Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

My opinion of Gettleman

FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 2:28 pm
I really want to like Gettleman. I honestly do.

I don't mind trading Beckham.. but why sign him in the first place if your priority is to build a smash mouth team. plus we lose carryover dollars.

Sorry but Barkley was the wrong choice.. as great as he seems now. QB is by far the most valuable position in sports. It was an error to use the number two pick on anything but a QB because...

... even though Eli is 38 and just about fallen off the cliff, DG is behaving like there is no problem here. Just awful evaluation.

Adding Tate makes absolutely no sense. Great so we can go 5-11 instead of 3-13. What a joke. If you're tanking then tank.

We need to add a QB. It is our most desperate need. If we don't get Murray or Haskins I think time is up for DG.

What is this seeming obsession with smash mouth football. What year is this? 1977?

I believe he is awful. Glad I could get that off my chest.
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
RE: RE: ďWhy sign him in the first placeĒ  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 6:45 pm : link
In comment 14354397 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
In comment 14354394 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


This argument always makes me laugh. So every player that we want here should stay at all costs, no questions asks?

Itís obvious that something went south after he signed. So do you force it to work, likely making it worse, or do you strike a deal to get rid of a problem and recoup assets?

Let me ask you a question, have you ever planned on doing something, committed to it, then something happened where you had to change course?



sure i agree. but it's a failure. especially with millions on the line.


Not really. If we arenít going to the playoffs this year, which we likely arent with or without Beckham, then eating the dead money now is effectively us buying picks to invest in the future. So idea being here long term was a failure but a net positive will likely happen.

Time to move on.
RE: RE: I agree on OBj.....  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 6:46 pm : link
In comment 14354421 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
In comment 14354411 Doomster said:


Quote:


Why sign him to a big contract, when the fifth year option was available?

Once he played a few games, then trade him......would have saved a lot of cap....

DG said he wouldn't trade OBj after signing him, UNLESS he received an offer he couldn't refuse....a ss(who's stats are not eye popping) who is cheap for 2 years, and two unknowns at 17 and the third round? That was a trade he couldn't refuse?



Agree completely. Look I am not mad about the return for OBJ. I never thought we were going to get two or three 1's for him, as some here fantasized.


He likely wouldnít have played. Have you guys not been paying attention?
RE: RE: I don't know, Mike in Ohio,  
adamg : 3/23/2019 6:47 pm : link
In comment 14354605 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
In comment 14354602 adamg said:


Quote:


if that is your real name. Maybe Franchise is on to something here, with a third round comp pick, we could do some real damage...



Do you even follow the NFL?


dO YoU eVeN FoLLow THe NfL?
Mack is a much better player at a much more important  
Mike from Ohio : 3/23/2019 6:48 pm : link
position than Beckham. There is nobody giving up two firsts for a wide receiver who needs to be signed long term. Getting a first alone would have been a coup.
RE: Mack is a much better player at a much more important  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 6:50 pm : link
In comment 14354623 Mike from Ohio said:
Quote:
position than Beckham. There is nobody giving up two firsts for a wide receiver who needs to be signed long term. Getting a first alone would have been a coup.


So you agree that they could have traded Beckham last season with two years of eligibility left. Thanks for agreeing.
RE: RE: 'but why sign him in the first place'...  
EricJ : 3/23/2019 6:57 pm : link
In comment 14354583 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:

Glad you're not our GM.


??? they could have traded him last season and likely gotten more, saved money and cap. That's what we are saying. Maybe I should be the GM.


Are you 14 years old or do you really have no idea how this league works?

You think the Giants could have gotten more for OBJ coming off of that ankle injury AND with only one year left on his deal? Really?

You are doubling down on your stupidity.
RE: RE: RE: 'but why sign him in the first place'...  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 7:00 pm : link
In comment 14354634 EricJ said:
Quote:
In comment 14354583 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:



Glad you're not our GM.


??? they could have traded him last season and likely gotten more, saved money and cap. That's what we are saying. Maybe I should be the GM.



Are you 14 years old or do you really have no idea how this league works?

You think the Giants could have gotten more for OBJ coming off of that ankle injury AND with only one year left on his deal? Really?

You are doubling down on your stupidity.


There were two years left and yes I think they could have gotten as much for OBJ with two years left on a rookie salary than what Cleveland paid for a receiver on a monster salary. You're throwing around the stupidity word but I think you need to look in the mirror.
RE: RE: Mack is a much better player at a much more important  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 7:03 pm : link
In comment 14354626 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
In comment 14354623 Mike from Ohio said:


Quote:


position than Beckham. There is nobody giving up two firsts for a wide receiver who needs to be signed long term. Getting a first alone would have been a coup.



So you agree that they could have traded Beckham last season with two years of eligibility left. Thanks for agreeing.


No, not after that injury. They had to trade him after his 2016 season. You can trade any player anytime though so what point are you even making?
Also  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 7:06 pm : link
Beckhamís deal is a bargain for Cleveland since they arenít on the hook for much of the upfront costs. Thatís a glaring omission from your analysis.

You should read up on the facts before lecturing people.
RE: RE: RE: Mack is a much better player at a much more important  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 7:07 pm : link
In comment 14354639 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
In comment 14354626 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14354623 Mike from Ohio said:


Quote:


position than Beckham. There is nobody giving up two firsts for a wide receiver who needs to be signed long term. Getting a first alone would have been a coup.



So you agree that they could have traded Beckham last season with two years of eligibility left. Thanks for agreeing.



No, not after that injury. They had to trade him after his 2016 season. You can trade any player anytime though so what point are you even making?


i'm saying that could have gotten an equal deal last year saved the cap and the money. it is what i said above. it shows a lack of clarity and vision for the team. it is fairly obvious.
RE: RE: RE: Darnold  
mattyblue : 3/23/2019 7:11 pm : link
In comment 14354474 Toth029 said:
Quote:
In comment 14354466 mattyblue said:


Quote:


In comment 14354463 Toth029 said:


Quote:


With a questionable OL and no run game? With a bad defense? Same loser team. But hey, they got a young QB to ruin while your team lacks in premier talent.



Canít you just say the exact same thing about Barkley?



Sure, it's a same team essentially. Remember the Rashad Jennings or Andre Brown year? So why get any panties in a bunch over them picking an elite prospect over a QB who isn't exactly Andrew Luck coming out? Their obviously picked a better player, in their minds, and I'm okay with that. The Rams picked Gurley early instead of forcing a pick at QB in their waning years post-Bradford.


I completely agree. It will be at least 5 years before you can say either one was a better decision.
RE: RE: RE: RE: 'but why sign him in the first place'...  
TrueBlue56 : 3/23/2019 7:13 pm : link
In comment 14354635 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
In comment 14354634 EricJ said:


Quote:


In comment 14354583 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:



Glad you're not our GM.


??? they could have traded him last season and likely gotten more, saved money and cap. That's what we are saying. Maybe I should be the GM.



Are you 14 years old or do you really have no idea how this league works?

You think the Giants could have gotten more for OBJ coming off of that ankle injury AND with only one year left on his deal? Really?

You are doubling down on your stupidity.



There were two years left and yes I think they could have gotten as much for OBJ with two years left on a rookie salary than what Cleveland paid for a receiver on a monster salary. You're throwing around the stupidity word but I think you need to look in the mirror.


Name one player under the franchise tag that was traded for at least what the giants got for Beckham. The giants were able to get more because Beckham was under contract and his cost is controlled as the browns did not absorb the signing bonus.

Sean Gilbert netted the redskins 2 first round picks

Peerless price netted buffalo a first round pick
RE: RE: RE: RE: Mack is a much better player at a much more important  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 7:18 pm : link
In comment 14354642 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
In comment 14354639 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


In comment 14354626 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14354623 Mike from Ohio said:


Quote:


position than Beckham. There is nobody giving up two firsts for a wide receiver who needs to be signed long term. Getting a first alone would have been a coup.



So you agree that they could have traded Beckham last season with two years of eligibility left. Thanks for agreeing.



No, not after that injury. They had to trade him after his 2016 season. You can trade any player anytime though so what point are you even making?



i'm saying that could have gotten an equal deal last year saved the cap and the money. it is what i said above. it shows a lack of clarity and vision for the team. it is fairly obvious.


I donít know how you can possibly think that when any buyer would be buying an injured player. This discussion is beyond stupid.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: 'but why sign him in the first place'...  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 7:18 pm : link
In comment 14354646 TrueBlue56 said:
Quote:
In comment 14354635 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14354634 EricJ said:


Quote:


In comment 14354583 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:



Glad you're not our GM.


??? they could have traded him last season and likely gotten more, saved money and cap. That's what we are saying. Maybe I should be the GM.



Are you 14 years old or do you really have no idea how this league works?

You think the Giants could have gotten more for OBJ coming off of that ankle injury AND with only one year left on his deal? Really?

You are doubling down on your stupidity.



There were two years left and yes I think they could have gotten as much for OBJ with two years left on a rookie salary than what Cleveland paid for a receiver on a monster salary. You're throwing around the stupidity word but I think you need to look in the mirror.



Name one player under the franchise tag that was traded for at least what the giants got for Beckham. The giants were able to get more because Beckham was under contract and his cost is controlled as the browns did not absorb the signing bonus.

Sean Gilbert netted the redskins 2 first round picks

Peerless price netted buffalo a first round pick


There was a demand for Beckham last offseason. The Pats were allegedly very interested. We won't know the offers but I am sure they were decent. The Giants almost dealt him. The Pats paid a first for Cooks (a one year rental) and got a first for Cooks. The Cowboys paid a first for Cooper. Mack went for a better deal than Beckham. All I am saying is the Giants would have gotten at least the deal they got now. It's silly to suggest they wouldn't have gotten a first and a little extra last offseason.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Mack is a much better player at a much more important  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 7:18 pm : link
In comment 14354651 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
In comment 14354642 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14354639 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


In comment 14354626 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14354623 Mike from Ohio said:


Quote:


position than Beckham. There is nobody giving up two firsts for a wide receiver who needs to be signed long term. Getting a first alone would have been a coup.



So you agree that they could have traded Beckham last season with two years of eligibility left. Thanks for agreeing.



No, not after that injury. They had to trade him after his 2016 season. You can trade any player anytime though so what point are you even making?



i'm saying that could have gotten an equal deal last year saved the cap and the money. it is what i said above. it shows a lack of clarity and vision for the team. it is fairly obvious.



I donít know how you can possibly think that when any buyer would be buying an injured player. This discussion is beyond stupid.


He's still injured
So you trade more than what we got  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 7:19 pm : link
for an injured player AND then give him the same deal (so he doesnít sit out) while taking on the signing bonus. Got it, makes perfect sense.
RE: So you trade more than what we got  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 7:22 pm : link
In comment 14354654 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
for an injured player AND then give him the same deal (so he doesnít sit out) while taking on the signing bonus. Got it, makes perfect sense.

First of all, there was interest in Beckham last offseason. So I don't even know what your point is that he was too injured to be traded.

Second, he was injured this offseason and still got traded. Again I don't get your pointless argumentation.

Third, Mack was traded and signed by a team that wanted him. I don't think it is far fetched to think Beckham would have been traded and signed by another team, since Cleveland traded for his very large contract.
So interest in trading for him is your argument?  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 7:26 pm : link
Jesus Christ. And a big fucking LOL at comparing a strained quad to a broken ankle.

This thread is great, keep the laughs coming please.
RE: So interest in trading for him is your argument?  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 7:28 pm : link
In comment 14354661 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
Jesus Christ. And a big fucking LOL at comparing a strained quad to a broken ankle.

This thread is great, keep the laughs coming please.

You're the laugh. Let me know when you finish college, joker.
Haha  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 7:30 pm : link
pure gold. I canít wait to get tons of first round picks for every player that an opposing team is interest in. Who cares about the rest, so long as thereís interest!

Keep it coming, Iím dying to see what you come up with next.
RE: Haha  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 7:39 pm : link
In comment 14354667 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
pure gold. I canít wait to get tons of first round picks for every player that an opposing team is interest in. Who cares about the rest, so long as thereís interest!

Keep it coming, Iím dying to see what you come up with next.


thanks for the comedy. i appreciate it. but you should have the Alzheimer's looked at. Your memory seems spotty. Let me remind you... The Giants were asking for TWO first rounders last off-season. That's not me. That's Gettleman who you are apparently defending. On this site people thought they shouldn't deal OBJ for anything less than THREE first rounders. I guess you forgot all that. I'm just saying they could have gotten one. If our GM was so badass and thought he could get TWO I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he could have gotten at least one. Don't you? Unless you think he is a moron.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: 'but why sign him in the first place'...  
TrueBlue56 : 3/23/2019 7:39 pm : link
In comment 14354652 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
In comment 14354646 TrueBlue56 said:


Quote:


In comment 14354635 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14354634 EricJ said:


Quote:


In comment 14354583 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:



Glad you're not our GM.


??? they could have traded him last season and likely gotten more, saved money and cap. That's what we are saying. Maybe I should be the GM.



Are you 14 years old or do you really have no idea how this league works?

You think the Giants could have gotten more for OBJ coming off of that ankle injury AND with only one year left on his deal? Really?

You are doubling down on your stupidity.



There were two years left and yes I think they could have gotten as much for OBJ with two years left on a rookie salary than what Cleveland paid for a receiver on a monster salary. You're throwing around the stupidity word but I think you need to look in the mirror.



Name one player under the franchise tag that was traded for at least what the giants got for Beckham. The giants were able to get more because Beckham was under contract and his cost is controlled as the browns did not absorb the signing bonus.

Sean Gilbert netted the redskins 2 first round picks

Peerless price netted buffalo a first round pick



There was a demand for Beckham last offseason. The Pats were allegedly very interested. We won't know the offers but I am sure they were decent. The Giants almost dealt him. The Pats paid a first for Cooks (a one year rental) and got a first for Cooks. The Cowboys paid a first for Cooper. Mack went for a better deal than Beckham. All I am saying is the Giants would have gotten at least the deal they got now. It's silly to suggest they wouldn't have gotten a first and a little extra last offseason.


There was not a demand for Beckham. Rumors were out there that the giants were looking to trade Beckham and team's were inquiring if that was the case, because they were looking to see if he could be had cheap. The patriots 31st overall pick in the first round isn't as valuable as the browns 17th overall pick.

You are also going off the basis that Gettleman signed Beckham with the intent of trading him one year later. That wasn't his intent. His intent was that Beckham would be a ny giant for the next 5 years at least. Beckham's actions changed their thinking and they still made a move that netted them a good haul
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: 'but why sign him in the first place'...  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 7:48 pm : link
In comment 14354672 TrueBlue56 said:
Quote:
In comment 14354652 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14354646 TrueBlue56 said:


Quote:


In comment 14354635 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14354634 EricJ said:


Quote:


In comment 14354583 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:



Glad you're not our GM.


??? they could have traded him last season and likely gotten more, saved money and cap. That's what we are saying. Maybe I should be the GM.



Are you 14 years old or do you really have no idea how this league works?

You think the Giants could have gotten more for OBJ coming off of that ankle injury AND with only one year left on his deal? Really?

You are doubling down on your stupidity.



There were two years left and yes I think they could have gotten as much for OBJ with two years left on a rookie salary than what Cleveland paid for a receiver on a monster salary. You're throwing around the stupidity word but I think you need to look in the mirror.



Name one player under the franchise tag that was traded for at least what the giants got for Beckham. The giants were able to get more because Beckham was under contract and his cost is controlled as the browns did not absorb the signing bonus.

Sean Gilbert netted the redskins 2 first round picks

Peerless price netted buffalo a first round pick



There was a demand for Beckham last offseason. The Pats were allegedly very interested. We won't know the offers but I am sure they were decent. The Giants almost dealt him. The Pats paid a first for Cooks (a one year rental) and got a first for Cooks. The Cowboys paid a first for Cooper. Mack went for a better deal than Beckham. All I am saying is the Giants would have gotten at least the deal they got now. It's silly to suggest they wouldn't have gotten a first and a little extra last offseason.



There was not a demand for Beckham. Rumors were out there that the giants were looking to trade Beckham and team's were inquiring if that was the case, because they were looking to see if he could be had cheap. The patriots 31st overall pick in the first round isn't as valuable as the browns 17th overall pick.

You are also going off the basis that Gettleman signed Beckham with the intent of trading him one year later. That wasn't his intent. His intent was that Beckham would be a ny giant for the next 5 years at least. Beckham's actions changed their thinking and they still made a move that netted them a good haul


Ok this is a fair reply. Yes there was some demand for Beckham. How much we might not ever know but I bet ot was more than just the Pats 31.. They had other picks to deal including an earlier first rounder that became Michel. But set that aside.

You make an interesting point. Beckham did something that suddenly forced their hand. Sorry I don't buy it. I think beckham did next to nothing. What? Pretend to pee? he basically acted as he always did. So I call that a miscalculation by DG. If he didn't want Beckham acting like Beckham then we all would have been better off if he did it a year earlier, hastening our rebuild. This set our rebuild back a year, imo. I feel DG thought we would compete and he needed Beckham to do so. When that failed, miserably, he has now decided he doesnt want to spend that kind of money on a WR and wants to retool the team differently, with a different allocation of resources.

This is a change of course. Which speaks to DG's lack of vision when he took this team over.
What I learned in this thread...  
EricJ : 3/23/2019 7:51 pm : link
is that the Giants were looking for 2 first round picks last year for OBJ.

Now, I am googling my ass of to see where Gettleman, Mara, or anyone else in a decision making capacity actually said that.

The only thing I could find are "reports" from pundits. That is really strange. Especially considering DG said he was not looking to trade OBJ back then.

So, can someone show me where Gettleman publicly said he wanted two first rounders for OBJ?

RE: What I learned in this thread...  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 7:53 pm : link
In comment 14354680 EricJ said:
Quote:
is that the Giants were looking for 2 first round picks last year for OBJ.

Now, I am googling my ass of to see where Gettleman, Mara, or anyone else in a decision making capacity actually said that.

The only thing I could find are "reports" from pundits. That is really strange. Especially considering DG said he was not looking to trade OBJ back then.

So, can someone show me where Gettleman publicly said he wanted two first rounders for OBJ?

People don't announce in the press how much they want for a player. GM's lie all the time publicly anyway. There were press reports (not pundits) that this was the asking price and yes they tested the water last year.
Haha  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 7:58 pm : link
Gettleman asking for 2 first rounders is called setting the starting points for a negotiation. That doesnít mean he expects to get it, but thatís where talks are starting.

I mean, you do know this basic, elementary level shit donít you? Why on earth would anyone start negotiations low?
To the OP  
Rjanyg : 3/23/2019 7:58 pm : link
I didnít read the whole thread. But you have no idea what DG is thinking or doing and he doesnít care if you like him.

Understand his philosophy: Run the ball, stop the run, rush the passer.

Also understand: Big men who can move win games.

Signing Beckham was just a much Shurmurs idea as DG. A couple of FUís and the stupid interview, the business decision on the insides kick and missing the last 4 games changed peoples mind about OBJ.

Barkley was the right pick. He was the best player in the draft last year. He is better than any player in this years draft. People are always saying drsftcbest player available, and Barkley was the best player no doubt.

Our O Line is way better than 2 years ago. Itís not close. A RT away from a total rebuild in less than 2 years. A great RB to run behind that line. A great NY Giant QB to lead the team in Manning. He is not perfect. But he is our QB. Deal with it.

I expect a good amount of draft picks to help build our defense. It will be better next year.
Anytime someoneís traded  
UConn4523 : 3/23/2019 8:00 pm : link
is a lack of vision I guess. Canít trade anyone you sign? Got it.
I don't understand..  
BigBlue1013 : 3/23/2019 8:13 pm : link
How fans dont understand the sign Odell and trade him.

Let me see if I can explain it...If the Giants franchise tag OBJ, a team who signs him, have to give the Giants 2 first round picks. So no team is doing that. If no team will give up 2 1st for a franchise tagged player then the only way to keep control of him is to sign him to a long term deal. Do you want the giants to let OBJ hit the FA market in 2 years and get nothing for him? No.

17th pick, 3rd and Peppers is a really good deal.

Plus Dee Ford got traded for a 2nd rounder in 2020.

DE>WR and just look at both deals.

It's not complicated.
You lost me at Barkley being the wrong choice...  
Bluesbreaker : 3/23/2019 8:14 pm : link
If we don't get our guy this year they will in 2020
Not going to sweat it have plenty of picks to help
bolster the talent we do have SB will have a big season .
We may go 9-7 i DKN ..
Gettleman didn't make a mistake taking Barkley over Darnold  
GeofromNJ : 3/23/2019 8:19 pm : link
He erred taking Barkley over Allen who will prove to be the next John Elway. However, having passed on Allen, he was correct to take Barkley over Darnold. Finding a quarterback of Darnold's talent in a subsequent year is eminently doable. With respect to Beckham, signing him before trading him made sense because locking him up for five years made him a more tradable commodity. One last small item. I realize that no one on this website thinks Davis Webb is worth three cents, but releasing him and then drafting Lauletta whose arm is substantially inferior made no sense to me whatsoever.
RE: What I learned in this thread...  
eric2425ny : 3/23/2019 8:22 pm : link
In comment 14354680 EricJ said:
Quote:
is that the Giants were looking for 2 first round picks last year for OBJ.

Now, I am googling my ass of to see where Gettleman, Mara, or anyone else in a decision making capacity actually said that.

The only thing I could find are "reports" from pundits. That is really strange. Especially considering DG said he was not looking to trade OBJ back then.

So, can someone show me where Gettleman publicly said he wanted two first rounders for OBJ?


I donít have the link handy, but in the Gettleman interview with Papa the other day he said his initial thought in terms of Beckham was two first rounders. He then said we got #17, and a former first rounder meaning Peppers. That was the first time I had seen anyone from the Giants say anything about two first rounders.
RE: Gettleman didn't make a mistake taking Barkley over Darnold  
eric2425ny : 3/23/2019 8:27 pm : link
In comment 14354700 GeofromNJ said:
Quote:
He erred taking Barkley over Allen who will prove to be the next John Elway. However, having passed on Allen, he was correct to take Barkley over Darnold. Finding a quarterback of Darnold's talent in a subsequent year is eminently doable. With respect to Beckham, signing him before trading him made sense because locking him up for five years made him a more tradable commodity. One last small item. I realize that no one on this website thinks Davis Webb is worth three cents, but releasing him and then drafting Lauletta whose arm is substantially inferior made no sense to me whatsoever.


I donít necessarily agree on the Barkley vs. Allen comment, but I agree with the rest, including why we did we dump Webb for Lauletta. I really wish we just kept Webb last year and picked a player we could use in the 4th round.
RE: Haha  
crick n NC : 3/23/2019 8:32 pm : link
In comment 14354685 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
Gettleman asking for 2 first rounders is called setting the starting points for a negotiation. That doesnít mean he expects to get it, but thatís where talks are starting.

I mean, you do know this basic, elementary level shit donít you? Why on earth would anyone start negotiations low?


George Costanza held out for less
Iím not saying I agree  
UberAlias : 3/23/2019 9:12 pm : link
But there is legitimate skepticism in all areas mentioned in the OP. These are all decisions which have been called into question, and not only by people lacking credibility. Say what you want, this team has a lot to prove.
RE: RE: What I learned in this thread...  
EricJ : 3/23/2019 9:29 pm : link
In comment 14354681 FranchiseQB said:
Quote:
In comment 14354680 EricJ said:


Quote:


is that the Giants were looking for 2 first round picks last year for OBJ.

Now, I am googling my ass of to see where Gettleman, Mara, or anyone else in a decision making capacity actually said that.

The only thing I could find are "reports" from pundits. That is really strange. Especially considering DG said he was not looking to trade OBJ back then.

So, can someone show me where Gettleman publicly said he wanted two first rounders for OBJ?



People don't announce in the press how much they want for a player. GM's lie all the time publicly anyway. There were press reports (not pundits) that this was the asking price and yes they tested the water last year.


So what you are telling me is that Gettleman told the press that he wanted 2 first round picks while all along never saying that he was looking to trade Odell.

That makes a lot of sense. The more you talk the more interesting the fairy tale becomes.
RE: Franchise...  
giantsFC : 3/23/2019 10:57 pm : link
In comment 14354596 bw in dc said:
Quote:
No sweat.

I get accused of trolling almost daily because I dare criticize the aristocracy at Jints Central... ;)


Amen to that.
Angry douche in Charlotte and his posse.
RE: RE: to the OP  
Joey in VA : 3/23/2019 11:07 pm : link
In comment 14354568 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 14354551 gidiefor said:


Quote:


if you continue to post repeatedly, the same material - in new threads - we will regard it as trolling



So you are putting a quota on how many times a poster can say the same thing?

Why? Because it goes against some preferred mainstream thought?

Sorry, I find this very bizarre.
You pot stirrer, knock it off. You know it's a tired argument, and you know the OP has a tired argument but you LOVE to twist the nerps of Jints Central. Don't ever change old friend, you are a mainstay here and I wouldn't be here if you weren't. Differences of opinion aside, you know I respect the hell out of you and your shtick.
RE: RE: RE: What I learned in this thread...  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 11:26 pm : link
In comment 14354738 EricJ said:
Quote:
In comment 14354681 FranchiseQB said:


Quote:


In comment 14354680 EricJ said:


Quote:


is that the Giants were looking for 2 first round picks last year for OBJ.

Now, I am googling my ass of to see where Gettleman, Mara, or anyone else in a decision making capacity actually said that.

The only thing I could find are "reports" from pundits. That is really strange. Especially considering DG said he was not looking to trade OBJ back then.

So, can someone show me where Gettleman publicly said he wanted two first rounders for OBJ?



People don't announce in the press how much they want for a player. GM's lie all the time publicly anyway. There were press reports (not pundits) that this was the asking price and yes they tested the water last year.



So what you are telling me is that Gettleman told the press that he wanted 2 first round picks while all along never saying that he was looking to trade Odell.

That makes a lot of sense. The more you talk the more interesting the fairy tale becomes.


where did I say that? I'll answer: no where. The leaks to the press were probably from one or more of the teams who talked with the Giants. Some of the things you guys say really defy rational thought.
RE: Iím not saying I agree  
FranchiseQB : 3/23/2019 11:29 pm : link
In comment 14354734 UberAlias said:
Quote:
But there is legitimate skepticism in all areas mentioned in the OP. These are all decisions which have been called into question, and not only by people lacking credibility. Say what you want, this team has a lot to prove.


thanks.. I didn't think I was saying anything controversial. I don't really understand the nastiness and the blow back from my post. These are obvious areas to question.
RE: RE: Haha  
joeinpa : 3/24/2019 7:21 am : link
In comment 14354671 FranchiseQB said:
[quote] In comment 14354667 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


pure gold. I canít wait to get tons of first round picks for every player that an opposing team is interest in. Who cares about the rest, so long as thereís interest!

Keep it coming, Iím dying to see what you come up with next.



thanks for the comedy. i appreciate it. but you should have the Alzheimer's looked at. Your memory seems spotty. Let me remind you...

Poor taste my friend, if you ve ever been touched by this hideous disease you would not use it in a cavalier manner.
bw  
fkap : 3/24/2019 9:37 am : link
you don't get accused of trolling because you criticize. you're accused because you do so in a manner calculated to elicit a particular reaction and then act all innocent/indignant when called on it.
RE: RE: RE: Haha  
FranchiseQB : 3/24/2019 9:46 am : link
In comment 14354868 joeinpa said:
Quote:
In comment 14354671 FranchiseQB said:
[quote] In comment 14354667 UConn4523 said:


Quote:


pure gold. I canít wait to get tons of first round picks for every player that an opposing team is interest in. Who cares about the rest, so long as thereís interest!

Keep it coming, Iím dying to see what you come up with next.



thanks for the comedy. i appreciate it. but you should have the Alzheimer's looked at. Your memory seems spotty. Let me remind you...

Poor taste my friend, if you ve ever been touched by this hideous disease you would not use it in a cavalier manner.


i sincerely apologize. I didn't mean to offend. It was a thoughtless and stupid comment by me.
I don't have a problem with trading OBJ  
fkap : 3/24/2019 9:47 am : link
I have a problem with the Giants head office decision committee (anyone who thinks DG is the sole member, come see me for a slightly used bridge I have for sale) thinking they could control him. They thought wrong.

They thought wrong about a lot of things.

Hooray that they recognized the error in a lot of cases and cut/traded the thought wrongs. But it doesn't fill one with confidence for the future.

Too soon to speak definitively about DG and the decision committee. This is an important year for them, and the team.

you can't count them wrong for not taking a QB, until they don't take one and one pans out.
RE: bw  
FranchiseQB : 3/24/2019 9:47 am : link
In comment 14354926 fkap said:
Quote:
you don't get accused of trolling because you criticize. you're accused because you do so in a manner calculated to elicit a particular reaction and then act all innocent/indignant when called on it.


Or perhaps, and more likely, people are too sensitive to this subject.
RE: I don't have a problem with trading OBJ  
FranchiseQB : 3/24/2019 9:58 am : link
In comment 14354938 fkap said:
Quote:
I have a problem with the Giants head office decision committee (anyone who thinks DG is the sole member, come see me for a slightly used bridge I have for sale) thinking they could control him. They thought wrong.

They thought wrong about a lot of things.

Hooray that they recognized the error in a lot of cases and cut/traded the thought wrongs. But it doesn't fill one with confidence for the future.

Too soon to speak definitively about DG and the decision committee. This is an important year for them, and the team.

you can't count them wrong for not taking a QB, until they don't take one and one pans out.


at least one of those QBs is going to pan out in a big way. They have a chance this year to maybe fix it. Let's hope they do.
my opinion on  
fkap : 3/24/2019 10:05 am : link
'one of them will pan out' is the same as last year. You're not drafting them all. Pick one, and that's the one you're judging the Giants on.

RE: Good read here, does a good job blowing up the stupid idea  
Giants_Rock : 3/24/2019 11:47 am : link
In comment 14354384 mfsd said:
Quote:
that Eli has fallen off a cliff.

2018 was actually one of the best of Eliís career, behind a dogshit OL for much of the season.

You want to make the point the Giants need to draft his replacement anyway? Fine, fair point. But to claim heís suddenly not good anymore reveals a pretty low football IQ
Eli Manning is the same QB heís always been - ( New Window )


Dumb article. Basically says quarterbacks do better with no pressure....not exactly newsbreaking. What i saw was Eli make a bad decision. He should have run to his letf, taken the sack or thrown it away.

RE: I see all the morons  
Giants_Rock : 3/24/2019 12:30 pm : link
In comment 14354423 Dave on the UWS said:
Quote:
decided to get together and populate this thread. You know, the type who should apply to be the teamís new GM because they obviously know better.


Its a message board where people express their opinions and vent when they disagree with something. If you don't get that then you re the moron.
RE: He's a buffoon  
Giants_Rock : 3/24/2019 12:47 pm : link
In comment 14354395 SHO'NUFF said:
Quote:
but he makes Mara comfortable.


Yes and that worries me. Im all for giving DG the benefit of the doubf at this point but If we continue to win only 5 or so games the next two years Dave shoult go but i think Mara will give him more time than that. Should be an interesting next couple of years.
Pages: 1 2 3 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner