There is not a franchise quarterback in this draft. The Giants are in a win now state. I believe that we can get Derrick Carr from a trade. Jon Gruden is not afraid to trade star players. This season for Carr wasn’t great but he didn’t have a lot of talent around him. He didn’t have support from his teammates either. This could be a new chapter in his career.
The most realistic scenario to find the next franchise qb is that the Giants position themselves to obtain one of the qbs in what should be a strong 2020 class (whether that be through acquiring additional draft picks or embracing a lost season- which is less likely).
For consideration: Is a franchise quarterback one who will be a starter for a minimum of 5 years? More? Is he someone who must be capable of winning a Super Bowl? Would you consider Foles one? How about Hostetler?
My opinion is that identifiable franchise quarterbacks (without defining them) are rare. Andrew Luck was a good bet, but I don't think there was a consensus about ANY of the Big 5 from last season, even though it was considered a strong group: Darnold, Mayfield, Rosen, Allen, and Jackson. And even after a full season, only Mayfield (who wasn't a consensus #1 by a long shot) seems to be a sure thing.
For consideration: Is a franchise quarterback one who will be a starter for a minimum of 5 years? More? Is he someone who must be capable of winning a Super Bowl? Would you consider Foles one? How about Hostetler?
My opinion is that identifiable franchise quarterbacks (without defining them) are rare. Andrew Luck was a good bet, but I don't think there was a consensus about ANY of the Big 5 from last season, even though it was considered a strong group: Darnold, Mayfield, Rosen, Allen, and Jackson. And even after a full season, only Mayfield (who wasn't a consensus #1 by a long shot) seems to be a sure thing.
My personal thoughts on a franchise qb:
(1) Qb regularly has his team in contention (not necessarily winning the super bowl but are playoff regulars or at least in the hunt the last week of the season) and can raise the play of his team when it isn't at is best (see Manning 2011) and cover for other areas of deficiency.
(2) Top 10 statistically on a year to year basis.
(3) Long term starter at the position where the franchise does not have to worry about who will be its qb in 1,5,10 years (barring major injury)
(4) When in the playoffs can raise his play, and make the "clutch" play (see Manning 2011 NFCC game and throw to Manning to Manningham throw in 46)
No, I do not consider Foles or Hoss as a franchise player, merely ones who did a nice mop up job when the starter did the bulk of the work (Giants were 11-3 when Simms went down, Eagles were 11-2 when Wentz went down), or solid back-ups and spot starters.
It is very difficult to find that type of guy, which is why when you have the opportunity you must draft him.
I read posts like this and wonder if people even think before they throw up on their keyboard.
Dave Gettleman literally just passed on Josh Allen in the draft - but, now he's going to want to pony up not just one first rounder to get a hold of Josh Allen, now he's going to want to pony up two of them!
I guess the original draft cost of pick 2 overall wasn't steep enough - if we want Josh Allen, we really have to make sure we burn some valuable assets to do it!
Beyond that, why is Buffalo trading the QB they literally just drafted?
This suggestion couldn't make less sense if you wanted it to.
(Spoiler alert - NYG will never ever offer this to the Bills. Erase it from your 'idea' bank and pretend you never suggested it)
Derek Carr would be a terrible move for the Giants.
We'd be better off sticking with Eli for another year and drafting a QB this year or next.
Carr doesn't elevate the Giants in a way that results in any more wins than Eli can. Even now.
I really believe the worst thing you can do is wind up on the hook for a non-rookie deal with significant money involved on a QB we didn't draft that another team doesn't want. See Kirk Cousins in Minnesota. And Cousins only cost money.... Carr is going to cost draft capital and then he's costing 20M+ against the cap in addition to that.
It's not a smart move.
Suggestions like that just blow my mind. People think the NFL is Madden. It doesn't work that way.
The plan should be to draft a QB in this draft in rounds two or three. Whereas the conventional wisdom thinks there aren't any franchise QBs this year, I think there is terrific upside with Grier and Lock.
Quote:
I'd be curious how you define a "franchise quarterback" and which current franchise quarterbacks you had identified with confidence prior to the draft.
For consideration: Is a franchise quarterback one who will be a starter for a minimum of 5 years? More? Is he someone who must be capable of winning a Super Bowl? Would you consider Foles one? How about Hostetler?
My opinion is that identifiable franchise quarterbacks (without defining them) are rare. Andrew Luck was a good bet, but I don't think there was a consensus about ANY of the Big 5 from last season, even though it was considered a strong group: Darnold, Mayfield, Rosen, Allen, and Jackson. And even after a full season, only Mayfield (who wasn't a consensus #1 by a long shot) seems to be a sure thing.
My personal thoughts on a franchise qb:
(1) Qb regularly has his team in contention (not necessarily winning the super bowl but are playoff regulars or at least in the hunt the last week of the season) and can raise the play of his team when it isn't at is best (see Manning 2011) and cover for other areas of deficiency.
(2) Top 10 statistically on a year to year basis.
(3) Long term starter at the position where the franchise does not have to worry about who will be its qb in 1,5,10 years (barring major injury)
(4) When in the playoffs can raise his play, and make the "clutch" play (see Manning 2011 NFCC game and throw to Manning to Manningham throw in 46)
No, I do not consider Foles or Hoss as a franchise player, merely ones who did a nice mop up job when the starter did the bulk of the work (Giants were 11-3 when Simms went down, Eagles were 11-2 when Wentz went down), or solid back-ups and spot starters.
It is very difficult to find that type of guy, which is why when you have the opportunity you must draft him.
The 1st criteria in your statement was a QB who regularly has his team in contention. What’s your definition of regularly? We’ve only been to the playoffs 6 times in the past 14 years and twice in the last 7.
The accuracy isn't close to lethal, though. He got picked off more than he threw TD passes and he's completing like.. half of his passes. Which is terrible.
Allen is far from a lock to be anything more than average. Jeff George and JaMarcus Russell had big arms too. Doesn't matter if the other stuff isn't there.
I saw nothing from Josh Allen this year outside of better than advertised mobility that makes me feel like we missed on this player whatsoever. I would have been furious if we took this guy over Barkley.
I get the ‘wait until 2020” mentality, but whose to say we will be in the opportunity to draft any of them? A year is forever in the NFL, if we are picking 15, can we get to the top 5 if needed? A lot of what ifs.
If Haskins has a high grade, get it done now.
I know he's not coming out till 21, but I'd sacrifice two more garbage years for him while we build up the roster for our next franchise QB.
I know he's not coming out till 21, but I'd sacrifice two more garbage years for him while we build up the roster for our next franchise QB.
2021 is an eternity away. Whose to say he doesn’t get hurt? New regime in place? So many things could happen between now and then.
I amen to this.
Quote:
In comment 14247756 CT Charlie said:
Quote:
I'd be curious how you define a "franchise quarterback" and which current franchise quarterbacks you had identified with confidence prior to the draft.
For consideration: Is a franchise quarterback one who will be a starter for a minimum of 5 years? More? Is he someone who must be capable of winning a Super Bowl? Would you consider Foles one? How about Hostetler?
My opinion is that identifiable franchise quarterbacks (without defining them) are rare. Andrew Luck was a good bet, but I don't think there was a consensus about ANY of the Big 5 from last season, even though it was considered a strong group: Darnold, Mayfield, Rosen, Allen, and Jackson. And even after a full season, only Mayfield (who wasn't a consensus #1 by a long shot) seems to be a sure thing.
My personal thoughts on a franchise qb:
(1) Qb regularly has his team in contention (not necessarily winning the super bowl but are playoff regulars or at least in the hunt the last week of the season) and can raise the play of his team when it isn't at is best (see Manning 2011) and cover for other areas of deficiency.
(2) Top 10 statistically on a year to year basis.
(3) Long term starter at the position where the franchise does not have to worry about who will be its qb in 1,5,10 years (barring major injury)
(4) When in the playoffs can raise his play, and make the "clutch" play (see Manning 2011 NFCC game and throw to Manning to Manningham throw in 46)
No, I do not consider Foles or Hoss as a franchise player, merely ones who did a nice mop up job when the starter did the bulk of the work (Giants were 11-3 when Simms went down, Eagles were 11-2 when Wentz went down), or solid back-ups and spot starters.
It is very difficult to find that type of guy, which is why when you have the opportunity you must draft him.
The 1st criteria in your statement was a QB who regularly has his team in contention. What’s your definition of regularly? We’ve only been to the playoffs 6 times in the past 14 years and twice in the last 7.
I guess I would say, if the player had a 15 year career, contention something like at least 10 for those years, maybe 12. That’s my thought, and again contention doesn’t necessarily mean they are in the SB or even NFCC game every year, it could mean they had a good season but maybe were the odd man out from the playoffs at 10 wins. I would say the Giants were in contention pretty much every year from 2005-2012.
I get the ‘wait until 2020” mentality, but whose to say we will be in the opportunity to draft any of them? A year is forever in the NFL, if we are picking 15, can we get to the top 5 if needed? A lot of what ifs.
If Haskins has a high grade, get it done now.
Completely agree Sean.
The most realistic scenario to find the next franchise qb is that the Giants position themselves to obtain one of the qbs in what should be a strong 2020 class (whether that be through acquiring additional draft picks or embracing a lost season- which is less likely).
I would love to wait for 2020 but for those of you who seem to think it will be easy to get a top tier QB-- where do you expect the Gmen to finish next year? WOuld you say 8-8 with a decent QB and picking up two OL in FA along with drafting defense in rd 1 and possibly rd 2?
SO what draft picks do you have to give to get the elite QB? All the other teams knwo that the QB's are elite, right? SO where's the plan to get one? WHich GMen draft picks or players are you trading to entice the other team?
IMO what gets lost (a particular idiot that regularly posts on here using for example Arizona and Josh ROsen as an example.) is that the 2020 QB's are supposedly elite and better than this last class. They are are considered elite. Other teams that stink (not all teams that stink have a super future QB) WANT elite QB's so you can't use "Arizona" as an example.
Who are you trading or how many draft picks are yo giving up for the elite Qb considering these QB's will be more highly thought of in the future than what most rotten teams have right now.
Personally, I like Haskins and Jones a great deal. People talk about the class of QBs last year, this year, and next year. Really it’s all meaningless because you are talking about 1 QB. If the Giants like one of those 2 or even Grier or Lock they will take them. No matter what all the Mel Kipers of the world say.
Problem solved. You're all welcome.
Problem solved. You're all welcome.
I would love this, but a lot of people will disagree. Hoping DG is on board with him. I like him more than Haskins but Haskins has one hell of a season.
If we have to draft a QB, I would prefer to pick Daniel Jones in the second round if he lasts that long (and he might), or Gardner Minshew or Clayton Thorson in the fourth/fifth round. Thorson, in particular, intrigues me because of his arm talent and his toughness. He certainly elevated the play of those around him. He had success with NO TALENT around him. Put Haskins on that 2017 Northwestern team, and see how he does.
Dak Prescott, Russell Wilson are not classics and they win. Lamar Jackson (an extreme) is winning for now. Not sure you would call Patrick Mahomes a classic Franchise QB.
I'd look for an accurate QB, with an above average arm and smart(reads and playbook). Mobility is a must. I think this type can be found into the 3rd round rather than top 10 picks of the draft.
There is more to this than what I posted above. I have not really thought about it beyond watching these younger kids play and win with less than perfect classic franchise credentials.
Plus, finding the types of oline that can protect the TBs and Eli's is getting harder and harder as they do not teach that type of protection in college as before.
Just a point of discussion.
Dak Prescott, Russell Wilson are not classics and they win. Lamar Jackson (an extreme) is winning for now. Not sure you would call Patrick Mahomes a classic Franchise QB.
I'd look for an accurate QB, with an above average arm and smart(reads and playbook). Mobility is a must. I think this type can be found into the 3rd round rather than top 10 picks of the draft.
There is more to this than what I posted above. I have not really thought about it beyond watching these younger kids play and win with less than perfect classic franchise credentials.
Plus, finding the types of oline that can protect the TBs and Eli's is getting harder and harder as they do not teach that type of protection in college as before.
Just a point of discussion.
You basically described Ryan Finley who no one is really talking about in the draft. I expect him to move up some boards during the Senior Bowl.
Dak Prescott, Russell Wilson are not classics and they win. Lamar Jackson (an extreme) is winning for now. Not sure you would call Patrick Mahomes a classic Franchise QB.
I'd look for an accurate QB, with an above average arm and smart(reads and playbook). Mobility is a must. I think this type can be found into the 3rd round rather than top 10 picks of the draft.
There is more to this than what I posted above. I have not really thought about it beyond watching these younger kids play and win with less than perfect classic franchise credentials.
Plus, finding the types of oline that can protect the TBs and Eli's is getting harder and harder as they do not teach that type of protection in college as before.
Just a point of discussion.
I think relying on non-1st round picks is disastrous because you need to get lucky. IMO you don't need a super QB but it is more likely you get a good QB in 1st 10 picks than in 3rd round.
IMO your pov is destined for QB Hell. And I don't want Dak Prescott. I want Mahomes. DOn't care whether you call him "franchise" but Mahomes is great and dak ain't.
I do expect Cowboys ot win but Dak is extrmely limited. Mahomes is a stud. I epxect Mahomes tpyes and Goff types over their career ot lead them more playoff victories than dak. Dak had the benefit this year of being in an awful division.
We're talking about a QB with a cap hit under 1M. It's basically a steal for Dallas at this point - even if you aren't a believer in Prescott.
The problem with Prescott is that the value is there now, but it won't be if they give him a new, big-money deal. Once his cap hit is about 25x what it is now, things will change there.
It's not an easy decision to make. I think the fear of moving backwards will be too much for Dallas to let Dak walk. I think they'll pay him. I wouldn't, personally - and I think it'll hurt Dallas more than it'll help, but I get why they'd do it.
If he can improve his ball security as he stands tall in pocket than Dallas is a tough out...
Everyone?
Sure, let's just paint the entire board with one broad brush and claim everyone had the same opinions on all of these QB's.
Makes sense.
Just silly, chicken thinking to get scared and draft a marginal QB right now.
Could be quick RPO, could be D line and pass rush, could be super see ol pass pro (but that's hard without the good and many runs as we have seen) Anything.
My guess, we go nuts on D broadly and OL for 2019.
The 'identity' for 2019 would be lots of running on O and wrecking shit on D. Pass rush and run stopping at same time.
For 2020 all the O theory and nuance will get a fresh look and the big investment with the stage having been set by having a line and a legit D.
I know it's hard for fans to envision a draft without WRs and qbs...but come 2020 it's going to have made sense looking back.
Set.The.Stage.
With a D and an OL, as the Ravens showed, you can start to do shit on O that orherwsise don't work.
Could be quick RPO, could be D line and pass rush, could be super see ol pass pro (but that's hard without the good and many runs as we have seen) Anything.
My guess, we go nuts on D broadly and OL for 2019.
The 'identity' for 2019 would be lots of running on O and wrecking shit on D. Pass rush and run stopping at same time.
For 2020 all the O theory and nuance will get a fresh look and the big investment with the stage having been set by having a line and a legit D.
I know it's hard for fans to envision a draft without WRs and qbs...but come 2020 it's going to have made sense looking back.
Set.The.Stage.
With a D and an OL, as the Ravens showed, you can start to do shit on O that orherwsise don't work.
I don't agree with how yo'ure looking at this. WITHOUT the elite qb going forward you CANNOT have an explosive offense. Thus you're running game WILL BE compromised in 2019.
What makes the GMe n unique is Barkley --- and if healthy OBJ. They don't have near the defense to be like the Ravens - so how many years will it take? In 202 theteam will be 7-9 or 8-8 mroe likely so they aren't gettignt h QB. SO they have to trade up-- when do you then expect the Gmen defense to be any good?
****Instead of being Baltimore -- the Gmen should try to be more like KC. Ill take KC's outlook over the next 5 years over Baltimore's. And that starts with a high=powered offense. ANd in order to get that-- you need a QB.
OFC they've got to like the guy. So if they like for example Haskins and he is projected to be a good to very good NFL QB-- you take him -- and now you're "SET THE STAGE" for being great in the NFC with an incredible high-powered offense just like KC is doing in the AFC.
**THe Giants are closer to kC type of team than Baltimore. The Giants have a window of prime for Barkley. We know before 2019 season starts that Barkley will be wasted. Each year you further delay getting THAT QB it's another wasted year with Barkley.
The 2019 team will be something like 7-9 or 8-8 if Eli is brought back - you get TWO OL in FA and you start building the D through the draft. That will lead them to 7-9 or 8-8. If you want to trade up after 2019 for a Qb - you're taking away from drafting DEFENSE in 2020- so the defense will still SUCK. You aren't turning that defense around in ONE year.
Many of you think it's so easy to get a QB. And it's easy to trade up. Well it could be if you're covered at many other positions but the Gmen's defense is pathetic. You are taking away opportunities to build the defense up if you trade up. Secondly, if Gmen are 7-9 or 8-8 think about/propose a trade that would entice a lousy team to bypass an elite QB to sell to you while you know you have a solid defense behind you.
Yes it is which is why I said the Gmen should try to be more like them. It's easier to become the Chiefs than Baltimore.