coverage. When DG has seen something not work out, he's cut bait and tried to improve, much to the chagrin of those who think he's old and set in his ways.
You are never as good as you appear at times nor as bad as it appears at times, and fans are continually fooled by this. Continually.
I do agree that one thing Gettleman has impressed me with is that he is not afraid to say that something has not worked as he had planned and cut bait. Too often, GM's will stick with players because they want to be proven right for signing or drafting someone. It is one of the reasons why GM's who are also the Head Coach rarely work out.
Keeping Rosas despite most of BBI wanting him gone...
Quote:
In comment 14212573 Andy in Boston said:
Quote:
In comment 14212551 JonC said:
Quote:
given the Redskins rolled out their 3rd string QB and have something like 20 players out with injuries.
Leaping to conclusions works both ways.
can't use the injury excuse any more. Prior to these past 2 years, Giants were as banged up as anyone and teams pounded on us for it. We still went up against a top defense yesterday and offense scored 33 point in 3 quarters. Ogletree is had 3 good games in a row. He's a good player. He may have been brutal earlier in year, but my point is, you gotta give him a pass, jumping into a new defensive scheme to lead it.
He's a good player, but a poor investment to pay an ILB $10M for what he's provided so far.
Fans are already starting to overrate the Giants based on recent play, and one blowout over a mega banged up fading Redskins team.
I'm not overblowing it....but he's more productive than any other recent LB we've had. I will take it.
Not taking the positives away from anyone as the team improves and shows signs of ascension, but the perspective of what's being seen big picture is important.
It's a work in progress, but he's earned his money and then some in my opinion
Fans are already starting to overrate the Giants based on recent play, and one blowout over a mega banged up fading Redskins team.
Maybe...But I would rather win these games then lose them. We beat the Bears. Yes, it was their backup QB but we won. Last year we could barely beat any team, never mind producing an actual blowout. I think being able to blow out an injured Redskin team is a sign of improvement from last year. I'm happy the team plays hard and shows signs of improvement.
The old guard just picked a guy, plugged him and hoped. When DG saw guys that didn't produce he acted.
He also gets an A+ for his first draft.
Quote:
Fans are already starting to overrate the Giants based on recent play, and one blowout over a mega banged up fading Redskins team.
Maybe...But I would rather win these games then lose them. We beat the Bears. Yes, it was their backup QB but we won. Last year we could barely beat any team, never mind producing an actual blowout. I think being able to blow out an injured Redskin team is a sign of improvement from last year. I'm happy the team plays hard and shows signs of improvement.
Definitely signs of improvement everywhere, they're fighting their arses off.
Dumping Flowers and Omameh mid-season are the kind of tough calls the previous regime refused to make.
Also, while none of us really know what the locker room was like, there's been enough chatter to make the assumption trading Apple and Snacks may have been addition by subtraction to team chemistry.
It's fair to give him an incomplete overall, and he should rightly be criticized for signing Omameh in the first place along with a couple other questionable moves, but at least he's got the guts to cut bait on a mistake.
To his credit, he'll admit mistakes and move on quickly. Ironically, it was the waiver wire and the Giants (un)favorable position there that may have been the most important moves of the season. Brown, Pulley, Hamilton and Edwards were all waiver claims and now making contributions.
Agree and THIS is almost as important as making the right selection in the first place. It is like holding onto a stock you bought instead of dumping it and taking just a small or moderate loss.
We can all probably come up with a few names of players who were force fed to us over the years because we had a stubborn front office.
But that doesn't excuse the fact he was dreadful for much of the season. If he can just be a solid run defender and do a better job on tight ends, that is enough for me.
We had no Odell, No Colins, No Snacks, missing our starting center. Vernon, JackRabbit, Engram have been banged up all year.
Andy, this is the healthiest the Giants have been perhaps in over a decade.
He has the 2nd most picks by a LB over the last 3 seasons so clearly he regularly makes plays. More than anything though the guy is an out and out leader which we've lacked for a long time. It just works so much better when your MLB is the emotional and analytical leader of the team.
I think he is someone we can build around. Folks used to complain about Pierce for some of the same things (exploited in coverage, not physical enough at POA etc).
But that doesn't excuse the fact he was dreadful for much of the season. If he can just be a solid run defender and do a better job on tight ends, that is enough for me.
The whole team was dreadful. They've all turned it around since the bye.
A LB is only as good as what's in front of him. Everybody is starting to play better and that's allowing playmakers to make plays.
Ogletree now has the 2nd most INT's by a LB since 2013.
This thread perfectly encapsulates how sports media and fans react now to everything on a game-by-game basis. Smart fans don't judge a team based on the last game or two but the entire picture. Unfortunately, this has been a trend in American sports for years now, and BBI falls victim to it non-stop.
Quote:
I
Gay Ramone : 9:42 am : link : reply
Will give credit when he figures a way to orchestrate a deal to correct another mistake made this past offseason ...
Nobody could have predicted the impact Barkley has made on this team, but it’s apparent he has made another player expendable and that player could return multiple players and/or picks ...
What's the motivation to continually and intentionally look like a fucking moron?
He a dupe of a troll who has had numerous IDs here -- I brought the dupes out in force on my Odell thread
This thread perfectly encapsulates how sports media and fans react now to everything on a game-by-game basis. Smart fans don't judge a team based on the last game or two but the entire picture. Unfortunately, this has been a trend in American sports for years now, and BBI falls victim to it non-stop.
+1.
Similarly, DG's recent trades will allow us to continue the retooling of this team in the offseason. A team like the Pats get tons of comp picks each year, so that they are always churning the bottom of their roster. We haven't typically been in that position. The recent trades are a nice way to start that process.
Shurmur also deserves credit for his cooperation with DG's turning over of the roster and the trading of guys like Snacks and Apple several weeks ago. He demonstrated his readiness to play some kids who might otherwise have gotten far less experience (e.g., Haley) and to give more snaps to our young defensive linemen. That shows his confidence in his relationship with DG (recognizing that DG has his back) and his willingness to invest in the long term success of the team rather than, as was feared at the time, its short term detriment.
This thread perfectly encapsulates how sports media and fans react now to everything on a game-by-game basis. Smart fans don't judge a team based on the last game or two but the entire picture. Unfortunately, this has been a trend in American sports for years now, and BBI falls victim to it non-stop.
Eric - I agree with you....I prefaced my thread with ...we still have 3 games to go to evaluate the entire season, but things have improved that last 4-5 week with Ogeltree no doubt. And I think you'll agree it takes time to adjust to a new system, especially if you're the leader of it, like his is.
Quote:
every team is banged up.
We had no Odell, No Colins, No Snacks, missing our starting center. Vernon, JackRabbit, Engram have been banged up all year.
Andy, this is the healthiest the Giants have been perhaps in over a decade.
agreed....but I'm going down the road that we're beating teams because they're banged up. No excuses in this league anymore. We played top defense yesterday and put up 33 on them in 3 quarters.
Hmmmm...When I read a quote like this I wonder if they ever watch other teams?
For instance Darnold, who is only 21 years old, his team put up 27 points yesterday, and he had a game winning 4th quarter drive.
You do realize he is doing this with a bottom 5 wr core, and a terrible running game right? In five years from now he will be twice the QB he is right now, with another ten years of solid QB play.
This is not a knock on Barkley, cuz I do like him, but If Darnold was on the Giants right now, our future would have been set for quite sometime...So no we aren't wrong
But the Redskins were ready to tank this game. They were down to quarterbacks they just signed off the street and with on their 5th or 6th guards. The first quarter looked like a contest between two bad football teams until the floodgates opened with the Sanchez pick. Then the air went out of the Skins.
The good news is that the Giants are playing hard and finally looking like an improving football team. But our defense still concerns the (blank) out of me. We have had issues with a string of second- and third-string quarterbacks during this winning streak. Can you imagine if we had to play Tom Brady or Patrick Mahomes?
He has the 2nd most picks by a LB over the last 3 seasons so clearly he regularly makes plays. More than anything though the guy is an out and out leader which we've lacked for a long time. It just works so much better when your MLB is the emotional and analytical leader of the team.
I think he is someone we can build around. Folks used to complain about Pierce for some of the same things (exploited in coverage, not physical enough at POA etc).
Nice to see a Brit saying "we."
But the Redskins were ready to tank this game. They were down to quarterbacks they just signed off the street and with on their 5th or 6th guards. The first quarter looked like a contest between two bad football teams until the floodgates opened with the Sanchez pick. Then the air went out of the Skins.
The good news is that the Giants are playing hard and finally looking like an improving football team. But our defense still concerns the (blank) out of me. We have had issues with a string of second- and third-string quarterbacks during this winning streak. Can you imagine if we had to play Tom Brady or Patrick Mahomes?
yeah, we need pass rushers no doubt. And a FS who can cover the field. And another run stuffing DT to spell Tomlinson and BJ Hill. For the 1st time in the 3 years though, I like the direction we're going....and I've always been a huge Gettleman fan...so I'm rooting for him hard.
We've got a LONG way to go to become a championship caliber team, and we certainly need to land our QB of the future in order to some day get there. Whether one of Darnold, Rosen, Allen or Jackson could have been a savior remains to be seen.
But the rest of the roster needs significant improvement as well. And I do see a way forward; and that includes making the hard decisions DG did recently.
Andy in Boston : 9:54 am : link : reply
every team is banged up.
We had no Odell, No Colins, No Snacks, missing our starting center. Vernon, JackRabbit, Engram have been banged up all year.
Where I'll violently disagree is the idea that injuries are no excuse. They most definitely are a valid excuse because I've found no other factor more indicative of success or failure that has been consistent over the past 20 years than overall team health. Here are some points:
- All but 2 SB's since 2000 have featured at least one team in the top 5 of health
- Last year, 10 of the 12 playoff teams finished in the top 15 of the league in overall health. While that looks like an outlier, the two years prior were 10 teams and 9 teams.
- The Giants have been in the bottom quarter of the league in team health every year but one since 2011 - that year was 2016, when they were in the top 5 of good health. 4 seasons they were dead last
- No team who was dead last in health even made the playoffs since 2000. The healthiest team in the league has made the playoffs all but 3 years in that span.
I know the common retort from fans is that injuries don't matter, but they matter. Significantly.
I don’t want to hear about playing backup QBs. This is the new norm with the way teams have shifted towards mobile, athletic QBs. Mobile QBs miss games. Every rookie QB has missed time due to injury this year except Mayfield I believe. Every mobile QB not named Mahomes has dealt with an injury or two.
Quote:
I
Gay Ramone : 9:42 am : link : reply
Will give credit when he figures a way to orchestrate a deal to correct another mistake made this past offseason ...
Nobody could have predicted the impact Barkley has made on this team, but it’s apparent he has made another player expendable and that player could return multiple players and/or picks ...
What's the motivation to continually and intentionally look like a fucking moron?
FM, I'd have to go searching the game thread, but I think he's the one who admitted that he's hated Beckham since day one.
Quote:
Injuries are no excuse in this league.
Andy in Boston : 9:54 am : link : reply
every team is banged up.
We had no Odell, No Colins, No Snacks, missing our starting center. Vernon, JackRabbit, Engram have been banged up all year.
Where I'll violently disagree is the idea that injuries are no excuse. They most definitely are a valid excuse because I've found no other factor more indicative of success or failure that has been consistent over the past 20 years than overall team health. Here are some points:
- All but 2 SB's since 2000 have featured at least one team in the top 5 of health
- Last year, 10 of the 12 playoff teams finished in the top 15 of the league in overall health. While that looks like an outlier, the two years prior were 10 teams and 9 teams.
- The Giants have been in the bottom quarter of the league in team health every year but one since 2011 - that year was 2016, when they were in the top 5 of good health. 4 seasons they were dead last
- No team who was dead last in health even made the playoffs since 2000. The healthiest team in the league has made the playoffs all but 3 years in that span.
I know the common retort from fans is that injuries don't matter, but they matter. Significantly.
I agree with this post, which is why I continue to be mystified by the way much of the NFL allocates its cap space and uses its roster.
If injuries are such a significant determinant of results (and I believe they are), why isn't more emphasis being placed on roster depth? With few exceptions, I think a team is better off with 5 $4M players than with 1 $20M player.
Yup.
Ogletree has been a very mixed bag, he's played well of late, and has really struggled at other times.
But always be careful of looking at stats like these and taking them too far to the positive or the negative...remember Stevie Brown and his one-year wonder playing Safety.
Ogletree's play still leaves a lot to be desired in both pass/run support this season...even yesterday at times.
I agree in principal with many of the points, but disagree with the overall radical approach, especially with the QB position. We do see that having a cost-controlled QB on a rookie contract is part of the formula for success, but where that breaks down is that it still has to be the right QB. Cluster drafting a bunch of mobile QB's will likely not lead to anymore success than having a very good pocket QB.
But the health thing cannot be overlooked. The problem is - it is really difficult to team-build around this. In theory, it seems like stockpiling a lot of mid-priced guys is sound, until the team has success and then those guys become either ex-teammates or get a big payday. Or, you stockpile a bunch of middle-priced guys who play like middle-priced guys and the team gets hit with injuries leaving them with an exposed poor depth that nearly every team is forced to field due to the cap.
It's a huge factor in why long-term success eludes 85% of the league.
If injuries are such a significant determinant of results (and I believe they are), why isn't more emphasis being placed on roster depth? With few exceptions, I think a team is better off with 5 $4M players than with 1 $20M player.
Look what ONE guy like Saquon or Rodgers or Brady or Russel Wilson brings to a team.
On defense, Aaron Donald or Earl Thomas...
Ogletree has been a very mixed bag, he's played well of late, and has really struggled at other times.
sigh.....some of guys need to realize that just because a LB gives up some big plays against RB's and TE's who are quicker andfaster, doesn't mean he's not playing well. Good have bad games...and Ogletree had a few. And some of you guys need to realize its not a video game, where you are going to just jump into a new system and starting making impact plays right off the bat. Things do take time.
Quote:
some of you guys need to learn how to watch the game and figure out for yourselves how a player is performing. The coach is typically going to be supportive and positive especially via the media.
Ogletree has been a very mixed bag, he's played well of late, and has really struggled at other times.
sigh.....some of guys need to realize that just because a LB gives up some big plays against RB's and TE's who are quicker andfaster, doesn't mean he's not playing well. Good have bad games...and Ogletree had a few. And some of you guys need to realize its not a video game, where you are going to just jump into a new system and starting making impact plays right off the bat. Things do take time.
good players have bad games.
They're also not as good as they've looked beating up on TB, the Redskins and San Francisco.
Welcome to the NFL where you're never quite as bad (or as good) as you look on your best/worst day.
In any given year you have the Pats (usually) and a few other teams at the top (this year Nola, KC and LAR). At the bottom you (usually) have Cleveland and a few others (this year San Fran, Arizona, Oakland).
Other than that, what is separating these teams other than penalties/officiating, health, and dumb luck (guys hitting 63 yard FGs one week and missing EPs the next)? The answer is very little.
To the OP, yes, do give DG credit! Give him credit for being tireless in turning over this roster, credit for his draft, and credit for being willing to let go of mistakes as soon as they become mistakes.
As a matter of fact, credit both DG and Shurmur for making something out of a 1-7 season and providing some level of hope for next year and beyond when it had been lost according to so many.
I don't expect perfection, I don't dispute he's performing better of late on a poor defense. The reality is he's not the player he's being paid to be. It's got nothing to do with a video game. It's called being a solid professional.
I Keep going back to the same shit i was saying prior to the 2017 season. Make this defense evil good and none of the other shit will matter. Shaky OL that can be overwhelmed at times? Defense will cover that up. Eli takes too many sacks? Defense wins championships.
Fix the D above all else and we will be just fine.
I don't expect perfection, I don't dispute he's performing better of late on a poor defense. The reality is he's not the player he's being paid to be. It's got nothing to do with a video game. It's called being a solid professional.
Interesting.
I heard Banks on with Evan and Joe this morning and he singled Ogletree out as someone who is playing well, and has really gotten comfortable with the scheme.
He also said he credits a lot of that to AO now just concentrating on doing his job, and not worrying about getting others in place or trying to cover for them. He said he's now just doing his job and doing it well.
It's a bit reminiscent of that safety a few years back who managed to reel in a ton of INTs despite being a below average player and overall liability.
His name is escaping me at the moment.
Quote:
Watch his repeatedly not read his keys and guess wrongly on gap assignments, allowing backs to run free in the secondary. Basic LB, basic defense, and he stinks at it.
I don't expect perfection, I don't dispute he's performing better of late on a poor defense. The reality is he's not the player he's being paid to be. It's got nothing to do with a video game. It's called being a solid professional.
Interesting.
I heard Banks on with Evan and Joe this morning and he singled Ogletree out as someone who is playing well, and has really gotten comfortable with the scheme.
He also said he credits a lot of that to AO now just concentrating on doing his job, and not worrying about getting others in place or trying to cover for them. He said he's now just doing his job and doing it well.
There's been an uptick in his play, but plenty of room for improvement, and no room for a slide back either.
I don't expect perfection, I don't dispute he's performing better of late on a poor defense. The reality is he's not the player he's being paid to be. It's got nothing to do with a video game. It's called being a solid professional.
We’ll agree to disagree- he’s a former 1st rounder, has had a productive career and is better than the dozens of linebackers we’ve had here for the last 10 years .... and there’s a reason he was given the contract he has.
I agree in principal with many of the points, but disagree with the overall radical approach, especially with the QB position. We do see that having a cost-controlled QB on a rookie contract is part of the formula for success, but where that breaks down is that it still has to be the right QB. Cluster drafting a bunch of mobile QB's will likely not lead to anymore success than having a very good pocket QB.
But the health thing cannot be overlooked. The problem is - it is really difficult to team-build around this. In theory, it seems like stockpiling a lot of mid-priced guys is sound, until the team has success and then those guys become either ex-teammates or get a big payday. Or, you stockpile a bunch of middle-priced guys who play like middle-priced guys and the team gets hit with injuries leaving them with an exposed poor depth that nearly every team is forced to field due to the cap.
It's a huge factor in why long-term success eludes 85% of the league.
The very good pocket QBs are rare, though, and may even be a dying breed due to changes in college football. If Drew Brees falls on your lap you hold on and pay whatever it takes to keep him...but as we've seen paying Stafford or Cousins that kind of money doesn't make them Brees.
Here's a fun fact - the Giants have conceded fewer points than the Chiefs have...yet the Chiefs are 11-2 and we're 5-8.
This game is about offense, and it's increasingly about the mobile QB. I switched off the Giants game yesterday around the second quarter to watch Baltimore and Kansas City, and I was glad I did. It still shows that Jackson only has a few start under his belt, but Baltimore is a better team with him running the offense instead of Flacco. With a running QB (or QBs) and a coach committed to running the ball creatively, you can do a lot of damage in this league. Watch Baltimore in these playoffs. They can go anywhere and beat anyone.
Quote:
I sometimes think your roster building methods are a bit Kevorkian.
I agree in principal with many of the points, but disagree with the overall radical approach, especially with the QB position. We do see that having a cost-controlled QB on a rookie contract is part of the formula for success, but where that breaks down is that it still has to be the right QB. Cluster drafting a bunch of mobile QB's will likely not lead to anymore success than having a very good pocket QB.
But the health thing cannot be overlooked. The problem is - it is really difficult to team-build around this. In theory, it seems like stockpiling a lot of mid-priced guys is sound, until the team has success and then those guys become either ex-teammates or get a big payday. Or, you stockpile a bunch of middle-priced guys who play like middle-priced guys and the team gets hit with injuries leaving them with an exposed poor depth that nearly every team is forced to field due to the cap.
It's a huge factor in why long-term success eludes 85% of the league.
The very good pocket QBs are rare, though, and may even be a dying breed due to changes in college football. If Drew Brees falls on your lap you hold on and pay whatever it takes to keep him...but as we've seen paying Stafford or Cousins that kind of money doesn't make them Brees.
Here's a fun fact - the Giants have conceded fewer points than the Chiefs have...yet the Chiefs are 11-2 and we're 5-8.
This game is about offense, and it's increasingly about the mobile QB. I switched off the Giants game yesterday around the second quarter to watch Baltimore and Kansas City, and I was glad I did. It still shows that Jackson only has a few start under his belt, but Baltimore is a better team with him running the offense instead of Flacco. With a running QB (or QBs) and a coach committed to running the ball creatively, you can do a lot of damage in this league. Watch Baltimore in these playoffs. They can go anywhere and beat anyone.
Another fun fact: Giants lead NFC East in scoring, but are in last place.
Go figure.
Quote:
Watch his repeatedly not read his keys and guess wrongly on gap assignments, allowing backs to run free in the secondary. Basic LB, basic defense, and he stinks at it.
I don't expect perfection, I don't dispute he's performing better of late on a poor defense. The reality is he's not the player he's being paid to be. It's got nothing to do with a video game. It's called being a solid professional.
We’ll agree to disagree- he’s a former 1st rounder, has had a productive career and is better than the dozens of linebackers we’ve had here for the last 10 years .... and there’s a reason he was given the contract he has.
There's also a reason why the Rams cut him loose only one year into that contract.
He's an improvement for NYG, but that's not saying much. At a cost of $10M per, when we badly need a talent infusion and capital investment in pass rushers, I'd rather move on.
Quote:
While I don't think you were necessarily saying injuries don't matter, they play a significant part in team performance:
Quote:
Injuries are no excuse in this league.
Andy in Boston : 9:54 am : link : reply
every team is banged up.
We had no Odell, No Colins, No Snacks, missing our starting center. Vernon, JackRabbit, Engram have been banged up all year.
Where I'll violently disagree is the idea that injuries are no excuse. They most definitely are a valid excuse because I've found no other factor more indicative of success or failure that has been consistent over the past 20 years than overall team health. Here are some points:
- All but 2 SB's since 2000 have featured at least one team in the top 5 of health
- Last year, 10 of the 12 playoff teams finished in the top 15 of the league in overall health. While that looks like an outlier, the two years prior were 10 teams and 9 teams.
- The Giants have been in the bottom quarter of the league in team health every year but one since 2011 - that year was 2016, when they were in the top 5 of good health. 4 seasons they were dead last
- No team who was dead last in health even made the playoffs since 2000. The healthiest team in the league has made the playoffs all but 3 years in that span.
I know the common retort from fans is that injuries don't matter, but they matter. Significantly.
I agree with this post, which is why I continue to be mystified by the way much of the NFL allocates its cap space and uses its roster.
If injuries are such a significant determinant of results (and I believe they are), why isn't more emphasis being placed on roster depth? With few exceptions, I think a team is better off with 5 $4M players than with 1 $20M player.
1. Only QBs + Mack + Donald make >$20M
2. You overestimate the ability of $4M players. Replacing Beckham, with 5 players averaging $3.6M ($18/5) would not make this a better team, unless you catch lightening in a bottle with an Adam Thielen ($4.8M per). More likely you'd end up with Terrance Williams ($4.25M), Kevin White ($4.1M), Chris Hogan ($4.0M), Ted Ginn ($3.66M), and Willie Snead ($3.5M) which would be one of the worst WR corps in the game (see Dallas pre Cooper trade)
Now, if you advocated trading down in the draft and building depth that way, then I'd agree with you. But low level FA "depth" acquisitions are how you get guys like John Jerry and Patrick Omameh. (this is not an endorsement of overpaying for Solder)
The very good pocket QBs are rare, though, and may even be a dying breed due to changes in college football. If Drew Brees falls on your lap you hold on and pay whatever it takes to keep him...but as we've seen paying Stafford or Cousins that kind of money doesn't make them Brees.
Here's a fun fact - the Giants have conceded fewer points than the Chiefs have...yet the Chiefs are 11-2 and we're 5-8.
This game is about offense, and it's increasingly about the mobile QB. I switched off the Giants game yesterday around the second quarter to watch Baltimore and Kansas City, and I was glad I did. It still shows that Jackson only has a few start under his belt, but Baltimore is a better team with him running the offense instead of Flacco. With a running QB (or QBs) and a coach committed to running the ball creatively, you can do a lot of damage in this league. Watch Baltimore in these playoffs. They can go anywhere and beat anyone.
And the very good mobile QBs aren't rare? How about the very good mobile QBs that actually stay healthy for 10+ years?
Quote:
Sorry, but you seem to forget all of those plays where teams were targeting Ogletree in coverage and he simply couldn't cover anyone. Just a few weeks ago, EVERYONE was railing against Ogletree. Then the ball started bouncing his way. (Like yesterday, the ball bounced into his arms).
It's a bit reminiscent of that safety a few years back who managed to reel in a ton of INTs despite being a below average player and overall liability.
His name is escaping me at the moment.
Landon Collins! :-)
I assume you're really thinking about Stevie Brown and his 8 INTs!
Quote:
In comment 14213009 JonC said:
Quote:
Watch his repeatedly not read his keys and guess wrongly on gap assignments, allowing backs to run free in the secondary. Basic LB, basic defense, and he stinks at it.
I don't expect perfection, I don't dispute he's performing better of late on a poor defense. The reality is he's not the player he's being paid to be. It's got nothing to do with a video game. It's called being a solid professional.
We’ll agree to disagree- he’s a former 1st rounder, has had a productive career and is better than the dozens of linebackers we’ve had here for the last 10 years .... and there’s a reason he was given the contract he has.
There's also a reason why the Rams cut him loose only one year into that contract.
He's an improvement for NYG, but that's not saying much. At a cost of $10M per, when we badly need a talent infusion and capital investment in pass rushers, I'd rather move on.
But the Rams didn’t “cut him loose”.... they received 2 draft picks for him.
And maybe the reason was financial ..and they felt like they could get by without him.... whatever the case , I think we need him.
Our problems with the roster has more to do with poor decisions on talent, than it does the money paid to these guys. Now if we’re talking foolish QB contracts or extensions, that’s something else.
And I love the way he lays the leather. He could have played with LT, Harry C and the boyz.
Our problems with the roster has more to do with poor decisions on talent, than it does the money paid to these guys. Now if we’re talking foolish QB contracts or extensions, that’s something else.
It's a symptom of poor decisions regarding veterans (pro personnel) which is where DG was previously employed by NYG. He needs to do better, especially with UFAs.
Our problems with the roster has more to do with poor decisions on talent, than it does the money paid to these guys. Now if we’re talking foolish QB contracts or extensions, that’s something else.
How can you say that with certainty?
Despite some people's beliefs, the cap does limit what teams can or can't do in free agency.
Giants have major holes at CB, major holes at S (depending on LC at least 1 maybe 2), need pass rushers, need OL help and more.
Some of that it's expected has to be fixed in FA, Ogletree is one of many, but the lower his cap commitment doesn't it stand to reason the better (or more expensive at least to remove subjectivity) free agent the Giants can add?
Hopefully the Giants can use his large, upcoming roster bonus (and game tape from the first half of this season) to squeeze some concessions from him.
While he might be "our best LB in a decade", he's certainly not worth $11.75M per season. His per season average over 2019-2021 seasons would have him as the 2nd highest paid ILB behind Kuechly and just ahead of Bobby Wagner.
I think he'd be lucky to get $8M per on the open market, though some of the deals given out always surprise me. That said, still better off cutting him and making CJ Mosley the highest paid ILB (~$12.5-13M per season)!
NYG locker room needed leadership on top of talent upgrades, no dispute there. But, I don't see him as a long term solution for a contender in a season or two. Put the dollars at pass rusher, and Collins.
NYG locker room needed leadership on top of talent upgrades, no dispute there. But, I don't see him as a long term solution for a contender in a season or two. Put the dollars at pass rusher, and Collins.
Better off just moving him to ILB than paying Ogletree that! :-)
Quote:
Is it going to affect our roster moving forward? No. Is it going to reduce our chances to pick up new FAs? No.
Our problems with the roster has more to do with poor decisions on talent, than it does the money paid to these guys. Now if we’re talking foolish QB contracts or extensions, that’s something else.
How can you say that with certainty?
Despite some people's beliefs, the cap does limit what teams can or can't do in free agency.
Giants have major holes at CB, major holes at S (depending on LC at least 1 maybe 2), need pass rushers, need OL help and more.
Some of that it's expected has to be fixed in FA, Ogletree is one of many, but the lower his cap commitment doesn't it stand to reason the better (or more expensive at least to remove subjectivity) free agent the Giants can add?
I haven’t seen evidence where our spending has hamstrung us to any degree. For example, if we wanted to re-sign Linval Joseph, we could have, imo. We didn’t think he was worth it, especially with Hankins here. That proved wrong, imo. Error in talent evaluation, more than money costs, imv. No one lnows for sure. We can only go by capologists like overthecap and from what I’ve seen poor choices have screwed us more than the cap
Quote:
"While he might be "our best LB in a decade", he's certainly not worth $11.75M per season. His per season average over 2019-2021 seasons would have him as the 2nd highest paid ILB behind Kuechly and just ahead of Bobby Wagner."
NYG locker room needed leadership on top of talent upgrades, no dispute there. But, I don't see him as a long term solution for a contender in a season or two. Put the dollars at pass rusher, and Collins.
Better off just moving him to ILB than paying Ogletree that! :-)
I know many want to move him to LB, but he's not a LB.
Quote:
In comment 14213146 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
Is it going to affect our roster moving forward? No. Is it going to reduce our chances to pick up new FAs? No.
Our problems with the roster has more to do with poor decisions on talent, than it does the money paid to these guys. Now if we’re talking foolish QB contracts or extensions, that’s something else.
How can you say that with certainty?
Despite some people's beliefs, the cap does limit what teams can or can't do in free agency.
Giants have major holes at CB, major holes at S (depending on LC at least 1 maybe 2), need pass rushers, need OL help and more.
Some of that it's expected has to be fixed in FA, Ogletree is one of many, but the lower his cap commitment doesn't it stand to reason the better (or more expensive at least to remove subjectivity) free agent the Giants can add?
I haven’t seen evidence where our spending has hamstrung us to any degree. For example, if we wanted to re-sign Linval Joseph, we could have, imo. We didn’t think he was worth it, especially with Hankins here. That proved wrong, imo. Error in talent evaluation, more than money costs, imv. No one lnows for sure. We can only go by capologists like overthecap and from what I’ve seen poor choices have screwed us more than the cap
How about losing out on Norwell to the Jags?
and then shifting to Solder.
I have no idea how Norwell has played or who would have been the Giants LT or if it would have made the Giants better, but you only need to look back to this past off-season to see how less cap room than another team led to the Giants missing out on a targeted FA.
I am sure there are tons of examples, many we don't (and shouldn't) hear about.
Yea, I was being facetious.
Unfortunately I think we're going to end up giving him something like 5 yrs/$60M (with $20-30M gtd) and will quickly have buyers remorse like the Rams did with Ogletree. He's a very good SS, but I think he's closer to Tashaun Gipson ($7.2M) than Harrison Smith ($10.25M).
Personally, if the money is the same, I'd rather have Mathieu than Collins (I know their styles are completely different).
Baltimore might be a better team with Jackson running the offense, but at a crucial juncture in OT, he was injured and RGIII came in and failed. Jackson's inability to stay on the field contributed to the loss. And you might not even get a chance to watch Baltimore in the playoffs as they still have to get in them.
He's been a disappointment as well.
He's been mocked for his UFA period but in reality, I think it's very good with the exception of Omameh who he QUICKLY cut bait on and then got it right with Jamon Brown.
Solder is a very good 2-way LT for a balanced offense. Kareem Martin was signed to be a jack-knife backup OLB/rusher/special teams guy and is strong in that role. Ogletree is a good field general and valuable 3-down MLB they really needed. Michael Thomas was a GREAT pickup in the Deon Grant mold. I love what I'm seeing from Antonio Hamilton too. Penny is a great pickup. Even Pulley -while not great and not paid to be great - has quietly settled things down inside. How bout B.W. Webb and quiet role players like Bennie Fowler? Anybody noticed this Eligwe guy?
Just like the 1st time DG here, everybody he brings in is doing their job and meeting or exceeding expectations. Great job cycling through players and cutting the dead wood and the team has righted the ship. And he'd found pieces that are not only good on their own but appear to fit well together. He's a good GM and he's showing that here. Can't wait to see what the team looks like after another offseason. I appreciate how diligent and relentless he's been rebuilding this putrid roster quickly while also enduring chemotherpy. Much respect!
But, handing A money to B/B+ talent is hard to watch. Eventually, it will limit us under a finite salary cap.
Quote:
I switched off the Giants game yesterday around the second quarter to watch Baltimore and Kansas City, and I was glad I did. It still shows that Jackson only has a few start under his belt, but Baltimore is a better team with him running the offense instead of Flacco. With a running QB (or QBs) and a coach committed to running the ball creatively, you can do a lot of damage in this league. Watch Baltimore in these playoffs. They can go anywhere and beat anyone.
Baltimore might be a better team with Jackson running the offense, but at a crucial juncture in OT, he was injured and RGIII came in and failed. Jackson's inability to stay on the field contributed to the loss. And you might not even get a chance to watch Baltimore in the playoffs as they still have to get in them.
Keep up FMIC. That's why teams have to draft multiple very good mobile QBs and really commit to it. Lamar Jackson was just Phase I of Baltimore's brilliant strategy!
His FA signings in Carolina were very reasonable contracts and he cut bait on overpriced vets.
That's why judging him on what has happened in 2018 in quite unfair.
He's been a disappointment as well.
So a serendipitous lack of cap room prevented the Giants from making one mistake and forced a potential different mistake.
My point was less about results, more about process.
It was clear the Giants wanted Norwell, and it was clear the Jags deeper pockets forced the Giants to pivot to Solder. If we believe all we read on this topic.
It may have worked out to the Giants benefit. Especially if Norwell is awful next year too and Solder improves, but it doesn't change the facts.
You can see what's happened this year there. And I expect the new owner, Tepper will clean house in the offseason. Rivera will be fired, Hurney will once again be let go as GM and he'll start putting his stamp on the team.
We talk about Mara being loyal, but Richardson brought a guy who was failing for a few years as GM, Hurney, back. And the results have been predictable.
tepper won't stand for that.
He's been mocked for his UFA period but in reality, I think it's very good with the exception of Omameh who he QUICKLY cut bait on and then got it right with Jamon Brown.
Solder is a very good 2-way LT for a balanced offense. Kareem Martin was signed to be a jack-knife backup OLB/rusher/special teams guy and is strong in that role. Ogletree is a good field general and valuable 3-down MLB they really needed. Michael Thomas was a GREAT pickup in the Deon Grant mold. I love what I'm seeing from Antonio Hamilton too. Penny is a great pickup. Even Pulley -while not great and not paid to be great - has quietly settled things down inside. How bout B.W. Webb and quiet role players like Bennie Fowler? Anybody noticed this Eligwe guy?
Just like the 1st time DG here, everybody he brings in is doing their job and meeting or exceeding expectations. Great job cycling through players and cutting the dead wood and the team has righted the ship. And he'd found pieces that are not only good on their own but appear to fit well together. He's a good GM and he's showing that here. Can't wait to see what the team looks like after another offseason. I appreciate how diligent and relentless he's been rebuilding this putrid roster quickly while also enduring chemotherpy. Much respect!
Solder is a B signing if he maintains his solid play. Still paid elite money for a very good player.
Kareem Martin is a great example of why 4 guys at $4M per season are not equal to one elite player (Mack, Von Miller, etc). Solid, much needed depth for this team, but ideally a team can get comparable production from mid-late round picks (Carter looks on his way to being at least that good).
Stewart was an awful signing, right up there with Omameh.
I think DG did well with all his trades (JPP, Ogletree, Snacks, Apple) and would probably give him a B+ overall on them. I'd still rather see Ogletree a 1 year stop gap than the ILB next year at $11.75M.
Webb is an A+ and Thomas was a solid pickup.
Some of these other guys (Penny, Pulley, Eligwe, etc) are bottom of the roster depth and while important to the teams overall success (especially the younger ones with some upside like Haley, Penny), they contribute less to a GMs overall "grade" than the big $ players (IMO).
His FA signings in Carolina were very reasonable contracts and he cut bait on overpriced vets.
That's why judging him on what has happened in 2018 in quite unfair.
I agree with that. The Giants basically had to sign either Norwell or Solder and then still had to draft an OL in the top 2 rounds just to have a mediocre OL. They basically had to build an entire OL from scratch in one offseason.
And let me say this right now:
If given the chance to reverse the Solder deal right now, I wouldn't. Maybe I'm in the minority but I've been impressed with his play - he was new to the team and injured early in the year AND the rest of the line was incompetent.
The last few weeks he's been outstanding. I'm fine with the deal in the context of the entire OL.
And let me say this right now:
If given the chance to reverse the Solder deal right now, I wouldn't. Maybe I'm in the minority but I've been impressed with his play - he was new to the team and injured early in the year AND the rest of the line was incompetent.
The last few weeks he's been outstanding. I'm fine with the deal in the context of the entire OL.
I was agreeing for the most part. Though I'd grade him as more "solid" (your 2nd post) than "very good" (your 1st). Two of his 3 biggest signings (Omameh and Stewart) were enormous flops, the latter of which even the worst posters on BBI predicted!
Exactly. And if this doesn't lead to a Championship (which it obviously will not), it will have been a failure.
Have you been enjoying Barkley's all-pro performance thus far Dave?
And we're still 5-8 and going nowhere.
When the roster is in a terrible state, it is a lose-lose scenario.
Have you been enjoying Barkley's all-pro performance thus far Dave?
5-8? It's not doom and gloom if it's true, stalker.
What's my load taste like?
That's very yucky.
Anyway, flip a coin and the Giants are 7-6 and playing for the division in a few weeks.
Also, lost on me how we are "going nowhere". I see improvement, especially along the OL.
it's just narrow-minded and lazy bullshit from people who like to talk themselves into believing things aren't as bad as they actually are.
That's very yucky.
Anyway, flip a coin and the Giants are 7-6 and playing for the division in a few weeks.
Also, lost on me how we are "going nowhere". I see improvement, especially along the OL.
We didn't lose on coin flips...we lost on incompetence.
You see improvement against teams in disarray with backup quarterbacks. You also see that it's about as difficult to go 2-14 as it is 14-2.
I don't think we're learning anything particularly relevant with regards to next year. And even if we are, enormous QB questions loom that will likely extend into contract time for Barkley, as well as a new GM and possibly new head coach.
When I look at the Giants I see a sailboat on a windless ocean. Just passing the time.
It's razor thin.
Also, Terps. Were you watching KC-Baltimore late yesterday afternoon. What are your thoughts on Lamar Jackson being unable to finish the game and RGIII not able to step in without a drop off. Not sarcastic but isn't this your model for success?
And I love the way he lays the leather. He could have played with LT, Harry C and the boyz.
So he'd be useless in a Super Bowl?
Weird take.
Should say, "I don't agree"
I guess I misjudged last year. Our miserable record was just poor coaching and players not performing. So I really should have ignored the infinite number of key injuries we had. Outstanding.
I don't know how to evaluate this team lately.
--We beat a 49ers team who started an undrafted, practice
roster QB and has no running game.
--We held on to beat a Tampa team that started
FitzTragic, a QB who hits just as many DBs in stride as
WRs. Who was then replaced by another turnover machine.
And the Bucs are a historically bad defense.
--Then yesterday we beat a Skins team, crushed by
injuries everywhere, who started Mark Sanchez, one of
the worst QBs ever drafted in the first round since
Ryan Leaf.
--The win over the Bears was decent, but even that is a
distorted because Chase Daniels started.
So the season has sort of evened-out. And we're likely where we should be - a team 4 games under .500 and on the verge of another double digit loss season.
As for Gettleman, I openly admit I disliked the hire and still think he was the wrong man for the job. He was just fortunate to be Accorsi's friend, and that carried immense weight.
I give him a TBD. Barkley is a great talent, has a huge entertainment factor like OBJ and that provides some consolation prize to some fans, but I just don't like investing high picks in that position. I do like Carter. Hernandez is a good one trick pony, but needs more refining in the pass game.
It's razor thin.
Also, Terps. Were you watching KC-Baltimore late yesterday afternoon. What are your thoughts on Lamar Jackson being unable to finish the game and RGIII not able to step in without a drop off. Not sarcastic but isn't this your model for success?
I did. I turned off our farce of a game around the second quarter to watch that one.
Jackson (and his ability to extend plays) was a huge reason they were even in the game. Yeah he missed the last play, but so what? If not for him that play never happens. If Flacco starts that game the Chiefs win by 20.
You're also being a little disingenuous. Jackson missed one play...and that play was 3rd and a mile. And Griffin actually made a great throw on what could have been PI on the Chiefs.
That was big boy football being played in Kansas City yesterday by both teams in large part because of their mobile quarterbacks. Playoff football...not the irrelevance we saw at FedEx.
I guess I misjudged last year. Our miserable record was just poor coaching and players not performing. So I really should have ignored the infinite number of key injuries we had. Outstanding.
I don't know how to evaluate this team lately.
--We beat a 49ers team who started an undrafted, practice
roster QB and has no running game.
--We held on to beat a Tampa team that started
FitzTragic, a QB who hits just as many DBs in stride as
WRs. Who was then replaced by another turnover machine.
And the Bucs are a historically bad defense.
--Then yesterday we beat a Skins team, crushed by
injuries everywhere, who started Mark Sanchez, one of
the worst QBs ever drafted in the first round since
Ryan Leaf.
--The win over the Bears was decent, but even that is a
distorted because Chase Daniels started.
So the season has sort of evened-out. And we're likely where we should be - a team 4 games under .500 and on the verge of another double digit loss season.
As for Gettleman, I openly admit I disliked the hire and still think he was the wrong man for the job. He was just fortunate to be Accorsi's friend, and that carried immense weight.
I give him a TBD. Barkley is a great talent, has a huge entertainment factor like OBJ and that provides some consolation prize to some fans, but I just don't like investing high picks in that position. I do like Carter. Hernandez is a good one trick pony, but needs more refining in the pass game.
Injuries aren't an excuse when we win, but are an excuse for Eli when we're 3-13. You should know this BW.
He didn't reenter for the final two plays.
So in effect, at the game's most important juncture, he was on the sideline injured.
Awesome
Missed two plays that were 3rd and 22 and 4th and 22. Hardly the reason they lost the game, as the odds were already fairly low of conversion.
He was a big part of the reason they were even in a position to win.
Lots and lots of pride in having the "best so-and-so in the league" or calling a guy "generational" for the millionth time.
Who cares? The team sucks!
Quote:
You're also being a little disingenuous. Jackson missed one play...and that play was 3rd and a mile. And Griffin actually made a great throw on what could have been PI on the Chiefs.
He didn't reenter for the final two plays.
So in effect, at the game's most important juncture, he was on the sideline injured.
Awesome
Again, disingenuous.
And if you watched the game, he was a handful. And bear in mind it was only his fourth start...on the road against possibly the best team in the NFL with a big home field advantage. It was a fantastic showing.
Meanwhile my understanding is that Lauletta looked like a joke in a zero pressure environment. But hey at least our head coach mocked him for it in the media.
Yeah, we're going in a positive direction...
Ogletree has 5 ints....mainly off deflections, but he was in position to make those plays....
Mauro just had one of those games.....probably the highlight of the season for him.....
Playing against Sanchez definitely helped.....they put a qb in the game that could move in the pocket, and all of a sudden this defense went to shit....
The Giants play who are in front of them.....whether it's Sanchez, Mullins, Prescott or Brees....the offense couldn't do crap until a couple of turnovers gave them momentum....and then it looked like the Skins just gave up....
Have to give Shurm a back slap....this team has not given up.....
We play a good Titans defense next week.....Mariotta is not the best qb, but he is mobile which gives this defense fits....Andrew Luck is slinging the ball good this season......and if the Cowboys have something to play for, like a bye or home field, these will be three tough games, and give us a clearer assessment of this team....but, another victory this season and we could be picking closer to 20 than to 10.....
But at least, it's enjoyable to watch Giants football again.....a winning attitude is healthy for a team.....we will not get one of the top qb's next year, unless we sell the farm and trade up.....
Question is, if we stay with Eli, do we go all in on the OL in the draft/FAcy? After next year, I don't see the Giants signing Eli unless he has "one of those years".....
The point I'm making isn't what do mobile QB's bring to the table, it is that they have a higher propensity of getting injured, which has as much of a negative impact as the positive impact of them being on the field.
DG has his blind spots, a couple of them are very concerning to me too, however, none of that matters if the team continues to draft well and succeed at identifying bottom of the roster role players like they have with Webb, Penny and Haley. Easier said than done, we're not picking 2nd with the highest waiver priority through 2/3 of the season every year. Hopefully he cleans up some things.
Ogletree was an overpaid but reliable commodity.
IMO well worth a 4th and a 6th, just think of the players that come in those rounds. Giants got a starter.
However, just with the eyeball test, Ogletree is not close to the upper tier of LBs in this league.
Watching the Seattle LBs, Kuechly, Lee (and Vender Esch) when healthy, those players are a tier above Ogletree.
Is he paid too much? Yes, but I get why he's here.
and the Giants have thrown for under 250 yards 25 times in the last 3 seasons.
Quote:
That it's easier than ever to pass the ball in this league, so with that said, shouldn't it be easier to find a qb that can get the job done?
and the Giants have thrown for under 250 yards 25 times in the last 3 seasons.
Great, that doesn't answer my question
Let's see who the next QB is for the Giants. I hope for a mobile (enough) QB as well, a good mobile QB really does tilt the field for the offense.
We can't call them rudderless until we see what they do this year. I envision fortifying the OL and Edge pressure this year, which will be a boon for any QB.
The point I'm making isn't what do mobile QB's bring to the table, it is that they have a higher propensity of getting injured, which has as much of a negative impact as the positive impact of them being on the field.
They be in trouble, just like everyone else. In the meantime they're competing for a title and scoring points for fun.
And they didn't need to spend huge at RB and WR to do it.
When the roster is in a terrible state, it is a lose-lose scenario.
Nobody would have been satisfied if they didnt try to improve the OL and LBs. There are other approaches to improve the OL besides resetting the high bar for LT salaries because the guy you really wanted signed elsewhere.
It's the same thing people murder Reese for, to the letter. Patching holes with bloated contracts to wring the last 2 years out of Eli Manning because you "have to" when you're almost 20 games under. 500 over the past 5 years.
Meanwhile my understanding is that Lauletta looked like a joke in a zero pressure environment. But hey at least our head coach mocked him for it in the media.
Yeah, we're going in a positive direction... [/quote]
I know you're chomping at the bit to add more fuel to your "Shurmur sucks" fire, but I'd watch the actual press conference video before coming to that conclusion. Shurmur was pretty measured about Lauletta, considering the performance. If he was taking a dig at anyone, it was the media who was treating Lauletta as a potential instant savior. (Watch from 4:12 onwards: https://www.giants.com/video/pat-shurmur-recaps-giants-win-over-washington)
- The offense has sucked for years
- Eli is going to be 38 in a month
- 2019 is the last year of Eli's contract
- With a new GM and coach in place, it makes sense to think about the future at QB
No one thought the Giants would be better this year with Lauletta over Eli. Unfortunately a lot of people (the front office included) thought this team was poised to compete this year and carried that mistaken mindset into their decision making.
They be in trouble, just like everyone else. In the meantime they're competing for a title and scoring points for fun.
And they didn't need to spend huge at RB and WR to do it.
I'm sure you'd be happy with a WR who dropped in the draft because of a domestic abuse arrest, a TE who was suspended for a year in college, and a RB videotaped shoving a woman around. When you're willing to take on people like that, you don't need to "spend huge".
The point is - eventually - NFL QBs need to be able to drop back, read a defense and deliver an accurate throw on time, under pressure. All the ability in the world won't save you from that fact and I made the same point RG3's rookie year. It's all good until there's a book on you and you have to prove you can stay healthy longterm. TBD on Jackson.
Hard to believe a Giants fan would turn off their best performance in years and fail to recognize the team's improving.
2. Will Hernandez has been solid & BJ Hill has been even better. This looks like a very nice draft thus far.
3. Say what you will about Eli, but I’m happy he’s gotten some wins. He was teetering very close to dipping below .500 has a NFL starter. He still may, but he has stabilized it a bit over the last 5 weeks. I don’t want Eli getting mocked to finish his career. I’m happy for him.
4. 5-8 is not good, but it’s also not 2-11. They’ve at least crawled back to towards the middle a bit which I think does have some value.
This offseason will present some very interesting decisions. I’ll admit, I don’t like investing so much money into RB + WR. I value Barkley much more than Beckham. I’d be open to trading Beckham for picks & running the offense through Saquon. Build up the trenches & let the run set up play action where Eli is best. That is what winning looks like with Eli at this stage in my opinion.
- The offense has sucked for years
- Eli is going to be 38 in a month
- 2019 is the last year of Eli's contract
- With a new GM and coach in place, it makes sense to think about the future at QB
No one thought the Giants would be better this year with Lauletta over Eli. Unfortunately a lot of people (the front office included) thought this team was poised to compete this year and carried that mistaken mindset into their decision making.
Under your model shouldn't it be fairly easy to replace the QB? Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't your solution be to take a QB along the lines of Jackson and back him up with someone cheap who has similar skill sets? In other words, keep the QB position low under the cap and then use that cap savings to build up the supporting cast?
Not sure I've remembered correctly, so that's why I'm asking.
If so, then why aren't the Giants in good position to do exactly that next year? Why can't they let Eli go and use the cap savings to get a couple of cheap mobile QB's and fill in other holes through FA?
The Chiefs are doing the right things with guys like Hill and Kelce (and Hunt), but the Giants are a joke for not trading their piece of shit WR who showboats!
What were people's actual expectations for this team this year?
Shouldn't realistic expectation be improvement? Arrow pointing up? Better than last year? Reason to believe we can be better going forward?
If the Giants finish 7-9 or somehow win out and get to 8-8 after a 1-7 start, isn't that a positive? That they continued to play hard for this coach and believe in his messages to them and buy into what he's putting out there for them?
The Giants were literally unwatchable last year for basically the entire season. They looked similarly unwatchable through the first half of this year at several points.
Now the offense is finally starting to figure it out. We've won 4 of 5 and if you think there are easy wins in the NFL, go ask the Steelers what they think about that or talk to the Chargers about how they barely beat Jeff Driskol and the AJ Green-less Bengals.
The Giants were never going to flip their W/L record in a single year. But if we go from 3-13 to 7-9 in one year, I'd say that's something to build on.
Or we could just find reasons to keep complaining on a daily basis and be miserable and not enjoy anything. To each their own, I guess.
The Chicago win matters, but we've seen wins like that before. Last year's unwatchable team upset the broncos on the road in primetime.
The Redskins didn't look like they had anything to play for yesterday, but they did. And their defense has been decent this year. We had 40 points on the board with ease... and without our best WR AND our backup QB playing most of the 4th quarter. If we kept our foot on the gas, we might have dropped 50+
I just think if people had expectations beyond this for the 2018-19 season, they were certain to be let down. It's hard to imagine a series of roster moves in the one offseason that passed that would have had this team winning 10+ games. And yet, we've been right there in the majority of the games we've lost and have a good chance to close out this campaign on a high note.
I think most people understand that there's still work to be done - a lot of it. But you don't go from point A to point B in one step. This was always going to be a process that required a little time. This roster was a fucking mess and there's still a long way to go. But we've got to start somewhere and I think there's a different feeling around the Giants now than there was a month ago.
The Chicago win matters, but we've seen wins like that before. Last year's unwatchable team upset the broncos on the road in primetime.
You're discounting wins against "bad" opponents saying it isn't a sign of improvement.
Have you forgotten the SF game last year?
And then they win a few games & its “well, they are just beating lousy QB’s”
I know each season is different, but I'll be feeling somewhat upbeat if finish strong, which it looks like we're doing. Hopefully we'll build on it next year.
This draft class appears to be good. Barkley, Hernandez, & Hill have all been good.
3. Say what you will about Eli, but I’m happy he’s gotten some wins. He was teetering very close to dipping below .500 has a NFL starter. He still may, but he has stabilized it a bit over the last 5 weeks. I don’t want Eli getting mocked to finish his career. I’m happy for him.
Once we stop worrying about Eli’s feelings and his stats and his freaks, we’ll finally be able to build a contender.
Quote:
3. Say what you will about Eli, but I’m happy he’s gotten some wins. He was teetering very close to dipping below .500 has a NFL starter. He still may, but he has stabilized it a bit over the last 5 weeks. I don’t want Eli getting mocked to finish his career. I’m happy for him.
Once we stop worrying about Eli’s feelings and his stats and his freaks, we’ll finally be able to build a contender.
His freaks? What are you insinuating?
That's when the decision has to get made. Two shots to fix it. FA and the draft.
Yep the number one thing Guy 1 should be evaluated on was how much he spent to partially fix the problem in FA (when the market sets the price on FA)
Decisions get made with:
- imperfect timing
- imperfect information
- no way to tell what other teams may offer
- no ability to tell the future
- no way to tell who would be even available in the draft ( draft board was likely not even finished at the time).
- few options available in FA
- might have to protect the blind side of a brand new franchise QB (who knew weeks before the draft?)
But he surely he sucks because how much he spent of money that is not ours compared to how much we claim he could have paid. What else was he supposed to do? Risk the next years to save a few bucks?
Thats just one example of torturing the data into confessing DG sucks and the team is badly led (which might be true...but i doubt we could tell until 2021).
I mean do we praise Jerry Reese for saving money by not being able to spell linebacker or 3rd round?
I thought the goal was to take chances to field a winning team. Is there a Lombardi for most cost effective OL? Was there a sure thing starting LT in the last draft? This one?
I submit that "cost effective FA deal for a LT" is close to an oxymoron.
fans feelings on a player and worrying about his stats impact the decisions made?
What fucking pipe dream do some of you subscribe to?
What would have made it a success? Did you think we were going to go from 3 wins to NFCE Champs and the Playoffs in one offseason?
If you did, that's your fault - not the Giants'
But the fact so many ripped him for taking Barkley, even well after we have seen the initial returns on him being as good as advertised, he really should be given a pat on the back just for that selection.
But it went against so many people's wishes that they have dug their heels in.
This wasn't going to be a quick turnaround, yet, amazingly, it actually is quickly turning around. Still not good enough.
I know the majority of the time we've been at or near the very bottom, but it isn't like we're a model of health.
Is the team improving or not? What were your expectations coming in? Playoffs? Super Bowl champs?
I do however like how he's not afraid to change up what isn't working. Sending under performing guys packing. No more draft status scholarship.
Too early to make an assessment IMHO. Will review in about 3 years. The draftees looks promising though.
I do however like how he's not afraid to change up what isn't working. Sending under performing guys packing. No more draft status scholarship.
Too early to make an assessment IMHO. Will review in about 3 years. The draftees looks promising though.
I guess it isn't too early to make an assessment - he sucks until he finds a duplicate of Victor Cruz.
For a franchise that has NEVER had back-to-back winning seasons, Gettleman compiled a record of 40-23-1 during his time as GM of the Panthers
17 games over .500.
But he needs a Victor Cruz on his resume??
What kind of bullshit comment is that?
For a franchise that has NEVER had back-to-back winning seasons, Gettleman compiled a record of 40-23-1 during his time as GM of the Panthers
People do talk about it. There were plenty of debates at the time he was hired that people pinned all the Panthers success on Gettleman, when in fact he inherited a franchise QB who already had two years of development, a defense that had been in the top 10 in 2012, and had a roster sprinkled with pro bowl players.
Sounds fair.
They've been absolutely stellar without him, too.
Some of the narratives here are strange as fucking hell.
They're just the Panthers. Alternating good years and bad years is what they are.
Interesting you didn't post their record the 4 years preceding Gettleman:
8-8, 2-14, 6-10, 7-9
Yep. Clearly just alternating good and bad seasons....
Interesting you didn't post their record the 4 years preceding Gettleman:
8-8, 2-14, 6-10, 7-9
Yep. Clearly just alternating good and bad seasons....
If you're in Charlotte, then you know why the team was bad . Why pretend as if it's relevant to this topic? Did Dave Gettleman lift them up out of incompetence, or was the franchise transitioning from the end of Jake Delhomme's career, to finding the next QB?
The real question to ask is why do people try to diminish what he had done? It is almost like some have made up their mind about him and any credit given has to be discredited.
I really don't understand this type of thinking.
His time here is still under evaluation, but he did a very good job in Carolina.
if we had beaten the top teams in the league these last few weeks it would have been used as evidence of how much we have improved.so the fact that we've only beaten backup quarterbacks and reeling teams also should be considered. I see no reason to make any clean memes about the season 3 weeks to go. Let's look at the last three games and then judge the season as a whole.
Who cares about pundits? Not sure why that should have anything to do with having reasonable expectations. 8-8 isn't even totally out of the question right now.
Favorable schedule? Well, you can call it that - doesn't make it factual. Show me actual proof of that otherwise it's a useless comment to add.
The Giants have injuries just like everyone else does and they also traded away 2 defensive starters for picks.
If the Giants manage a 7-8 win season after a 1-7 start, then yes, I think it's fair to say this was a step in the right direction.
Not sure why anyone would think this was a playoff team coming off a 3 win season when we had such significant roster turnover.
We hired a new coach, have new coordinators, several new starters, new systems on both sides of the football... and you thought this should be a playoff team?
Not really sure what would have led anyone to believe that outside of wishful thinking.
Shurmur still concerns be greatly with regards to in game management, but he has weathered a storm of adversity this year. I’d rather have a coach do this early in his career as opposed to a few years in as we saw with McAdoo. McAdoo had early success & I really believe he felt it could be easily replicated in 2017, but never was able to weather the storm of adversity which led to 2-10. We never saw the adversity present itself in 2016.
At the bye, I said I wanted to see improvements & wins in the 2nd half for Shurmur. I always made the point *IF* you want to believe in this regime & see it be successful, this team needs to rattle off some wins in the 2nd half. So far so good, but it is far from over. If this team can knock the Titans & Colts out of the playoffs on the way to 7-9 / 8-8, I don’t see how this isn’t viewed as a positive off a 1-7 start.
The past two weeks we have eclipsed 30 points.
BTW, as for your new coach and so forth argument,how are the Bears doing? They were 5-11 last year and I don't recall the last winning season that they had.
IMO,Gettelman's grade as a GM is incomplete,
Which one is it and why is it too early to call it a success, but not too late to call it a failure? Your logic has just a few holes in it here...
You also didn't show how our schedule was in any way more favorable than most other teams in the league. So, I'd be interested in seeing whether or not thats actually true or just a BS anecdote you tossed into that post to try and enhance a weak stance.
Like FMiC pointed out, the injury comment was hyperbole as well. One of the "healthiest teams in Giants history" ?? Based on what? I'm not sure this team is even healthier than the 2016 team.
You're sorry my expectations are so low and seem to think they should be higher, so what should I have expected from a 3-13 football team with a 37 year old QB that underwent significant roster turnover and had a significant amount of holes that needed to be patched?
As for the Bears - well, If we'd given up a haul for a borderline generational defensive player like they did instead of trading away our starting NT and CB, I'm sure that would make a slight difference. The Bears won 2 more games than we did last year and right now, they have 3 more wins than us... and we just beat them. If you want to keep focusing on Chase Daniel and ignore that our offense fared quite a bit better against that defense than the Rams did in an effort to minimize anything remotely positive here, be my guest...
Like I said - if NYG manage to spin a 1-7 start into a 7-8 win season, I fail to see how that's not a solid step forward for this team. It doesn't mean we're there or are now a contender, but again, this is a multi-step process. This doesn't just go from bad to fixed overnight. We had far too many issues for that to be possible. You either understood that or didn't going into this season. Clearly you did not.
That's exactly what it is. Here's the order of priority:
1. Being right.
2. The Giants winning.
When the two conflict, you see what you're seeing here.
The 2014 team ended up 6-10.
The disturbing signs that we all identified with Gettleman and Shurmur haven't just gone away in the last 5 weeks. It was only 2 weeks ago that Shurmur pissed away a division game in Philly through, frankly, abject stupidity.
And go back to Gettleman's proud Luddism in the offseason...I suppose it's possible he's done a 180 and embraced best practices since then, but it seems unlikely.
I haven't seen any reason to believe that Gettleman and Shurmur are better at their jobs than we thought they were at 1-7. "They're still playing hard" is a damn low bar when we're trying to compete with what we're seeing from the elite teams in the NFL.
I think there's a fundamental cultural problem with the way the Giants operate. I've thought that for some time, and that belief isn't going to change because we've beaten 4 backup QBs on 3 bad teams in 5 weeks.
Before Barkley’s run with 10 seconds left in the half the offense was terrible. We didn’t convert on 3rd downs. We had 4 3 and outs in the first half. And a 4 and out. Our longest drive? 6 plays before an INT. We did nothing before the Barkley run.
In the 2nd half, Beckham threw a TD.
We had one strong offensive drive for a TD. That was it.
Giants offense wasn’t good vs CHI outside of Barkley and a nice throw from Beckham.
Daniels gave us 10 points and they had a ton of 3 and outs (and we usually gave it right back on a 3 and out). That’s the story. It wasn’t about a good performance by the Giants offense and the offense scoring 30 on the Bears D. That didn’t happen.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nyg/2016_injuries.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nyg/2018_injuries.htm
18.8 PPG
77.9 rush yards per game
1-7 rec
Since... (5 games)
31.4 PPG
150.8 rush yards per game
4-1 rec
Can't give backup QB's all of the credit. The offensive line is playing better. We are playing smarter. We are learning on the run like we should have been from the start.
I don't see parallels between this and 2013 at all save for the backup QB aspect. We had Brandon Jacobs wearing #45 on that team. Guys like Peyton Hillis and Michael Cox were getting the majority of the carries. We had no Saquon Barkley. The offensive line was deteriorating rather than being rebuilt. The team had recently begun their descent into what became a mostly awful past few seasons.
We have to start getting better somewhere. I see a better offense being run here than I saw early in the year. I see Eli Manning actually having some time to throw the football. I see us truly committing to running more.
Doesn't mean everything is fixed or that I've seen enough - but I'm not convinced that this team hasn't improved at all and is just taking advantage of the teams they're playing right now.
What were people looking for this year? 10 wins? Playoffs? That was never happening this season. Improvement should have been the expectation and the goal. If we win 4-5 more games than we won a year ago, I'd say that's a start.
18.8 PPG
77.9 rush yards per game
1-7 rec
Since... (5 games)
31.4 PPG
150.8 rush yards per game
4-1 rec
Can't give backup QB's all of the credit. The offensive line is playing better. We are playing smarter. We are learning on the run like we should have been from the start.
I don't see parallels between this and 2013 at all save for the backup QB aspect. We had Brandon Jacobs wearing #45 on that team. Guys like Peyton Hillis and Michael Cox were getting the majority of the carries. We had no Saquon Barkley. The offensive line was deteriorating rather than being rebuilt. The team had recently begun their descent into what became a mostly awful past few seasons.
We have to start getting better somewhere. I see a better offense being run here than I saw early in the year. I see Eli Manning actually having some time to throw the football. I see us truly committing to running more.
Doesn't mean everything is fixed or that I've seen enough - but I'm not convinced that this team hasn't improved at all and is just taking advantage of the teams they're playing right now.
What were people looking for this year? 10 wins? Playoffs? That was never happening this season. Improvement should have been the expectation and the goal. If we win 4-5 more games than we won a year ago, I'd say that's a start.
How about not coming out of the gate 1-7 and destroying the season before Halloween?
I'll agree that this was not a great team coming into the season. But we've seen untalented teams, or teams that were derailed early by a catastrophic injury, that are well managed within the constraints of the roster. We know what that looks like. Seattle, for example, is that type of team this year. Not much talent, but brilliantly managed to what looks like a certain playoff appearance.
That's not what is happening here. We didn't enter this season completely unprepared simply because of a low talent level. It's tempting to just throw all the blame at the feet of the OL, but that ignores the fact the Giants have, for reasons only Shumur can explain, a 465/284 pass/run ratio. By contrast, Seattle (who also has a bad OL and doesn't have Saquon Barkley) has a 346/422 pass/run ratio.
We all knew the OL might be a problem heading into the season, and we all knew Eli had zero mobility in the event the OL broke down. We just spent huge on a stud back. So why did we allow Eli to get destroyed and scuttle our ability to, at times, even play professional-level football? That's a game management issue...and only one of many in which Shurmur has failed to excel.
And even if we're blaming the OL for everything...who put together the OL? Who coaches them? Go back and read the game and post game threads over the first 8 games. That doesn't just go away because we're going to finish 6-10 instead of 3-13.
I think the last 5 games are 4 games of fool's gold with 1 game of reality (@ Philly) mixed in. If I sound annoyed at wins it's not because I want to be right, it's because I'm afraid that fool's gold will keep ownership thinking we're on the right track when the truth is the season was over before the fucking leaves changed color.
Being at the beginning doesn't always imply wrong track.
I don't pay much attention, but Redskins D front has a decent reputation?
And we ran on them, correct?
Could you see us having run on any good DLs last year? That's one step.
I like what The Betch is doing also. Can we stop a great QB? Maybe, but, if not, that may be more parts... or steps rather than direction on the track. Stay the course. Draft greatly.
But I don't see dramatic coaching changes.
@ SF:
23 rush attempts
31 pass attempts
Vs. TB:
31 rush attempts
19 pass attempts
@ PHI:
18 rush attempts
37 pass attempts
vs. CHI:
29 rush attempts
36 pass attempts
@ WSH:
34 rush attempts
27 pass attempts
The Eagles game is the obvious outlier and where the most egregious error was made.
In Week 2 against Dallas, we ran just 17 times and passed 44 times.
In Week 4 against New Orleans, we ran just 15 times and threw 41 times.
In Week 5 against Carolina, we ran the ball 16 times and threw 37 times.
In Week 6 against Philadelphia, we ran the ball 17 times and threw 43 times.
In Week 7 against Atlanta, we ran the ball 20 times and threw 38 times.
In Week 8 against Washington, we ran the ball 14 times and threw 47 times.
It's not fools gold - it's a change in philosophy. We are playing offense now the way we should have been playing offense from the start.
We can certainly criticize Shurmur for leaning on the pass game so heavily for the first half of the season, but the difference in play recently is correlating directly with a balanced offensive attack.
Even in the Houston game back in Week 3, we were about 50:50 - and it was one of the only games where we looked good early in the season.
The answer is obvious. We have an elite player in the backfield and we've finally figured out how to leverage that into winning some football games.
You want to laud Seattle for recognizing their weaknesses and committing to running the football? Well, we're starting to do the same thing here.
Linked below is the post game thread. The desire to fire Shumur is almost unanimous.
That was two weeks ago. And now we're moving in the right direction because we beat two backup QBs that gifted us first quarter pick sixes?
I just don't buy it.
Link - ( New Window )
@ SF:
23 rush attempts
31 pass attempts
Vs. TB:
31 rush attempts
19 pass attempts
@ PHI:
18 rush attempts
37 pass attempts
vs. CHI:
29 rush attempts
36 pass attempts
@ WSH:
34 rush attempts
27 pass attempts
The Eagles game is the obvious outlier and where the most egregious error was made.
In Week 2 against Dallas, we ran just 17 times and passed 44 times.
In Week 4 against New Orleans, we ran just 15 times and threw 41 times.
In Week 5 against Carolina, we ran the ball 16 times and threw 37 times.
In Week 6 against Philadelphia, we ran the ball 17 times and threw 43 times.
In Week 7 against Atlanta, we ran the ball 20 times and threw 38 times.
In Week 8 against Washington, we ran the ball 14 times and threw 47 times.
It's not fools gold - it's a change in philosophy. We are playing offense now the way we should have been playing offense from the start.
We can certainly criticize Shurmur for leaning on the pass game so heavily for the first half of the season, but the difference in play recently is correlating directly with a balanced offensive attack.
Even in the Houston game back in Week 3, we were about 50:50 - and it was one of the only games where we looked good early in the season.
The answer is obvious. We have an elite player in the backfield and we've finally figured out how to leverage that into winning some football games.
You want to laud Seattle for recognizing their weaknesses and committing to running the football? Well, we're starting to do the same thing here.
Nice work. That said, Shurmur and his PC (until of late) has sucked big time which is a tremendous disappointment to me. I was so excited when I knew he would be our PC. Our 1-7 start is on him, big time, imv. No excuse for not using SB more on the ground. Sure the OL was pathetic and partly to blame, but you run SB much more which would have made Eli more effective with PA (which he’s superb at) and most likely would have kept him upright.
Too little, too late and you know how positive I am
Beyond the fact we were playing broken teams, we secured early leads - comfortable leads - and were able to settle in and run the ball more. It's a simple strategy that falls into your lap. It's no great epiphany and adjusment by the over-rated, over-matched Shurmur. It's just coaching 101 with a lead against a fractured opponent...
Actually, I know exactly why the ratio was what it was in the Eagles game - and it's the exact thing I said I was worried about several times leading up to that game.
He let temptation take over knowing how beat up they were in the secondary. They had Malcom Jenkins and no one else back there. They had street WR's taking DB reps because they didn't even have enough practice bodies.
Shurmur thought we'd be able to throw them out of the stadium that day and got greedy. Look no further than the go for the throat play call late in the first half that led to an INT and took a potential FG off the board that could have been the difference in the football game.
He did a terrible job that day. But I'm pretty sure he's figuring out who makes this offense hum.
That said - this is not a simple matter of playcalling. The offensive line is, indeed, playing better now than they were before. Barkley was getting hit behind the line constantly earlier in the year. He was getting hit faster than any RB in the entire sport. If you're the coach and you know that - it's hard to keep forcing the run.
The run game has been more effective lately not just because we're more committed to it, but also because the line is playing quite a bit better than they were before.
Play action passes are working now because we're setting it up with the ground game - and PA is where Eli does a lot of damage on rollouts and TE leaks/flats.
I'd prefer to see a little progress here than just keep rooting for abysmal losses hoping it somehow shocks the owner into coherence.
This was a 3 win team last year - people need to be at least a little bit realistic in terms of how quickly they think this can get turned around.
Beyond the fact we were playing broken teams, we secured early leads - comfortable leads - and were able to settle in and run the ball more. It's a simple strategy that falls into your lap. It's no great epiphany and adjusment by the over-rated, over-matched Shurmur. It's just coaching 101 with a lead against a fractured opponent...
And conversely, we were the broken team early on. All too often, we started drives with negative plays/penalties dictating the run as not being an option. It's a damn shame the OL was such a liability, but it is what it is. Nate has settled in, and I think he was playing through an injury early on. Hernandez has had his own share of growing pains, but he has improved. Hard to find fault with a rookie. Center was and is a shit show. Halapio, Greco, Spencer, and I'll list Evan Brown in there even though he hasn't played. If the bar of competency is set at Spencer, then Evan has suck to be unable to unseat him. Omameh, Greco, to Jamon. Finally, we seem to have found someone who is capable. Still makes mistakes, but for a guy who just got a playbook a few weeks ago and saw his first game action in over a year, I'll withhold judgement on him. And then we are left with our Karate Kid who is starting in Jax only because their own 3rd string LT is injured. Wheeler gives great effort. I'm rooting for him, but he is all too often overmatched. But we are all out of bodies to throw at the problem this season.
Beyond the fact we were playing broken teams, we secured early leads - comfortable leads - and were able to settle in and run the ball more. It's a simple strategy that falls into your lap. It's no great epiphany and adjusment by the over-rated, over-matched Shurmur. It's just coaching 101 with a lead against a fractured opponent...
You can't run the football if you're trailing by a score or two?
How many games did we play where the score was so lopsided that it was necessary to abandon the run?
The first Eagles game? What else?
Running the football most certainly does not have to always just "fall into your lap"
There has been a shift in what Barkley has been asked to do and how he's being used. It has been discussed a billion times - both by him and the coach.
That clip where he is coaching the OL prior to his run in WSH last week was very impressive.
I have a far greater worry in Shurmur who has felt very reactionary in how he coaches. I don’t know if he has a greater philosophy/program in which he coaches.
Yup. My buddies who are Mich fans aren't happy. :)
Chicago was 5-11 last year. This year, 9-4.
Cleveland was 0-16 last year. This year, 5-7-1.
Houston was 4-12 last year. This year, 9-4.
2016 Rams were 4-12. 2017, 11-5.
2016 Jags were 3-13. 2017, 10-6.
Turning it around doesn't take long if the people running the show know what they're doing.
Further, the "turnaround" isn't always linear as Jacksonville is finding out this year. Or as we found out in 2017.
You say we're turning around an aircraft carrier, but I say we're just floating with no direction. That was the generally held belief before these last 5 ridiculous games somehow managed to weigh more than 6 years of bad football.
Two wins over Chase Daniels's Bears and a Redskins team obliterated by injuries and starting Mark Sanchez, and we're supposed to feel good about the team's direction?
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
This was a 3 win team last year - people need to be at least a little bit realistic in terms of how quickly they think this can get turned around.
Chicago was 5-11 last year. This year, 9-4.
Cleveland was 0-16 last year. This year, 5-7-1.
Houston was 4-12 last year. This year, 9-4.
2016 Rams were 4-12. 2017, 11-5.
2016 Jags were 3-13. 2017, 10-6.
Turning it around doesn't take long if the people running the show know what they're doing.
Further, the "turnaround" isn't always linear as Jacksonville is finding out this year. Or as we found out in 2017.
You say we're turning around an aircraft carrier, but I say we're just floating with no direction. That was the generally held belief before these last 5 ridiculous games somehow managed to weigh more than 6 years of bad football.
This doesn't take into account why those teams struggled.
LAR and CHI both had rookie QB's in those down years. Mitch Trubisky played very little in college and didn't come from a major program - he was extremely green last year. He had 7 TD passes in 12 games.
Goff was awful as a rookie, too. Took a ton of lumps and struggled quite a bit. Huge step forward after that.
Did JAX actually turn anything around? They suck again this year. 2017 looks like more of an outlier than a "fixed" team. The Jags aren't turned around until they get rid of Blake Bortles and someone better than Cody Kessler is taking snaps there.
It's like saying the 2016 Giants were "turned around" and fixed. In retrospect, it was more of a "which one of these years doesn't belong" season in a long run of crappy football.
Not sure why a team like Cleveland is getting credit and being talked about like they know what they're doing when they have the same amount of wins as we do. Doesn't make sense. Because they were worse and winless last year means their 5 wins are more impressive than ours?
I've said several times there is still a LOT of work to be done here. This isn't fixed now and there is a long way to go before it is. But there are logical steps forward, and I feel like I am starting to see some better football being played by this team lately. Beyond that, the culture here seems to be much more stable and far less circusy than it was last year - which was no doubt a priority for this regime.
Can't we just enjoy these wins, regardless of who they came again/who was injured? Wins have been scarce of late.
Can't we just enjoy these wins, regardless of who they came again/who was injured? Wins have been scarce of late.
Apparently not - this will somehow fool the Giants into thinking the team is fixed and they will no longer continue to work on improving the team.
Quote:
Should have won 5 of 5.
Can't we just enjoy these wins, regardless of who they came again/who was injured? Wins have been scarce of late.
Apparently not - this will somehow fool the Giants into thinking the team is fixed and they will no longer continue to work on improving the team.
It's been happening for years.
Quote:
In comment 14215287 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
Should have won 5 of 5.
Can't we just enjoy these wins, regardless of who they came again/who was injured? Wins have been scarce of late.
Apparently not - this will somehow fool the Giants into thinking the team is fixed and they will no longer continue to work on improving the team.
It's been happening for years.
Right - which is why the GM, coach, and coordinators were all just fired after last season... because the Giants thought the team was headed in the right direction after last year.
I predict we'll be here this time next year with a similar record.
That's the type of ridiculous stance you'd rip other people for and call them wishful/magical thinkers over - but you've doubled down on that several times now.
Last year it was a different tune. Up until this year, you were the "losing is for losers" guy. Now, you've done a 180 and winning late season games is a bad thing.
And that's precisely why you're annoyed now - because you want them to lose and they aren't.
I predict we'll be here this time next year with a similar record.
Did you read Lombardi’s article on the Packers franchise structure last week? That franchise has a ton of issues. We have shared our concerns about the state of the Giants, but I made a thread last week talking about how it’s the Pats & everyone else. Just look around the NFL:
-Vikings have the richest QB in the NFL & they can’t score
-Lions have done nothing since paying Stafford
-Falcons are 4-9
-Steelers always have a ton of drama
-The Chiefs have had very nice success under Reid & have a very dynamic offense, but let’s see them win a playoff game this year
-Everyone raves about Lynch/Shanahan in SF, but where are the results?
It’s easy to pound the Giants & it is deserved for the last 6 years, but I’m not seeing all these great run franchises. You want to talk up Dallas? I agree, they have a very nice formula now, but Dak will be making $25M plus per year shortly. You’ve complimented the Eagles for winning a SB after going 13-3 last year, but they are 6-7 the following year.
I’d say right now Seattle has been a model of success, but there aren’t many others. I also don’t see all the great candidates. Do we want to hire Scott Pioli (who bombed in KC) & Dan Campbell to be HC? Would that represent a new way of thinking?
I get wanting fresh blood in the building, I think we need it as well...but I’m not seeing all these great alternatives out there. I’m also not seeing all the well operated franchises out there either.
That's the type of ridiculous stance you'd rip other people for and call them wishful/magical thinkers over - but you've doubled down on that several times now.
Last year it was a different tune. Up until this year, you were the "losing is for losers" guy. Now, you've done a 180 and winning late season games is a bad thing.
And that's precisely why you're annoyed now - because you want them to lose and they aren't.
I want Mara to be shocked into changing the way the Giants operate. This past offseason of hirings was a complete joke. Shambolic. That's why I'm annoyed.
As for the injury thing:
In 2016, we finished the year as the 3rd healthiest team in the league. This year we are 16-18th depending on whose metrics you use.
Two wins over Chase Daniels's Bears and a Redskins team obliterated by injuries and starting Mark Sanchez, and we're supposed to feel good about the team's direction? Link - ( New Window )
Ummm....things can change. And if they do, a smart person isn't afraid to change with it.
Is the team improving or not?
In 2016, we finished the year as the 3rd healthiest team in the league. This year we are 16-18th depending on whose metrics you use.
Has anyone done an evaluation on our soft tissue injuries lately. I haven't but when Coughlin was here I was insisting that our problem was the strength and conditioning program. We changed strength coaches and I have a feeling that we improved significantly in this area.
That's the type of ridiculous stance you'd rip other people for and call them wishful/magical thinkers over - but you've doubled down on that several times now.
Last year it was a different tune. Up until this year, you were the "losing is for losers" guy. Now, you've done a 180 and winning late season games is a bad thing.
And that's precisely why you're annoyed now - because you want them to lose and they aren't.
Well said arc. It seems winning some games is not good enough for some here. It has to be done their way or it's not really improving. As if their evaluating skills are better than those in charge.
I can't help but wonder if that were the case why they're not employed by some team in the league.
We had a bump in 2016 where we were very healthy and made the playoffs. In 2017, we were back in the bottom 5 in terms of health. Not sure if the categorizations of the injuries are drastically different, but I couldn't tell you definitively.
I predict we'll be here this time next year with a similar record.
If you cannot see the difference, then I don't know what to tell you. You are blinded by semantics. You didn't like the hiring process. So even though the roster is virtually 70% turned over, the deadwood and or trouble makers are gone, the players are still playing hard on a losing team, the offense is actually starting to play with some consistency, the defense has shown a little improvement; you are caught up in that you despise Mara, Gettleman and Shurmur because you did not like the search.
It is early, but it is apparent you cannot see the forest because of the trees. Now you may be right that they will have a similar record next season. I expect an influx of rookies and UDFAs replacing some older vets which would probably wreak havoc early in the season.
It is a message board and everyone is entitled to their opinion, but your whole premise is that you didn't like the hiring process so it must be flawed and those in power now will be unable to fix this team.
So who exactly was it you were looking for? Which new blood GM? Which 2nd coming of McVay HC was out there? If you can name two each GM and HC you wanted please share with us.
He basically asked that everything get blown up, that malcontents be let go. That's pretty much happened to a T (except for not trading Beckham), and so now he's complaining about the hiring process and us being a rudderless ship.
I firmly believe that no matter what moves Gettleman made, there'd be a fair amount of criticism. The guy tured over 70% of the roster, over 50% of the starters. Got rid of Flowers, Hart, Apple and Harrison. Cut Omameh after seeing it didn't work out.
And that's still not good enough.
So it is true that you can ask for something and get it and still be a cranky asswipe.
As bad as this team has been for most of a decade, why would it be far-fetched to really question what this team is doing when the same people at the top are running it?
Terps and I are polar opposites on tons of stuff, sometimes violently and spitefully so, but his point isn't so wild and crazy.
Quote:
It has to be done their way or it's not really improving. As if their evaluating skills are better than those in charge.
As bad as this team has been for most of a decade, why would it be far-fetched to really question what this team is doing when the same people at the top are running it?
Terps and I are polar opposites on tons of stuff, sometimes violently and spitefully so, but his point isn't so wild and crazy.
True, but declaring the newly hired regime of DG and PS a failure at this point is just foolish. This was always a 2 year rebuild...year 1 is showing signs of progress.
If we’re worse next year than this year, the argument becomes more reasonable.
Ultimately they’ll be judged on the eventual Eli transition...when and to who
Quote:
It has to be done their way or it's not really improving. As if their evaluating skills are better than those in charge.
As bad as this team has been for most of a decade, why would it be far-fetched to really question what this team is doing when the same people at the top are running it?
Until somebody buys out Tisch and the Maras, who the heck is going to be at the top?
Where he's wrong, imo, is pointed out in his last post where he called the hiring process last year shambolic. It didn't go the way he would have done it, and he doesn't feel the hires were legitimate. I get that. The hiring process seemed to be very narrow and it seemed as though they already knew who they wanted before conducting a thorough search.
Having said that, sometimes you have to move fast when you find a guy you really want. Start with the GM.
DG is a guy who was known in the organization. They obviously liked what they knew about him. The opportunity to bring him back must have excited them. Why? Well we can't see all the reasons because we're not in the offices with him, but certainly they would know about his approach. He also has a legit resume.
4 year track record as a GM in CAR, won 3 division titles, went to a SB. Led the team to a 17-2 record. He won the NFL executive of the year award.
15 years with the Giants, including 13 as director of pro personnel. Under his direction key free agents signed included Plax, Pierce, O'Hara, Boothe and other low-cost but effective contributors who helped the Giants win 2 SB's.
In 28 years he's been a part of 7 teams who played in the SB. He's been around a ton of success.
Basically, he's building a HOF-type resume. Not saying he's there yet, but he's well on his way.
Nobody thought he would become available, but when he did the Giants moved quickly to get him.
Terps didn't like the move. He wanted a fresh start from the org's old way of looking at things. I understand this thinking, but also understand why the Giants acted the way they did, and think most of us would do the same.
Imagine working alongside a guy who you respect greatly and who has had tremendous success. A guy who regularly helps your team win "championships", whether that be big accounts, scientific breakthroughs, large profits, whatever. His success led to him being offered a big promotion and he took it. Your team begins to struggle, doesn't do a lot of the little things right. You lose accounts/profits. Suddenly, this talented guy becomes available again. You hear he'd like to come back, and you feel a strong need to make a change. Who among us wouldn't go into the hiring process a bit biased?
I don't consider his hiring a sham. That's where we Terps and I differ.
That doesn't mean I think everything is magically fixed now. I just think there's a different feel around the Giants now - like they've finally stabilized and are ready to start finally moving forward.
It also doesn't mean I don't realize that taking one or two steps forward are just the tip of the iceberg here. I don't think this is fixed or finished. Nowhere close.
It's simple for me, I wanted to see improvement this year. After 8 games, I saw none. I feel I have seen some since. We are running the offense through Barkley the way we should be now. I think there's some preliminary cohesion forming along the OL. I think Eli is seeing some better protection than he was earlier.
Now - if we finish the year losing out and look like crap in the process, I'll certainly change my tune.
But I do expect this team to finish strong and win at least 2 of these final 3 games. If the Giants go from 3 wins to 7 or 8 in one offseason, I can look at that and feel more positive about the direction we're going in. Maybe others can't.
My question is really simple, though - say the Giants do finish 7-9 or even 8-8. Why would that be a disappointment? People expected 10+ wins in year one of this process? I'm not sure why that would be the case if you knew how bad this team was last year and how many roster issues needed to (and still need to be) addressed.
Quote:
In comment 14215523 Eman11 said:
Quote:
It has to be done their way or it's not really improving. As if their evaluating skills are better than those in charge.
As bad as this team has been for most of a decade, why would it be far-fetched to really question what this team is doing when the same people at the top are running it?
Until somebody buys out Tisch and the Maras, who the heck is going to be at the top?
Sure, that's the reality. And I get why some people would say why bother talking about something you can't change, but this is a discussion site. Some people just want to embrace the positives only, others look at things deeper than surface level. There's room for both.
Quote:
It has to be done their way or it's not really improving. As if their evaluating skills are better than those in charge.
As bad as this team has been for most of a decade, why would it be far-fetched to really question what this team is doing when the same people at the top are running it?
Terps and I are polar opposites on tons of stuff, sometimes violently and spitefully so, but his point isn't so wild and crazy.
Violently? Is BBI the new Thunderdome?
It is going deeper than the surface level to be critical? Fuck - the team has been pretty poor since 2011 - that should be the surface level.
It isn't looking at things deeper to say that Gettleman was hired as a sham, can't construct an OL and made horrific signings. It isn't looking at things deeper to say drafting Barkley was a fireable offense, minutes after the draft.
It is just a negative viewpoint. Not all critical thinking is negative, just like not all positive comments are just looking at the surface.
It would be better if people just accepted that they have a negative take on things instead of trying to fluff it up under the guise of some misunderstood intelligence that is unearthed.
Quote:
Some people just want to embrace the positives only, others look at things deeper than surface level. There's room for both.
It is going deeper than the surface level to be critical? Fuck - the team has been pretty poor since 2011 - that should be the surface level.
It isn't looking at things deeper to say that Gettleman was hired as a sham, can't construct an OL and made horrific signings. It isn't looking at things deeper to say drafting Barkley was a fireable offense, minutes after the draft.
It is just a negative viewpoint. Not all critical thinking is negative, just like not all positive comments are just looking at the surface.
It would be better if people just accepted that they have a negative take on things instead of trying to fluff it up under the guise of some misunderstood intelligence that is unearthed.
It would be equally nice if the polyannas on this board recognized that a sustained stretch of losing and incompetence alongside another (very likely) losing year justify skepticism of an organization's leadership and management.
Quote:
here is that those who criticize are breaking new ground:
Quote:
Some people just want to embrace the positives only, others look at things deeper than surface level. There's room for both.
It is going deeper than the surface level to be critical? Fuck - the team has been pretty poor since 2011 - that should be the surface level.
It isn't looking at things deeper to say that Gettleman was hired as a sham, can't construct an OL and made horrific signings. It isn't looking at things deeper to say drafting Barkley was a fireable offense, minutes after the draft.
It is just a negative viewpoint. Not all critical thinking is negative, just like not all positive comments are just looking at the surface.
It would be better if people just accepted that they have a negative take on things instead of trying to fluff it up under the guise of some misunderstood intelligence that is unearthed.
It would be equally nice if the polyannas on this board recognized that a sustained stretch of losing and incompetence alongside another (very likely) losing year justify skepticism of an organization's leadership and management.
But can't you separate the two regimes? The half decade of losing before DG has no bearing on whether DG is a capable GM. And I presume most wouldn't draw a conclusion based on 1 year.
Not terribly sustainable though.
Not terribly sustainable though.
The goal should be 4th and 5th strings..
We don't have any on the defensive side.
MUST find some.