at 6. I doubt it, but aside from size Murray prolly fits Shurmur to a T.
Of note, this mock has Jags jumping the Giants to nab Haskins at 2, Murray at 6, Jones to Broncos at 10 and Lock at 11 to 'Skins in trade up with Bengals.
Mocks are crazily speculative at this point in time, linked below.
CBS latest mock draft - (
New Window )
do you think he goes higher? or you think giants wont take him because of height?
That would take breaking decades and decades of the "Giants Way" to be that courageous.
How many people can shit in FMIC's boxers at a time?
Another CBS mock by another author has the Giants grabbing the 340# DT out of Clemson, Williams?, who didn't play vs Bama due to suspension. That's 150# plus difference of opinion
do you think he goes higher? or you think giants wont take him because of height?
He’s way too short, not a risk I see the Giants taking.
This to me is a low ball move. I guess he has the right to do it. But who’s to say he won’t change his mind back again after 1 year in the NFL?
Quote:
are people saying it isnt likelhy???
do you think he goes higher? or you think giants wont take him because of height?
He’s way too short, not a risk I see the Giants taking.
he is what an inch shorter than mayfield/wilson/etc
im more worried about his thin frame, not sure he can put on more weight/muscle.
that being said this kid can sling it. id be interested in seeing how he measures at combine before passing judgement but damn the though of him and barkley is flat out exciting
Spot on. Belichick is bold. Maybe he would take this type of chance...
bw in dc : 3:31 pm : link : reply
the stodgy old men at Jints Central climb out of their box and do something this unique.
That would take breaking decades and decades of the "Giants Way" to be that courageous.
Courage wouldn't be the adjective used by the chronically miffed.
Quote:
In comment 14263241 BleedBlue said:
Quote:
are people saying it isnt likelhy???
do you think he goes higher? or you think giants wont take him because of height?
He’s way too short, not a risk I see the Giants taking.
he is what an inch shorter than mayfield/wilson/etc
im more worried about his thin frame, not sure he can put on more weight/muscle.
that being said this kid can sling it. id be interested in seeing how he measures at combine before passing judgement but damn the though of him and barkley is flat out exciting
Yeh his height really isn't the issue. Especially with his baseball background he can find throwing windows similar to what you see with Mahomes. The real issue is it's hard to look at the guy and put another 15 lbs on him. I'd peg him 5 9 185.
Quote:
In comment 14263241 BleedBlue said:
Quote:
are people saying it isnt likelhy???
do you think he goes higher? or you think giants wont take him because of height?
He’s way too short, not a risk I see the Giants taking.
he is what an inch shorter than mayfield/wilson/etc
im more worried about his thin frame, not sure he can put on more weight/muscle.
that being said this kid can sling it. id be interested in seeing how he measures at combine before passing judgement but damn the though of him and barkley is flat out exciting
Oh I’m with you, I think he’s a fantastic player and I will root for him.
I thought it was common knowledge he's 5 9. He was measured at baseball combine I heard.
Quote:
There is no way in hell...
bw in dc : 3:31 pm : link : reply
the stodgy old men at Jints Central climb out of their box and do something this unique.
That would take breaking decades and decades of the "Giants Way" to be that courageous.
Courage wouldn't be the adjective used by the chronically miffed.
Absolutely. The height doesn't bother me as much as the inevitability of picking air. Talk about a wasted pick. It wouldn't be QB hell so much as purgatory or even fantasy.
Quote:
There is no way in hell...
bw in dc : 3:31 pm : link : reply
the stodgy old men at Jints Central climb out of their box and do something this unique.
That would take breaking decades and decades of the "Giants Way" to be that courageous.
Courage wouldn't be the adjective used by the chronically miffed.
Yeh I originally thought Murray had all the leverage here but now I'm not sure, especially if he picks football. Scouts will definitely ding him because let's say the A's ponied up. Does he take that contract? It doesn't scream that this is a guy that loves football more than baseball whcih has been the narrative.
AMPED!!!
Quote:
Combine starts.
I thought it was common knowledge he's 5 9. He was measured at baseball combine I heard.
Does baseball even have a combine? I can’t find anything about it. But he’s listed at 5’10’’ most sites i can find..
now get some more big men up front and we good offensively....gotta score 50 per with our defense right now tho haha
Quote:
In comment 14263259 Ira said:
Quote:
Combine starts.
I thought it was common knowledge he's 5 9. He was measured at baseball combine I heard.
Does baseball even have a combine? I can’t find anything about it. But he’s listed at 5’10’’ most sites i can find..
An espn baseball article has him at 5 9. If the football team is listing him at 5 10 you can almost book that he is 5 9.
An espn baseball article has him at 5 9. If the football team is listing him at 5 10 you can almost book that he is 5 9.
Right. The OU football roster has Murray at 5'10", 195.
Just LOL stuff...
I like Haskins more. I think he's a more sustainable NFL prospect and a guy who can play QB for you for a decade. Murray is too gadgety and I don't know if I see the longevity.
QB is a major investment. If you have questions about longevity and durability, it's probably wise to not go down that road. I don't know how Gettleman and Shurmur feel about Murray - but I have a feeling they will also prefer Haskins if given the option.
Link - ( New Window )
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
he def will. he knows its a weak QB class(prob part of reason he has chosen football)
he knows if he tests well(he should) he could be first one chosen and a team in top 5 either natural or by trade up could force the QB pick.
Because none of these guys we are looking at are the prospect that Saquon Barkley was. How is Haskins not comparable as prospect to Darnold (turnover machine), Rosen (Injury, Poor Record), Allen (accuracy issues).
well then we should be on the phone with zona. give em #38 and a 2020 second rounder(conditional)
then take best defender at #6
They also predict him to run a 4.42 40 +/- 0.1 sec. IE, 4.32-4.52. He throws better than Jackson, no?
They also predict him to run a 4.42 40 +/- 0.1 sec. IE, 4.32-4.52. He throws better than Jackson, no?
he is definitely a better passer than jackson in terms of accuracy. both have strong arms
This to me is a low ball move. I guess he has the right to do it. But who’s to say he won’t change his mind back again after 1 year in the NFL?
That's why an NFL team would be reluctant to spend this high a pick on him........always has the option to try something else when things don't go exactly right.
Murray sort of addresses the line in a lame way (more elusive) and the QB issue (if he pans out). But DG would be betting his job on the kid. If he doesn't pan out the franchise is set back for 2-3 years, and if the team is still struggling then, DG will be gone and they'll almost certainly clean house again.
Haskins looks like a top prospect, he passes the eye test, he's kind of a safe pick. Much more Giants-like. I don't think either is really a safe pick, but Haskins is safer.
Baker Mayfield measured 6' 5/8 inch at the combine.
If Murray is 5' 9 inches then he is over 3 1/2 inches shorter than Mayfield.
It will be real interesting to see what he measures at.
Baker Mayfield measured 6' 5/8 inch at the combine.
If Murray is 5' 9 inches then he is over 3 1/2 inches shorter than Mayfield.
It will be real interesting to see what he measures at.
I would bet he's under 5'9" when he's official measured if he makes it to the Combine.
oh wait...
I like coaches being progressive and forward thinking, but contrary to public opinion you can teach speed, what you absolutely can't teach is height.
That would take breaking decades and decades of the "Giants Way" to be that courageous.
Wellington did play Tarkenton and Gary Wood
Hahah! Instagram live that!
Great if they could take him in the 2nd.
Great if they could take him in the 2nd.
He sat out as a transfer.
Does that scout mean the same offense/team/oline (most) that Mayfield played with?
Exciting college player. A lot of questions as a pro.
They must know he's got a 90%+ chance to go in round one.
Exciting college player. A lot of questions as a pro.
I agree. Man, it's so hard to properly scout a QB due to the huge difference between college & the NFL.
Suffice to say, I think the Giants kick the Qb can down the road another year.
It's the ideal year to get out of that six hole and move down. And then consider Lock.
It's the ideal year to get out of that six hole and move down. And then consider Lock.
FWIW Ben Allbright keeps talking about Lock to the Broncos. He's really plugged in with that organization and usually has a good sense for their thinking. It's early and a lot can change but figured I'd mention it.
hmmm
He is one hell of an intriguing prospect as he has the physical tools closest to Mahomes than anyone in this draft, and that is damn sexy. But I’m with you on the 5’9” (or less). I just don’t see it happening. Damn I love draft talk.
It was worse than that. Most guys had him mocked late first or in the second this time last year.
Quote:
I agree. It doesn't take much imagination to see Lock as a more athletic, talented Eli Manning.
It's the ideal year to get out of that six hole and move down. And then consider Lock.
FWIW Ben Allbright keeps talking about Lock to the Broncos. He's really plugged in with that organization and usually has a good sense for their thinking. It's early and a lot can change but figured I'd mention it.
I really liked Lock a lot and thought he is a sure top 15 pick until I watched his tape vs. Bama this year. Yeah his team was overwhelmed, much like Darnold's USC teams were. But dang he came apart against them in the worst ways.
Still his arm and throwing accuracy for the most part are intriguing, as is his lightning quick release.
I wouldn't be opposed to either as they are the only QB's I want for the Giants along with Tyree Jackson on day two.
Link - ( New Window )
Or is there some other factor in regards to height?
Did he have his helmet on? ;)
Or is there some other factor in regards to height?
His height doesn't bother me. I am most concerned about his dedication to football. Which sport does he prefer? If he convinces the Giants that he is 100% committed to football then I would be in full support of drafting him.
Or is there some other factor in regards to height?
It's harder to play a pocket passing game with QB's this small - a lot of passes will get knocked down @ the LOS and he's going to have a hard time seeing the entire field in general.
It's easier for a player like Murray to be a weapon in college because the college game has more spread concepts and more ways to get him out in space in places where he can use his athleticism and see more of the field.
More of these college concepts are creeping into the NFL, so I have more faith in Murray working out in 2019+ than I would 10-20 years ago, sure. But it's still a risk and it's not just about the height. He's under 200lbs right now and there's no guy in the NFL playing QB that light.
Of course, he can add weight - but not everyone has the same frame. And we don't know how adding 15-20lbs will impact his athleticism. So, it's most certainly a risk.
I'm not crazy about Daniel Jones or Drew Lock. I'd take a shot on Murray before I drafted either of those guys. Grier's arm strength I'm also a little iffy on.
Haskins has the arm I'm looking for. I don't care where you play college ball - when you complete 70%+ of your passes and throw 50 TD passes, you're doing something right. He can make the big boy throws and has more traditional size.
This is the type of QB I think you can roll with for a decade+
I can't see Murray having the same longevity.
I'm not crazy about Daniel Jones or Drew Lock. I'd take a shot on Murray before I drafted either of those guys. Grier's arm strength I'm also a little iffy on.
Haskins has the arm I'm looking for. I don't care where you play college ball - when you complete 70%+ of your passes and throw 50 TD passes, you're doing something right. He can make the big boy throws and has more traditional size.
This is the type of QB I think you can roll with for a decade+
I can't see Murray having the same longevity.
Haskins has tremendous accuracy in the short and intermediate game which is paramount in today's NFL. Pretty much why Eli's game hasn't aged particularly well.
More of these college concepts are creeping into the NFL, so I have more faith in Murray working out in 2019+ than I would 10-20 years ago, sure. But it's still a risk and it's not just about the height. He's under 200lbs right now and there's no guy in the NFL playing QB that light.
Of course, he can add weight - but not everyone has the same frame. And we don't know how adding 15-20lbs will impact his athleticism. So, it's most certainly a risk.
There was a QB from Georgia Southern back in the late '80s named Tracy Ham. He was an incredible play maker who won two 1-AA championships.
I think he was 5'10'. Built a bit sturdier than Murray, but able to do some incredible things throwing and running. One of the most amazing dual threat QBs I have ever seen. Not the thrower Murray is but there are similarities.
Anyway, Ham got drafted by the Rams like in the 20th round. But back then the NFL wasn't ready for that skill set. So I recall talk of converting him to RB.
Well, the NFL didn't pan out. Ham went to the CFL and just killed it. Won a few MVPs and Grey Cups. Was almost unstoppable. It got me thinking how crazy good someone with Murray's skills would do in Canada. He would be an instant superstar. More space to work with and more movement allowed ...It would be one helluva show...
The kid can also toss it, albeit from the shotgun/spread. I'm intrigued.
Quote:
More of these college concepts are creeping into the NFL, so I have more faith in Murray working out in 2019+ than I would 10-20 years ago, sure. But it's still a risk and it's not just about the height. He's under 200lbs right now and there's no guy in the NFL playing QB that light.
Of course, he can add weight - but not everyone has the same frame. And we don't know how adding 15-20lbs will impact his athleticism. So, it's most certainly a risk.
There was a QB from Georgia Southern back in the late '80s named Tracy Ham. He was an incredible play maker who won two 1-AA championships.
I think he was 5'10'. Built a bit sturdier than Murray, but able to do some incredible things throwing and running. One of the most amazing dual threat QBs I have ever seen. Not the thrower Murray is but there are similarities.
Anyway, Ham got drafted by the Rams like in the 20th round. But back then the NFL wasn't ready for that skill set. So I recall talk of converting him to RB.
Well, the NFL didn't pan out. Ham went to the CFL and just killed it. Won a few MVPs and Grey Cups. Was almost unstoppable. It got me thinking how crazy good someone with Murray's skills would do in Canada. He would be an instant superstar. More space to work with and more movement allowed ...It would be one helluva show...
Showing your age a bit, Bee Dubs :)
Interesting stuff. Definitely a few years before my time as an avid football fan, so I don't recall it.
But I agree - Murray playing up north would probably be fireworks. He's tailor made for that game.
I'm not crazy about Daniel Jones or Drew Lock. I'd take a shot on Murray before I drafted either of those guys. Grier's arm strength I'm also a little iffy on.
Haskins has the arm I'm looking for. I don't care where you play college ball - when you complete 70%+ of your passes and throw 50 TD passes, you're doing something right. He can make the big boy throws and has more traditional size.
This is the type of QB I think you can roll with for a decade+
I can't see Murray having the same longevity.
I'm warming up to Haskins as well. I think he could be a real good QB for us with Barkley, Beckham, Engram, and Shepard. It would also allow the Giants to move on from Eli and have the benefit of paying their starting QB well below market value for 5 years. That is a big advantage as we have seen recently with the Eagles, Rams, Chiefs, Texans, Seahawks, etc.
Quote:
Personally, I want Haskins - I think I'm pretty set on him being my guy as far as QB's go in this class.
I'm not crazy about Daniel Jones or Drew Lock. I'd take a shot on Murray before I drafted either of those guys. Grier's arm strength I'm also a little iffy on.
Haskins has the arm I'm looking for. I don't care where you play college ball - when you complete 70%+ of your passes and throw 50 TD passes, you're doing something right. He can make the big boy throws and has more traditional size.
This is the type of QB I think you can roll with for a decade+
I can't see Murray having the same longevity.
Haskins has tremendous accuracy in the short and intermediate game which is paramount in today's NFL. Pretty much why Eli's game hasn't aged particularly well.
Yep, and he can throw down the field, too. I saw someone compare him to Geno Smith here recently - I guess when you have two black QB's who are the same size that's what happens - but I think Haskins' arm is far better than Smith's.
Smith was a very lateral passer @ WVU - it seemed like he was always throwing behind the sticks and rarely challenging teams down the field.
WIth Haskins, I see a vertical arm that can sling it deep - and not just in the middle of the football field.
Haskins is a super effective PA passer out of the shotgun - which is something I saw Shurmur do more of in Minnesota with Keenum but not quite as much with Eli - presumably because Eli is more comfortable under center and we went much less shotgun heavy later in the year. I think he'd love to run more of that with Haskins.
He can throw WR's open. Fantastic short game accuracy, strong arm and giddyup on the ball. Sees the field really well.
He's not a scrambler, but he'll move when he needs to. He also got better in the face of pressure as the year progressed.
You'd prefer that he had more than 1 year of starting experience under his belt - but given that lack of experience, Haskins is pretty advanced as a passer.
All aboard!
Quote:
Personally, I want Haskins - I think I'm pretty set on him being my guy as far as QB's go in this class.
I'm not crazy about Daniel Jones or Drew Lock. I'd take a shot on Murray before I drafted either of those guys. Grier's arm strength I'm also a little iffy on.
Haskins has the arm I'm looking for. I don't care where you play college ball - when you complete 70%+ of your passes and throw 50 TD passes, you're doing something right. He can make the big boy throws and has more traditional size.
This is the type of QB I think you can roll with for a decade+
I can't see Murray having the same longevity.
I'm warming up to Haskins as well. I think he could be a real good QB for us with Barkley, Beckham, Engram, and Shepard. It would also allow the Giants to move on from Eli and have the benefit of paying their starting QB well below market value for 5 years. That is a big advantage as we have seen recently with the Eagles, Rams, Chiefs, Texans, Seahawks, etc.
I think Shurmur would do really, really well with Haskins.
Showing your age a bit, Bee Dubs :)
Interesting stuff. Definitely a few years before my time as an avid football fan, so I don't recall it.
But I agree - Murray playing up north would probably be fireworks. He's tailor made for that game.
I was a teenager and remember reading about him in SI. ESPN showed the 1-AA semis and finals so I got interested and watched. Ham was a magician.
Quote:
In comment 14263517 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Personally, I want Haskins - I think I'm pretty set on him being my guy as far as QB's go in this class.
I'm not crazy about Daniel Jones or Drew Lock. I'd take a shot on Murray before I drafted either of those guys. Grier's arm strength I'm also a little iffy on.
Haskins has the arm I'm looking for. I don't care where you play college ball - when you complete 70%+ of your passes and throw 50 TD passes, you're doing something right. He can make the big boy throws and has more traditional size.
This is the type of QB I think you can roll with for a decade+
I can't see Murray having the same longevity.
I'm warming up to Haskins as well. I think he could be a real good QB for us with Barkley, Beckham, Engram, and Shepard. It would also allow the Giants to move on from Eli and have the benefit of paying their starting QB well below market value for 5 years. That is a big advantage as we have seen recently with the Eagles, Rams, Chiefs, Texans, Seahawks, etc.
I think Shurmur would do really, really well with Haskins.
I would love to see the reaction of a certain poster who has guaranteed on numerous threads that Haskins will not be a Giant.
If Murray got picked at #6 overall he is gonna play football. You make a lot more money playing football early on. It would take him awhile to get paid the mega bucks baseball has to offer.
Link - ( New Window )
Murray is closer to 5'10" than 5'9", according to 2 sources. 5'9.75" to be precise. Russell Wilson is 5'11" according to his Combine measurement.
Wilson ran a 4.55 sec. 40 yard dash. Murray may run a 4.45 40. So far I have seen him passing well from roll outs to his left as well as his right, which will be crucial for him to succeed. I haven't watched enough of him yet, but he may be that 1 in a million guy who just has it, despite his height. He's only 1.25 inches shorter than Wilson. Is that TOO short?
Those highlights... make it look as if Murray plus Barkley, OBJ, Engram and Sterling Shepard would be like playing Madden - with a halfway decent OL.
This is going to happen if he’s there. It’s a no brainer for them. Marketability in dc, need a price controlled QB, and if it works he’s a genius, if not then it’s a cheap qb for a few years.
I mean, would you be shocked if the Giants got say Haskins round 1 and moved back into round 1 late to take a guy that falls, a Lock or whatever, too? I wouldn't be only because as crazy as that sounds if you like 2 guys a whole lot and the roster has spots after Eli, pull the trigger. Or Eli is cut. Or whatever. Draft boards get crazy.
But I'm always for best player available regardless of position. Stay with your board, not with your emotions.
Murray is closer to 5'10" than 5'9", according to 2 sources. 5'9.75" to be precise. Russell Wilson is 5'11" according to his Combine measurement.
. . . He's only 1.25 inches shorter than Wilson. Is that TOO short?
Initial combine measurements get rounded off. Wilson's combine highlight video shows that his precise measurement was actually 5-10 5/8.
That's good for your case. But the other thing the combine video shows is that Wilson came out of college built like a linebacker.
Murray doesn't have that and, while he might put on some weight, he'll never be as solid as Wilson.
RW muscles - ( New Window )
For the millionth time, they passed on Darnold and Rosen because of how good Barkley was. Not because Darnold and Rosen weren't good enough. Plus, Murray was a significantly better college player than Darnold and Rosen. If you're saying they didn't check enough boxes as prospects that's a different argument.
QBs normally always move up the draft board the closer that the draft comes.
Murray played against enormous defenders in college and did it well enough to win the Heisman. I have no doubt he can play quarterback in the NFL.
The issue always ends up being when coaches try to turn these guys into pocket QBs in an effort to keep him healthy. It may keep him healthy longer, but that doesn't matter much if it destroys his game.
Murray played against enormous defenders in college and did it well enough to win the Heisman. I have no doubt he can play quarterback in the NFL.
The issue always ends up being when coaches try to turn these guys into pocket QBs in an effort to keep him healthy. It may keep him healthy longer, but that doesn't matter much if it destroys his game.
Spot on Terps. With Murray's running ability and supposed 4.4n speed, you keep this guy rolling out a high % of his snaps because D's have to respect his running. At the same time he can stop on a dime and sling the darn football all over the place, rolling to either side I think
IMO he's a top 10 pick but I gotta watch more.
In the other mock from BR I posted today, very nice brief write up on Lock and how he'll likely rise up boards like Josh Allen did last year - who went 7 to Buffalo. Big arm and athleticism of the two compared favorably.
Quote:
Rich Gannon was 6'3"...that didn't matter when Tony Siragusa pancaked him and separated his shoulder.
Murray played against enormous defenders in college and did it well enough to win the Heisman. I have no doubt he can play quarterback in the NFL.
The issue always ends up being when coaches try to turn these guys into pocket QBs in an effort to keep him healthy. It may keep him healthy longer, but that doesn't matter much if it destroys his game.
Spot on Terps. With Murray's running ability and supposed 4.4n speed, you keep this guy rolling out a high % of his snaps because D's have to respect his running. At the same time he can stop on a dime and sling the darn football all over the place, rolling to either side I think
IMO he's a top 10 pick but I gotta watch more.
In the other mock from BR I posted today, very nice brief write up on Lock and how he'll likely rise up boards like Josh Allen did last year - who went 7 to Buffalo. Big arm and athleticism of the two compared favorably.
He looks like one hell of a football player to me. He may not match the measurables, not even close, but he looks like a game changer.
Quote:
Rich Gannon was 6'3"...that didn't matter when Tony Siragusa pancaked him and separated his shoulder.
Murray played against enormous defenders in college and did it well enough to win the Heisman. I have no doubt he can play quarterback in the NFL.
The issue always ends up being when coaches try to turn these guys into pocket QBs in an effort to keep him healthy. It may keep him healthy longer, but that doesn't matter much if it destroys his game.
Spot on Terps. With Murray's running ability and supposed 4.4n speed, you keep this guy rolling out a high % of his snaps because D's have to respect his running. At the same time he can stop on a dime and sling the darn football all over the place, rolling to either side I think
IMO he's a top 10 pick but I gotta watch more.
In the other mock from BR I posted today, very nice brief write up on Lock and how he'll likely rise up boards like Josh Allen did last year - who went 7 to Buffalo. Big arm and athleticism of the two compared favorably.
Allen was really underwhelming. I think the most impressive part of his rookie year was actually how well he did running with the football. But that's not why he was drafted.
His completion % is still dreadful - to be completing just half your passes in a league where 40 year olds are @ 70% is bad. He got picked off more than he threw the ball into the endzone.
We'd be in a world of trouble right now if we took this guy rather than Barkley.... Josh Allen is the type of guy that gets you into "QB hell" because now Buffalo will spend more than half this rookie contract trying to get him "right" and have him put his tools together - odds are he won't, and then they'll go back and forth wondering when to cut the cord because of the investment and will be hesitant to move on from him.
I know I'm getting way ahead of myself and that his career arc could change on a dime - but I just don't see it with Allen.
I do think Darnold will be good. I think Rosen was in a near-impossible situation with a first year coach and terrible team around him, but the talent is there.
But really, after year 1, I think the only guy I'd have considered a "mistake" to pass on would have been Mayfield. And we didn't pass on him.
There's no "RB hell" - we're never going to get stuck in a phase of roster building because of Saquon Barkley. But a team like Buffalo most certainly can with Allen if he's middling and no one can decide if he's worth continuing along with or moving on from.
It's basically the Dolphins with Tannehill. He's one of those guys who fools teams into sticking with them because they're too afraid of the alternative unknown - so, they waste money on a second contract and keep spinning their wheels with a QB who really isn't very good.
Barkley is a top 3 player at his position. Allen is close to the bottom of his.
Point being, for all his talent he was poorly deployed and he didn't impact games. He's a special player that made some special plays, but most of the work he did last year - particularly as a receiver - could have been done by anybody.
That ain't on him...it's on the coaching staff that wasted him in year 1.
And I don't really care about Josh Allen's completion percentage. With him as a starter the Bills went 5-6. In the remainder of their games they went 1-4. He made a difference.
Also, Barkley didn't impact games? Am I missing something?
Point being, for all his talent he was poorly deployed and he didn't impact games. He's a special player that made some special plays, but most of the work he did last year - particularly as a receiver - could have been done by anybody.
That ain't on him...it's on the coaching staff that wasted him in year 1.
And I don't really care about Josh Allen's completion percentage. With him as a starter the Bills went 5-6. In the remainder of their games they went 1-4. He made a difference.
I stopped reading when you said Barkley "didn't impact games"
I like to think you know your stuff - but comments like that really make me wonder.
You crush the Giants for everything, refuse to say that the post bye play was an improvement here despite the difference in record, but readily give Josh Allen credit for a losing record just because the backup options were horrid and impossible to win games with while he was out.
They were still a losing football team WITH him, and if completing just 52% of passes in a year where completion percentages were up across the board and saw several QB's approach 70%, that is a HUGE red flag.
Allen was not good this year and the Giants would have been worse football team if they drafted him.
What the heck am I reading here?
The go-to move seems to be to constantly assign assessment to individual players using their team records.
I shouldn't have to explain why that is a really poor method of evaluation again, but maybe I do - because it keeps being used as a way to prop up shitty non-Giants and knock down anyone who IS a Giant. Including incredibly talented players like Barkley and Beckham.
Point being, for all his talent he was poorly deployed and he didn't impact games. He's a special player that made some special plays, but most of the work he did last year - particularly as a receiver - could have been done by anybody.
That ain't on him...it's on the coaching staff that wasted him in year 1.
And I don't really care about Josh Allen's completion percentage. With him as a starter the Bills went 5-6. In the remainder of their games they went 1-4. He made a difference.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂.
Point being, for all his talent he was poorly deployed and he didn't impact games. He's a special player that made some special plays, but most of the work he did last year - particularly as a receiver - could have been done by anybody.
That ain't on him...it's on the coaching staff that wasted him in year 1.
And I don't really care about Josh Allen's completion percentage. With him as a starter the Bills went 5-6. In the remainder of their games they went 1-4. He made a difference.
Holy cow. Talk about cherry picking stats to fit a narrative. One of those losses was the game Allen got hurt for one. Two, the losses were against NE, Indy, Houston and Chicago — all playoff teams. Allen didn’t win a single game against a playoff team.
The reason for your Barkley stat is that the Giants were already losing and playing catch up which meant lots of dumpoffs. Sure, they didn’t utilize him well in the passing game but all else being equal, you’d win a lot more games with Barkley and a crappy QB than Allen with a crappy RB. Buffalo won one more game than we did and that’s with their elite defense and with 4 games against the Jets and Dolphins.
No one is knocking Barkley. My point is that with him on our offense getting all those yards we still struggled to score points and win games. The way he was used limited his effectiveness.
You said above that the Bills might be in trouble with Allen. If that's true, it's also true about us despite Barkley's presence.
The point is, what difference did he make? He made some incredible plays and put up 2000 yards, and the offense still sucked. What does that tell you?
No one is knocking Barkley. My point is that with him on our offense getting all those yards we still struggled to score points and win games. The way he was used limited his effectiveness.
You said above that the Bills might be in trouble with Allen. If that's true, it's also true about us despite Barkley's presence.
It's not - because the Giants are never going to be held hostage by a RB the way teams get stuck with QB's. Hell, most teams use 2 and 3 RB's simultaneously. You don't marry yourself to one individual player there - but you do at the QB position - which is why there's a big difference.
Barkley will never throw a wrench in the Giants plans the way middling QB's do.
Of course the record is the most important part, but can't use this logic you keep using where you say "player x was on a team with a bad record, therefore player x is not a good investment" - you'll never wind up with a good football team if your criteria for a worthwhile football player is only one who plays on teams with good W/L records.
It is a bad way to evaluate players. Barkley had tons of impact. But when you're adding good players to a really bad team, they aren't going to push the needle far enough on their own.
We need MORE Barkleys and MORE Beckham's. Talent is the biggest problem here - we don't have enough. Barkley was awesome. He can be part of the solution. But we won't get better until we do more to fix the lines, do more to get to opposing QB's, and figure out our own QB future.
No one is knocking Barkley. My point is that with him on our offense getting all those yards we still struggled to score points and win games. The way he was used limited his effectiveness.
You said above that the Bills might be in trouble with Allen. If that's true, it's also true about us despite Barkley's presence.
Barkley is a component, you add components to make a unit. Barkley even as great as he was past year is only a single component. The wins will happen once they get other components (coaching is another component). The giants have missed on high draft picks so they are behind. You are putting way too much responsibility on Barkley, an individual for a team game
You're taking my post too literally - the point is that NYG need more talent. We won't get better by passing on players like Barkley in the draft because he's a running back or by narrowing our criteria to only players that we think can somehow win us games singlehandedly.
Like I said in my above post - we need more offensive line help, we need to be able to rush the passer, we need more DB depth, and depth in general.
I don't actually expect twenty two #26's and #13's - but I also don't expect the Giants to be a better football team until they fill out their roster with better football players.
And to be fair, Buffalo is not an elite team on the offensive side of the ball - anywhere. They need a infusion of talent before we can really assess Allen as a thrower. I think of us agree this is the same sentiment for Rosen, too.
Component is a good word to use. Barkley is one - a large one. But we're still missing pieces and until we have those pieces, the overall unit won't be good enough.
But Barkley gets us closer. Which is why you make that investment even if he doesn't get us all the way.
I'm also pretty sure that more top flight talent would only help NYG - not hurt them. Doesn't mean I expect that or think it's an actual model to follow - but there's certainly nothing BAD about adding elite talent to a football team.
And to be fair, Buffalo is not an elite team on the offensive side of the ball - anywhere. They need a infusion of talent before we can really assess Allen as a thrower. I think of us agree this is the same sentiment for Rosen, too.
The cardinals actually have some nice skill players. Their offensive line is putrid though. Hard to judge a pure pocket passer on that. Although I would have hoped he put up better numbers than he did.