On the crazy Russell Wilson/Cowherd 3 way deal thread jtgiants (who's been a fantastic resource for all of us this and past offseasons) said the following about the Giants cutting Eli:
| The Giants cutting Eli now would be a dick move and sever his relationship with the Giants by forcing his retirement. They won't do that to him or his legacy. Like it or not it isn't happening. |
I'm not trying to put jtgiants on the spot...I think he's plugged in and giving us an accurate perspective into the Giants' thinking.
You can not operate a football team this way. It's very difficult to win in the NFL if you're making critical decisions based on post-football relationships and legacies. If ever there were a time to ask "What would Belichick do?", this is it.
I very rarely start threads, but I felt this deserved one because jtgiants captured perfectly why Eli is still the QB - and it's not just about winning in 2019.
Not according to what a known insider just told us.
Lets say everything falls our way this season and we go 9-7, get a wild card and maybe even win one playoff game. To what end? We are in the same spot next year.
He is slowly playing himself out of the HoF and our ownership (which I blame for the Geno Smith debacle) is putting the rest of the team in limbo (to be nice) because they are sentimental.
Quote:
Think he can still play regardless of what posters and “analysts” proclaim.
Not according to what a known insider just told us.
You are conveniently leaving out that JT hsa said NUMEROUS times that PS and DG believe Eli still can get it done at a high level.
Agree or disagree - they believe in Eli and there are no better options for the future that are available at this time.
I understood this when it was first written.
He is the same player that he always has been, if you don't like Eli today than you never have. He's not a mobile QB. I get it, its exciting to watch these guys that can make things happen with their feet.
Quote:
In comment 14380785 dep026 said:
Quote:
Think he can still play regardless of what posters and “analysts” proclaim.
Not according to what a known insider just told us.
You are conveniently leaving out that JT hsa said NUMEROUS times that PS and DG believe Eli still can get it done at a high level.
Agree or disagree - they believe in Eli and there are no better options for the future that are available at this time.
While it does not bother me a ton that Eli is going to be the quarterback next year, the second part of the statement really makes no sense to me. Are we talking about future? Because if that is the case, hard to dispute Josh Rosen making more sense than Eli.
Remember "No Guts, No Glory".
Russel Wilson would be wild to see in Blue.
Quote:
You guys are missing the point. Cutting eli after the year and going in a different direction is business. That's a football decision. After paying the bonus and committing to have him as the qb this year has consequences and you don't treat iconic players that way. It sends a bad message to other players and isn't good business. It won't and shouldn't happen.
I understood this when it was first written.
How dare he post something that not only makes sense but doesn’t fit others agendas
While it does not bother me a ton that Eli is going to be the quarterback next year, the second part of the statement really makes no sense to me. Are we talking about future? Because if that is the case, hard to dispute Josh Rosen making more sense than Eli.
I am sure they have done their research on Rosen. They just may not like him. And they can be 100% wrong or right..... but I am sure they havent blown everything off.
Which tape? And which year?
He is the same player that he always has been
Go watch his highlights from 2011. Can he still play? Yeah. He is not the same player that is actually a discredit to how good he was.
Remember "No Guts, No Glory".
Russel Wilson would be wild to see in Blue.
Would but at the same time that salary would hurt my checkbook lol
He is the same player that he always has been, if you don't like Eli today than you never have. He's not a mobile QB. I get it, its exciting to watch these guys that can make things happen with their feet.
This is just wrong. Yes, he can make all the throws still, but he needs to put a lot more into his deep ball than he has in the past and his mobility/escapability is a shell of what it used to be. These QB's that seem ageless have two common qualities - quick decision makers and accurate in the short game. While Eli is a quick decision maker his game has suffered comparative to his peers because he isn't very accurate in the short game. With the way the rules are now it is very important to have your QB create YAC for your receivers because it is practically illegal to cover them.
He is the same player that he always has been, if you don't like Eli today than you never have. He's not a mobile QB. I get it, its exciting to watch these guys that can make things happen with their feet.
Are you serious, you think Eli is the same player? I urge you to watch his 2011 season again. He can still play but he is not the same.
I wonder how other players feel about seeing everyone else on the team who was being paid for past performances, or potential never reached be cut or traded while Eli is still around?
That seems to be the major driving force behind this entire issue, coincidentally.
Quote:
You guys are missing the point. Cutting eli after the year and going in a different direction is business. That's a football decision. After paying the bonus and committing to have him as the qb this year has consequences and you don't treat iconic players that way. It sends a bad message to other players and isn't good business. It won't and shouldn't happen.
I wonder how other players feel about seeing everyone else on the team who was being paid for past performances, or potential never reached be cut or traded while Eli is still around?
Justin Tuck comes to mind
Quote:
While it does not bother me a ton that Eli is going to be the quarterback next year, the second part of the statement really makes no sense to me. Are we talking about future? Because if that is the case, hard to dispute Josh Rosen making more sense than Eli.
I am sure they have done their research on Rosen. They just may not like him. And they can be 100% wrong or right..... but I am sure they havent blown everything off.
I have a problem with a lot of professional athletes nowadays, they behave like entitled brats. I will always respect Eli for handling the NY media and his job with the utmost professionalism. He was also a damn good quarterback who performed best when the lights were brightest. He'll be gone soon and we may be consistently reminded how good we had it here for many years.
This is a really tough subject because both sides make sense, and while my gut instinct tells me they should have moved on this offseason, i want to see how he performs when the team philosophy is finally run first with a lot of play action. They got away from that and it was a mistake.
JT, Eli has been apart of a losing team for some time now. And because of that, he's currently associated with losing for many fans. Its just the way it goes.
no one is making much of the fact that brees, rivers, rothelis, etc. are in their late 30s and none of those teams have an heir apparent on the roster..
It's not an anti-Eli thread.
I don't think its a debate either.
Mara has deep ties to Eli beyond the field. I'm sure he envisions Eli being here for the rest of his life as a Giants ambassador, future front office exec, etc. I don't see him just ending Eli's career on "bad" terms (trade or cut).
I'm not an insider like you are but I do happen to know Justin personally and have for several years. I brought up his name because I know how he felt after the Giants showed no interest in bringing him back at the end of his deal. So I happen to know exactly what he thinks about Eli's play. He loves the guy personally and would never utter anything negative about him publicly. I'll just leave it at that.
thats great for kids with Eli Fatheads in their bedroom, but how has that helped the Giants win football games? and build a team?
it doesnt and hasnt... and we all have to live with it- some are more content with that than others
Plus Eli is a HOF player.
But, really, it doesn't take an insider to arrive at this. It's all be out there in press conferences, interviews, news reports, etc where the circumstantial is so overwhelming that Mara is determined to keep Eli, and has surrounded himself with like-minded thinkers.
It is just incredulous the lengths this organization has taken to improving and restoring Eli's legacy over winning.
thats great for kids with Eli Fatheads in their bedroom, but how has that helped the Giants win football games? and build a team?
it doesnt and hasnt... and we all have to live with it- some are more content with that than others
See I disagree with this. Lets forget Eli's play. You can still build a team if the QB isnt there that you want. Are we establishing the Giants arent getting better? I like the direction they are going. Getting rid of the me-first players, the distractions, concentrating on the OL/DL. I mean we all know this isnt going to be built in a year.
However, the REESE STINK, is still un full effect and set us back nearly a decade and counting. Its going to take some more years. But not a lot of GMs would have wanted the Giants situation.
But, really, it doesn't take an insider to arrive at this. It's all be out there in press conferences, interviews, news reports, etc where the circumstantial is so overwhelming that Mara is determined to keep Eli, and has surrounded himself with like-minded thinkers.
It is just incredulous the lengths this organization has taken to improving and restoring Eli's legacy over winning.
You also like to fabricate and revise history.
jtgiants has maintained often that the Giants will move away from Eli - likely next year.
You've maintained that there has been a mandate to keep eli, that hiring choices were made with that being the primary driver, and that the team is being built around him. You've even asserted that certain personnel decisions have to go through eli before they happen.
You are castigated for having moronic conspiratorial type leanings. You are like the drunken guy in the boondocks who swears he saw a UFO and then equates it to being right if the head of NASA says there's a possibility life exists in the Universe.
But, really, it doesn't take an insider to arrive at this. It's all be out there in press conferences, interviews, news reports, etc where the circumstantial is so overwhelming that Mara is determined to keep Eli, and has surrounded himself with like-minded thinkers.
It is just incredulous the lengths this organization has taken to improving and restoring Eli's legacy over winning.
and failing at both objectives
I don’t believe him but I also don’t think sentimentality is the right word. Eli can still play, not as good as we need but he’s still capable of running the offense. I don’t think Mara sees a big enough sure fire upgrade to risk damaging the relationship he has with Eli, and whatever their plans are post football.
Simply put if Andrew Luck was coming out this year we’d probably move mountains to get him, but the risk with the rest of the guys so far hasn’t been worth the “damage”.
He shouldn’t run the team that way, but I get it.
Quote:
.
Agree with you the Fanatics have taken over this site by filibuster. Eric take note. Day after day the same BS. about Rosen.
Are you insinuating the owner of this site should take note that many threads are being opened re this subject and his site is getting thousands of hits while it's happening? Eric, watch out!
He is the same player that he always has been, if you don't like Eli today than you never have. He's not a mobile QB. I get it, its exciting to watch these guys that can make things happen with their feet.
In no way shape or form, is he the same player that he was in 2011 or even 2015. If you don't see that and then well...
Quote:
Eli can still play at a high level. Period. End of story.
He is the same player that he always has been, if you don't like Eli today than you never have. He's not a mobile QB. I get it, its exciting to watch these guys that can make things happen with their feet.
In no way shape or form, is he the same player that he was in 2011 or even 2015. If you don't see that and then well...
You really shouldn't be so cut and dried.
In the past two years, Eli has a rushing TD in each of them!!
Do what you gotta do. See you in a couple years.
He wanted to jettison Brady two years ago. But Kraft pulled ownership rank and forced the trade of JimG (speculation is Brady went to Kraft). And Brady is one of the all-timers.
So I don't think it's a leap to think Eli would have been cut two years ago or traded.
“I’ve read that and I have to tell you that really gets under my skin because that is absolutely nonsense,’’ Mara, his voice rising, said Sunday at the NFL annual league meeting. “Do I feel a certain amount of sentimentality towards Eli? Of course I do. Would I ever let that get in the way of making a football decision? Absolutely not! And I cannot believe some of you write that.’’
Believe what you want.
Full article - ( New Window )
JT: who outside the Giants’ organization thinks Eli can still play? And by that I mean a person with no ties to the team? I seriously have yet to find one. You and others are entitled to your opinions. But it’s hard to believe they aren’t impacted with a love for the guy because of the titles he brought us.
Every mock drafter thinks we need a QB. Non-Giants’ fans everywhere believe he can’t play. Why is it that the only people who believe he can are Giants’ fans or in the front office?
And the numbers suggest he is a mediocre QB, at best. Virtually none of his stats are above average. In fact, most are below average. So, the objective evidence is not in Eli fans’ favor, either.
Again, I respect others’ opinions because they are entitled to them. I just don’t see the support for them anywhere.
Quote:
If they don't honestly believe Eli is the best option going forward but they just don't want to tarnish his legacy, we might as well not participate as fans until Eli is gone. They don't deserve support if they're operating under some sense of loyalty to the old QB. It's not fair to anyone else other than Eli. And frankly, Eli has received what he was owed and he really doesn't deserve anything more.
Do what you gotta do. See you in a couple years.
I said it's a fair point if they actually believe that about Eli. JT seems to think otherwise. I tend to give management the benefit of the doubt.
But lets say the Giants go 8-8 or 9-7 (our schedule is pretty favorable this year), Eli goes for 4200-4300 yards, 66% completion and a 25/12 INT season. All very respectable numbers, the team improved - what next? If you dont think this is a distinct possibility - you havent followed the league long enough.
I wonder what each of their answers would be if they weren't tied to the organization.
Lastly, I would love to hear what some of the other NFL scouts say about Eli and his game RIGHT NOW. For some reason, there is very little intel out there about it...I wonder why that is...If his name wasn't Manning - do you think the insider NFL word on the curb would different?
Quote:
If Eli can still play? Spoiler alert. He agree w me
JT: who outside the Giants’ organization thinks Eli can still play? And by that I mean a person with no ties to the team? I seriously have yet to find one.
How hard have you looked?
I really dont want to make this an "is Eli a HoF player?" thread. You report what I assume to be facts back to us and I am appreciative. As a result you have a great reputation but you then use that repute (intentionally or unintentionally) to bolster your opinion as fact and make others seem "lost" and other adjectives.
Frankly, I for one am getting tired of you conflating the two. State your opinion but dont present that as fact like you do the things you hear. You dont know what every HoF voter thinks of Eli's candidacy - my guess is that if you do know some, it is just that - some, maybe none.
Youve said many times that the Giants (and you) think Eli can still play at a high level so I am asking you, your personal opinion of what "high level" means.
Ive agreed many times that he can play. I would say he can be effective (not consistently high level) if everything around him is ideal. On another team, he might be able to make a run but I just dont see that with this team.
All that said, I dont think he should be replaced just to be replaced. And from what you say, and I believe, the decision makers dont see anyone available that can play better than Eli. As I have said, I appreciate and accept this.
But lets say the Giants go 8-8 or 9-7 (our schedule is pretty favorable this year), Eli goes for 4200-4300 yards, 66% completion and a 25/12 INT season. All very respectable numbers, the team improved - what next? If you dont think this is a distinct possibility - you havent followed the league long enough.
I think that is a possibility but I think EVERYTHING has to go our way.
You've maintained that there has been a mandate to keep eli, that hiring choices were made with that being the primary driver, and that the team is being built around him. You've even asserted that certain personnel decisions have to go through eli before they happen.
Absolutely to all of that - except the last part about running decision by Eli. I may have said Archie in jest, but never Eli.
He wanted to jettison Brady two years ago. But Kraft pulled ownership rank and forced the trade of JimG (speculation is Brady went to Kraft). And Brady is one of the all-timers.
So I don't think it's a leap to think Eli would have been cut two years ago or traded.
Considering that Belichick was apparently overruled by Patriots ownership in your premise, your conclusion that he would have cut Eli makes no sense.
Quote:
If Eli can still play? Spoiler alert. He agree w me
JT: who outside the Giants’ organization thinks Eli can still play? And by that I mean a person with no ties to the team? I seriously have yet to find one. You and others are entitled to your opinions. But it’s hard to believe they aren’t impacted with a love for the guy because of the titles he brought us.
Every mock drafter thinks we need a QB. Non-Giants’ fans everywhere believe he can’t play. Why is it that the only people who believe he can are Giants’ fans or in the front office?
And the numbers suggest he is a mediocre QB, at best. Virtually none of his stats are above average. In fact, most are below average. So, the objective evidence is not in Eli fans’ favor, either.
Again, I respect others’ opinions because they are entitled to them. I just don’t see the support for them anywhere.
You ask for evidence of support for belief that Eli can still play, and then offer up mock drafters and other fans as evidence he can't. Brilliant.
But lets say the Giants go 8-8 or 9-7 (our schedule is pretty favorable this year), Eli goes for 4200-4300 yards, 66% completion and a 25/12 INT season. All very respectable numbers, the team improved - what next? If you dont think this is a distinct possibility - you havent followed the league long enough.
Another year of QB hell? (gettleman's term, not mine)
The reaction by the fans to the "benching" was ridiculous then as has the reaction by the ownership to it now. We are getting the treatment of Eli that we deserve and asked for.
The reaction by the fans to the "benching" was ridiculous then as has the reaction by the ownership to it now. We are getting the treatment of Eli that we deserve and asked for.
yup
The Giants do not fit this description.
The reaction by the fans to the "benching" was ridiculous then as has the reaction by the ownership to it now. We are getting the treatment of Eli that we deserve and asked for.
The reaction was justified cause they put an absolute shitbird in for no reason. Genao Smith didn’t earn shit and was given the keys for no reason.
Anyone with a clue that it was Reese and Ben sticking it to Eli cause they didn’t want him anymore.
They had no problem cutting Simms back in the day, and that relationship is fine.
Eli gets the business side as well. If they have to cut him he'll get over it sooner rather then later.
You can't make decisions over hurting someones feelings.
But lets say the Giants go 8-8 or 9-7 (our schedule is pretty favorable this year), Eli goes for 4200-4300 yards, 66% completion and a 25/12 INT season. All very respectable numbers, the team improved - what next? If you dont think this is a distinct possibility - you havent followed the league long enough.
I wish it were a simple AND/OR situation.
There's one last scenario - Eli leads us to another poor year...and Eli plays well in a handful of games (maybe late in the season, maybe against the Eagles) and the fan base comments on certain team aspects that don't go swimmingly (maybe the offensive line suffers injuries, maybe the offense weapons are lacking b/c there's no Odell, maybe the defense doesn't hold leads late) - and we sign him to an extension.
The Giants do not fit this description.
If we go 8-8 or 9-7 it wont be on Eli's back, It will be on Barkley and improved def, and we will fit this description pretty closely
"what I call quarterback hell. They've got quality defense, they've got a good special teams, and they're going 7-9, 8-8, 9-7. And now if there is a legitimate guy, they've got to trade up and give away the farm to get the guy."
He wanted to jettison Brady two years ago. But Kraft pulled ownership rank and forced the trade of JimG (speculation is Brady went to Kraft). And Brady is one of the all-timers.
So I don't think it's a leap to think Eli would have been cut two years ago or traded.
Didn't he just win another Superbowl with Brady at QB?
Yep. Everyone would do best to read his posts for a sense of what the Giants are going to do, because he’s clearly plugged in.
When it comes to the overt lobbying that what they’re going to do is the RIGHT course of action, just move on if you don’t like it.
I happen to hate the choices the org is making, much along the line of GoTerps. But no sense shitting on jtgiants.
We all like hearing insider information. It’s only logical that the best way for someone who is clearly plugged in to continue to receive it is to drink the kool-aid, tow the company line, or whatever euphemism you want to use.
It’s a lot easier for everyone if you just take the editorial parts of his posts with a grain of salt and move on, if you’re in such disagreement. Jtgiants seems like a good dude, but it seems unrealistic to expect that his opinions are going to be swayed by anything said in these threads.
Quote:
I heard Gettleman explain QB hell when he got here. It is when a team is built and can compete with the best and the QB is holding the team back.
The Giants do not fit this description.
If we go 8-8 or 9-7 it wont be on Eli's back, It will be on Barkley and improved def, and we will fit this description pretty closely
"what I call quarterback hell. They've got quality defense, they've got a good special teams, and they're going 7-9, 8-8, 9-7. And now if there is a legitimate guy, they've got to trade up and give away the farm to get the guy."
I must have missed the good special teams, quality defnese and records near 8 and 8 these past few years. The team sucks. 2016 was a fluke and Eli was actually the best player on the field in the playoffs. The Giants have not been in QB hell, the team just sucked. Even last season the passing game improved as the year went on and it could be argued the offense was the strength of that crap team. Most QB'S the first half of last season would have been on a stretcher. I guess that is a kinda of QB hell. I stand by my claim the Giants of do not fit that description.
He is the same player that he always has been, if you don't like Eli today than you never have. He's not a mobile QB. I get it, its exciting to watch these guys that can make things happen with their feet.
I can honestly only laugh whenever I see this comment. To say he is the same player he has always been does nothing but diminish how great of a player he used to be in his prime. No, he was never a runner, but he used to be much more mobile in the pocket. Go to 4:30 in the linked video below. One of my favorite Eli plays ever. You think Eli could still pull that off? The spin move against Dallas in the '11 final regular season game comes to mind too.
Also, he used to stand in the pocket and take hits while delivering the ball downfield. How about the throw to Cruz to beat the Redskins in 2012 while taking a hit? Today he would have tucked the ball and fell to the ground when he saw the free rusher.
Lastly (and most importantly), the magic is gone. In his prime he was always great in the biggest moments. You knew he was going to take the ball down the field and win the game. My last memories of 2018 are a horribly overthrown interception and 4 straight incompletions with the ball at mid field against the Colts and Cowboys with only a field goal needed to win.
Just stop with this nonsense that he is the same player he has always been. I wish he were but he is not even close to the same player.
Eli vs. Falcons - ( New Window )
This isn't a settled debate. Sure he flashed some later in the year. The same kind of circumstantial evidence out there to explain his bad play over the last 5 years can be used to explain away the good play.
They paid Eli more money than any other player has ever earned. They did right by him. If a trade should fall into their laps for a top 3 QB in the league in his 30s they should go for it, even it would mess with the farewell tour.
I actually support the farewell tour. I do think he deserves it. This isn't the 2020 draft in regards to QBs. Give Eli the best chance you can and hope he rekindles his magic. If he bombs this year, it will change the narrative on the last 5. Same is true if he does great but the converse.
After being in the middle of this debate for over a year I don't how how anyone can say with certainty what Eli is at this point. I can't. I just do not believe Eli's feelings should stop us from acquiring Wilson. If they are, that is an indictment of the front office.
Eli is always there, that cannot be overlooked, its so important to a team that your QB stay's healthy. He reads defense, he goes about the game the right way, he's even keeled, he's a leader, he can make all the throws, he can drop it in a bucket, back shoulder fade, fade to the endzone perfectly placed, he throws on time and often puts it were only his guy can get it. He's willing to be a gunslinger and let his WR go make a play.
What has he lost...Arm strength. Is it good enough to get the job done, yup. Was it ever really a big part of his game, nope. Maybe his 40 time is down too, I don't know and I don't care.
Protect him. How did the Giants beat the Pats, by pressuring Brady. Its hard to play QB on your back.
Quote:
He is the same player that he always has been, if you don't like Eli today than you never have. He's not a mobile QB. I get it, its exciting to watch these guys that can make things happen with their feet.
I can honestly only laugh whenever I see this comment. To say he is the same player he has always been does nothing but diminish how great of a player he used to be in his prime. No, he was never a runner, but he used to be much more mobile in the pocket. Go to 4:30 in the linked video below. One of my favorite Eli plays ever. You think Eli could still pull that off? The spin move against Dallas in the '11 final regular season game comes to mind too.
Also, he used to stand in the pocket and take hits while delivering the ball downfield. How about the throw to Cruz to beat the Redskins in 2012 while taking a hit? Today he would have tucked the ball and fell to the ground when he saw the free rusher.
Lastly (and most importantly), the magic is gone. In his prime he was always great in the biggest moments. You knew he was going to take the ball down the field and win the game. My last memories of 2018 are a horribly overthrown interception and 4 straight incompletions with the ball at mid field against the Colts and Cowboys with only a field goal needed to win.
Just stop with this nonsense that he is the same player he has always been. I wish he were but he is not even close to the same player. Eli vs. Falcons - ( New Window )
Rewatch your video and just watch the pocket.
Eli is always there, that cannot be overlooked, its so important to a team that your QB stay's healthy. He reads defense, he goes about the game the right way, he's even keeled, he's a leader, he can make all the throws, he can drop it in a bucket, back shoulder fade, fade to the endzone perfectly placed, he throws on time and often puts it were only his guy can get it. He's willing to be a gunslinger and let his WR go make a play.
What has he lost...Arm strength. Is it good enough to get the job done, yup. Was it ever really a big part of his game, nope. Maybe his 40 time is down too, I don't know and I don't care.
Protect him. How did the Giants beat the Pats, by pressuring Brady. Its hard to play QB on your back.
He's lost his ability to feel pressure in the pocket and evade it. That is absolutely the worst part of Eli in 2020.
There were multiple times last year where he was a second off of something whether it be stepping up, or just holding the ball just a second longer to get it out. He used to do those things well, and it just doesn't exist in today's Eli.
If they don't upgrade center and RT. We are going to be exactly the same as last year as well or worse since we don't have OBJ taking 2 people out in coverage with him.. Pressure up the middle from the center and some terrible RT play.
As the prodigal son with a life long NFL pedigree, Eli knows this too. He might not agree, but he knows it's about winning.
"Manning can still play" is a worthless barometer. Short of a catastrophic injury, he'll be able to go out and play to some functional degree.
To borrow a phrase from Bill, the stats can be tortured to tell any story, pro or ant-Manning.
The basic question should always be, is this a quarterback the Giants intend to build a champion around.
If he's not -- there are less than satisfactory, if understandable reasons he's on the roster; nostalgia, placeholding, timing etc.
In my view I'd like the team to either be churning a QB competition as they have at other roster spots and getting to the bottom of how big a problem he really is.
There stands a chance Manning isn't the problem at all and the Giants are much, much, further from championship level.
Looking around the league, should we think that Eli is the only great QB hampered by a poor OL? Can we all agree before the season if the OL will be an excuse or not?
We will only know if Eli has been part of the problem for all these disastrous years if there is a capable alternative on the roster who can step in mid-season. The problem is the Giants seem hesitant/unwilling to make that happen, for whatever reason, and that’s what most of us are upset about.
If the first read is there and he doesn't have pressure yet, he is the same guy he always was. Second and third reads. I feel he makes the decision to chuck it and his body is a half second behind doing what he wants it to. This is what I think we are seeing when he isn't as accurate as we would like.
I don't know. I either need to see someone else practice and start a number of games with the same players or I need us to improve the OL so he has more time and see him play a decent chunk of the season with an average to better than average OL.
DG: Eli, what are the chances you might be considering retirement? We don't want to cut you, but we would like to move in another direction at QB if you're ready to hang 'em up.
EM: I'm not retiring.
DG: Perfect! Glad to have you aboard!
Quote:
In comment 14380974 rocco8112 said:
Quote:
I heard Gettleman explain QB hell when he got here. It is when a team is built and can compete with the best and the QB is holding the team back.
The Giants do not fit this description.
If we go 8-8 or 9-7 it wont be on Eli's back, It will be on Barkley and improved def, and we will fit this description pretty closely
"what I call quarterback hell. They've got quality defense, they've got a good special teams, and they're going 7-9, 8-8, 9-7. And now if there is a legitimate guy, they've got to trade up and give away the farm to get the guy."
I must have missed the good special teams, quality defnese and records near 8 and 8 these past few years. The team sucks. 2016 was a fluke and Eli was actually the best player on the field in the playoffs. The Giants have not been in QB hell, the team just sucked. Even last season the passing game improved as the year went on and it could be argued the offense was the strength of that crap team. Most QB'S the first half of last season would have been on a stretcher. I guess that is a kinda of QB hell. I stand by my claim the Giants of do not fit that description.
I think the point is, the longer the Giants go on bolstering the roster without addressing the QB position with a post-Eli succession plan, the more likely it is that they voluntarily enter the QB hell that Gettleman described.
This is about Mara and his thought process.
What a real question I have is and we will probably never know is if Gettleman said we should cut him definitively without a replacement in house would Mara agree?
Will we ever really know DG's opinion of Eli?
I don't think bw is off when he says it quite possibly could have been an requisite of DG getting hiring that he stuck with Eli and if it was entirely up to him he might have cut bait.
jt if you have any insights into this that would be wonderful!
Quote:
If they don't honestly believe Eli is the best option going forward but they just don't want to tarnish his legacy, we might as well not participate as fans until Eli is gone. They don't deserve support if they're operating under some sense of loyalty to the old QB. It's not fair to anyone else other than Eli. And frankly, Eli has received what he was owed and he really doesn't deserve anything more.
Do what you gotta do. See you in a couple years.
As a fan OF THE GIANTS, and specifically within the premise of this thread, which is that the Giants might be choosing to keep Eli solely for sentimental reasons and NOT because they actually believe he can still play effectively (which is what adamg is saying with "if" in case you didn't pick up on that), are you ok with that? Are you good with the team knowingly and willingly choosing a suboptimal path at QB exclusively because of nostalgia?
If (there's that word again) so, I'd have to ask if you're a fan of Eli more than the team itself. For me, I root for Eli because he's on the Giants, not the other way around. How about you? Based on your reply to adamg, it sure reads like you care more about Eli than you do about the best interest of the team, even if those two are not congruent. Do what you gotta do, I guess.
Now, obviously, this is all just a matter of conjecture. There's nothing concrete from the team that actually confirms (or even suggests) that their reason for keeping Eli is based solely in sentimentality and personal relationships. I'm not asking you or anyone else to say that there is. But IF.
That is a matter of opinion.
All the other stuff isn't relevant to 2019, if it was than why not bring Strahan out of retirement?
Quote:
In comment 14380974 rocco8112 said:
Quote:
I heard Gettleman explain QB hell when he got here. It is when a team is built and can compete with the best and the QB is holding the team back.
The Giants do not fit this description.
If we go 8-8 or 9-7 it wont be on Eli's back, It will be on Barkley and improved def, and we will fit this description pretty closely
"what I call quarterback hell. They've got quality defense, they've got a good special teams, and they're going 7-9, 8-8, 9-7. And now if there is a legitimate guy, they've got to trade up and give away the farm to get the guy."
I must have missed the good special teams, quality defnese and records near 8 and 8 these past few years. The team sucks. 2016 was a fluke and Eli was actually the best player on the field in the playoffs. The Giants have not been in QB hell, the team just sucked. Even last season the passing game improved as the year went on and it could be argued the offense was the strength of that crap team. Most QB'S the first half of last season would have been on a stretcher. I guess that is a kinda of QB hell. I stand by my claim the Giants of do not fit that description.
No the Giants have not been in QB hell. But if they get to 8-8 this year, they will be in QB hell. Eli is good enough to win some games but not good enough to be a serious contender and not bad enough to get the team a top draft spot.
But is he the best possible option? At his pre-3/17 cap hit of $17M (factoring in $6M of dead money), I can't trust the objectivity of anyone that answers in the affirmative.
Quote:
When Eli decided he didn't want to sit in the second half of the OAK game and preferred to bench himself, the fans went into an absolute outrage over the treatment Eli got, and the message was sent to ownership: Eli has earned a different level of respect and treatment than other players, and the fans want him treated differently.
The reaction by the fans to the "benching" was ridiculous then as has the reaction by the ownership to it now. We are getting the treatment of Eli that we deserve and asked for.
The reaction was justified cause they put an absolute shitbird in for no reason. Genao Smith didn’t earn shit and was given the keys for no reason.
Anyone with a clue that it was Reese and Ben sticking it to Eli cause they didn’t want him anymore.
I'm not so sure it was for no reason. It may have very well been an attempt to show that a veteran journeyman could operate the offense just as effectively. Obviously that's not saying very much given how crappy the offense was that season anyway.
Quote:
In comment 14380940 adamg said:
Quote:
If they don't honestly believe Eli is the best option going forward but they just don't want to tarnish his legacy, we might as well not participate as fans until Eli is gone. They don't deserve support if they're operating under some sense of loyalty to the old QB. It's not fair to anyone else other than Eli. And frankly, Eli has received what he was owed and he really doesn't deserve anything more.
Do what you gotta do. See you in a couple years.
As a fan OF THE GIANTS, and specifically within the premise of this thread, which is that the Giants might be choosing to keep Eli solely for sentimental reasons and NOT because they actually believe he can still play effectively (which is what adamg is saying with "if" in case you didn't pick up on that), are you ok with that? Are you good with the team knowingly and willingly choosing a suboptimal path at QB exclusively because of nostalgia?
If (there's that word again) so, I'd have to ask if you're a fan of Eli more than the team itself. For me, I root for Eli because he's on the Giants, not the other way around. How about you? Based on your reply to adamg, it sure reads like you care more about Eli than you do about the best interest of the team, even if those two are not congruent. Do what you gotta do, I guess.
Now, obviously, this is all just a matter of conjecture. There's nothing concrete from the team that actually confirms (or even suggests) that their reason for keeping Eli is based solely in sentimentality and personal relationships. I'm not asking you or anyone else to say that there is. But IF.
1. I attended my first Giants game in 1984. I was a Giants fan long before Eli Manning was here, and I'll be a fan long after. So just because I support ownership that Eli is the best option RIGHT NOW that means I've now evolved from Eli Apologist to non Giants fan? Is this how far you're going to take it now?
2. They have stated numerous times they believe Manning can still play. Mara has directly addressed and vehemently denied any notion that he is keeping Manning solely for sentimentality reasons. Believe what you want. But those are direct quotes from the horse's mouth, whether you agree with them or not. They have also stated numerous times that they are indeed planning for his successor, which leads me to my next point:
3. Why can they not plan for the future of the team, as well as the future of the position, while Manning is still the QB until his replacement arrives? That has been done in the NFL as long as I've been watching the NFL. They draft a rookie to sit and learn behind a veteran. Why can't some of you wrap your heads around that very simple fact.
4. The Maras and their sentimental way of running a business have brought us 4 Superbowl Championships and 5 Appearances over 4 decades. They are the only team to win a Superbowl once a decade for the past 40 years, to my knowledge. Maybe their consistent, non knee jerk reaction approach might actually work again?
5. Finally, as far as my post about fans choosing not to support the Giants as long as Eli remains QB. That's everybody's right, isn't it? If you disagree that Eli should be QB and want to stop watching until he's gone, then there's the door? This site won't miss you, the Giants won't miss you either. I think they'll be just fine. And so will you! Maybe not watching will make some of you less miserable, because you come off as genuinely miserable.
Because it s fun. No one is forced to participate in any form including reading the post or especially responding to it
Quote:
In comment 14380941 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
In comment 14380940 adamg said:
Quote:
If they don't honestly believe Eli is the best option going forward but they just don't want to tarnish his legacy, we might as well not participate as fans until Eli is gone. They don't deserve support if they're operating under some sense of loyalty to the old QB. It's not fair to anyone else other than Eli. And frankly, Eli has received what he was owed and he really doesn't deserve anything more.
Do what you gotta do. See you in a couple years.
As a fan OF THE GIANTS, and specifically within the premise of this thread, which is that the Giants might be choosing to keep Eli solely for sentimental reasons and NOT because they actually believe he can still play effectively (which is what adamg is saying with "if" in case you didn't pick up on that), are you ok with that? Are you good with the team knowingly and willingly choosing a suboptimal path at QB exclusively because of nostalgia?
If (there's that word again) so, I'd have to ask if you're a fan of Eli more than the team itself. For me, I root for Eli because he's on the Giants, not the other way around. How about you? Based on your reply to adamg, it sure reads like you care more about Eli than you do about the best interest of the team, even if those two are not congruent. Do what you gotta do, I guess.
Now, obviously, this is all just a matter of conjecture. There's nothing concrete from the team that actually confirms (or even suggests) that their reason for keeping Eli is based solely in sentimentality and personal relationships. I'm not asking you or anyone else to say that there is. But IF.
1. I attended my first Giants game in 1984. I was a Giants fan long before Eli Manning was here, and I'll be a fan long after. So just because I support ownership that Eli is the best option RIGHT NOW that means I've now evolved from Eli Apologist to non Giants fan? Is this how far you're going to take it now?
2. They have stated numerous times they believe Manning can still play. Mara has directly addressed and vehemently denied any notion that he is keeping Manning solely for sentimentality reasons. Believe what you want. But those are direct quotes from the horse's mouth, whether you agree with them or not. They have also stated numerous times that they are indeed planning for his successor, which leads me to my next point:
3. Why can they not plan for the future of the team, as well as the future of the position, while Manning is still the QB until his replacement arrives? That has been done in the NFL as long as I've been watching the NFL. They draft a rookie to sit and learn behind a veteran. Why can't some of you wrap your heads around that very simple fact.
4. The Maras and their sentimental way of running a business have brought us 4 Superbowl Championships and 5 Appearances over 4 decades. They are the only team to win a Superbowl once a decade for the past 40 years, to my knowledge. Maybe their consistent, non knee jerk reaction approach might actually work again?
5. Finally, as far as my post about fans choosing not to support the Giants as long as Eli remains QB. That's everybody's right, isn't it? If you disagree that Eli should be QB and want to stop watching until he's gone, then there's the door? This site won't miss you, the Giants won't miss you either. I think they'll be just fine. And so will you! Maybe not watching will make some of you less miserable, because you come off as genuinely miserable.
Fair enough. I just thought it was nicer than asking if you knew what "if" meant, but I guess that was the problem all along.
Quote:
If Eli can still play? Spoiler alert. He agree w me
I'm not an insider like you are but I do happen to know Justin personally and have for several years. I brought up his name because I know how he felt after the Giants showed no interest in bringing him back at the end of his deal. So I happen to know exactly what he thinks about Eli's play. He loves the guy personally and would never utter anything negative about him publicly. I'll just leave it at that.
Wow!
Quote:
You asked the question - What would Belichick do?
He wanted to jettison Brady two years ago. But Kraft pulled ownership rank and forced the trade of JimG (speculation is Brady went to Kraft). And Brady is one of the all-timers.
So I don't think it's a leap to think Eli would have been cut two years ago or traded.
Didn't he just win another Superbowl with Brady at QB?
Yes. But my point is Belichick wanted to move on.
Naturally he figured it out, but he was overruled.
And Brady is significantly better than Eli, so it's hard to say this is an apple to apple compare...
Quote:
You asked the question - What would Belichick do?
He wanted to jettison Brady two years ago. But Kraft pulled ownership rank and forced the trade of JimG (speculation is Brady went to Kraft). And Brady is one of the all-timers.
So I don't think it's a leap to think Eli would have been cut two years ago or traded.
Considering that Belichick was apparently overruled by Patriots ownership in your premise, your conclusion that he would have cut Eli makes no sense.
Let me re-phrase - Belichick would have tried to cut Eli.
I cede the point Mara likely steps in and stops it.
2. They have stated numerous times they believe Manning can still play. Mara has directly addressed and vehemently denied any notion that he is keeping Manning solely for sentimentality reasons. Believe what you want. But those are direct quotes from the horse's mouth, whether you agree with them or not. They have also stated numerous times that they are indeed planning for his successor, which leads me to my next point:
Wait, you believed that?? LOL.
That was as defensive as it gets. Mara got asked a straight forward question. Instead of answering calmly, he basically exploded. It was not very becoming...
...Eli is a 2019 placeholder on a team that is trying to build its way toward respectability. And by "respectability" I mean something like 7/8 wins max.
But getting beyond respectability will be with a new QB.
I assume he is talking about his current level of play
Mike Lombardi is the last person to talk about QBs.
Quote:
considering Eli was decidedly better when Tuck was let go
I assume he is talking about his current level of play
To clarify, yes. Has nothing to do with Eli Manning the football player for the vast majority of his career.
Quote:
Great conversation on this topic on Lombardi's new podcast today.
Mike Lombardi is the last person to talk about QBs.
Ha...but we should listen to you?
You can dislike Lombardi, fair. Are you also going to discredit the legion of experts pointing out that Eli's play has deteriorated? Apparently that group even involves Justin Tuck, who loves Eli.
This situation with Eli boils down to one of two things:
1. The Giants are unduly influenced by sentimentality and nostalgia; or
2. The Giants are completely unable to assess QB play (this is a possibility given their recent whiffs with Davis Webb and Kyle Lauletta)
Either way there is a fundamental problem involving the QB position that is hanging over this team like a cloud.
Giants have 1st down at 48 after kickoff with a minute to go
and all we needed was 10 yards for long field goal attempt
Manning could not get ONE YARD
Quote:
2. They have stated numerous times they believe Manning can still play. Mara has directly addressed and vehemently denied any notion that he is keeping Manning solely for sentimentality reasons. Believe what you want. But those are direct quotes from the horse's mouth, whether you agree with them or not. They have also stated numerous times that they are indeed planning for his successor, which leads me to my next point:
Wait, you believed that?? LOL.
That was as defensive as it gets. Mara got asked a straight forward question. Instead of answering calmly, he basically exploded. It was not very becoming...
Let me see if I got this straight.
So you're saying because Mara got agitated at the insinuation that he is staying with Manning for sentimental/loyalty reasons that he actually is doing just that.
Got it
Quote:
If Eli can still play? Spoiler alert. He agree w me
I'm not an insider like you are but I do happen to know Justin personally and have for several years. I brought up his name because I know how he felt after the Giants showed no interest in bringing him back at the end of his deal. So I happen to know exactly what he thinks about Eli's play. He loves the guy personally and would never utter anything negative about him publicly. I'll just leave it at that.
This all still leaves me with a lot of I don't know. It really depends on how the people in that locker room right now, that have not won one single thing with Eli, feel about Eli's play. If they believe he has it, then this is all good. If they think he has been declining and is not being held accountable in the same way as everyone else, and is getting special treatment, it could destroy the team. That's real.
Wait, you believed that?? LOL.
That was as defensive as it gets. Mara got asked a straight forward question. Instead of answering calmly, he basically exploded. It was not very becoming...
Let me see if I got this straight.
So you're saying because Mara got agitated at the insinuation that he is staying with Manning for sentimental/loyalty reasons that he actually is doing just that.
Got it
That is exactly what I am saying. This organization has reached a point where they have an irrational attachment to Eli.
If they believe there is a better QB available this year, whether that is Russell Wilson, Josh Rosen, Murray, Haskins, Lock, Jones or even Lauletta, that guy should play.
That is the bar that everyone else on this team should be judged by. You play if you give us the best chance to win right now. Any other consideration may be lovely for the fans and for Eli, but it is a disservice to everyone else in the locker room who is giving their all to get a spot on the roster and win games.
If management - Mara included - is using any other consideration, than in my opinion they are making a huge mistake.
Quote:
Wait, you believed that?? LOL.
That was as defensive as it gets. Mara got asked a straight forward question. Instead of answering calmly, he basically exploded. It was not very becoming...
Let me see if I got this straight.
So you're saying because Mara got agitated at the insinuation that he is staying with Manning for sentimental/loyalty reasons that he actually is doing just that.
Got it
That is exactly what I am saying. This organization has reached a point where they have an irrational attachment to Eli.
What's hard for some of the people that want to move on from Eli to understand is that there doesn't appear to be anyone good enough to be the Giants quarterback in last year's or this year's draft, or on anyone else's team, until Eli decides for himself to hang it up. That just seems hard to believe, the fact that people are saying Russell Wilson isn't good enough, makes the argument to keep Eli around seem seeped in homerism.
Quote:
He is the same player that he always has been, if you don't like Eli today than you never have. He's not a mobile QB. I get it, its exciting to watch these guys that can make things happen with their feet.
I can honestly only laugh whenever I see this comment. To say he is the same player he has always been does nothing but diminish how great of a player he used to be in his prime. No, he was never a runner, but he used to be much more mobile in the pocket. Go to 4:30 in the linked video below. One of my favorite Eli plays ever. You think Eli could still pull that off? The spin move against Dallas in the '11 final regular season game comes to mind too.
Also, he used to stand in the pocket and take hits while delivering the ball downfield. How about the throw to Cruz to beat the Redskins in 2012 while taking a hit? Today he would have tucked the ball and fell to the ground when he saw the free rusher.
Lastly (and most importantly), the magic is gone. In his prime he was always great in the biggest moments. You knew he was going to take the ball down the field and win the game. My last memories of 2018 are a horribly overthrown interception and 4 straight incompletions with the ball at mid field against the Colts and Cowboys with only a field goal needed to win.
Just stop with this nonsense that he is the same player he has always been. I wish he were but he is not even close to the same player. Eli vs. Falcons - ( New Window )
+1
Quote:
Great conversation on this topic on Lombardi's new podcast today.
Mike Lombardi is the last person to talk about QBs.
In your mind this is not true, but to everyone else who watches football Mike Lombardi is eminently more qualified to provide trustworthy opinions on QBs than you or any fan.
Quote:
Great conversation on this topic on Lombardi's new podcast today.
Mike Lombardi is the last person to talk about QBs.
We should only listen to Zac Schomler
Quote:
In comment 14381127 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Great conversation on this topic on Lombardi's new podcast today.
Mike Lombardi is the last person to talk about QBs.
Ha...but we should listen to you?
You can dislike Lombardi, fair. Are you also going to discredit the legion of experts pointing out that Eli's play has deteriorated? Apparently that group even involves Justin Tuck, who loves Eli.
This situation with Eli boils down to one of two things:
1. The Giants are unduly influenced by sentimentality and nostalgia; or
2. The Giants are completely unable to assess QB play (this is a possibility given their recent whiffs with Davis Webb and Kyle Lauletta)
Either way there is a fundamental problem involving the QB position that is hanging over this team like a cloud.
Bingo.
b) Eli wouldn't still be on the roster if they didn't think he could still play. So the inference that he's garbage and we are just holding on to him to not sever a legacy is built on a false premise. They. Think. He. Can. Still. Play. If they didn't think that he would have been cut last month. Russell Wilson's contract negotiations don't impact an evaluation that they already made.
c) Of the 10,000 reasons why Russell Wilson won't be the NYG starting QB, Eli may be 1 of them but there are probably about 100 more critical hurdles above that. Compensation to the Seahawks, salary, Golden Tate being on our roster, etc.
But to those with an agenda, sure, what is likely a far fetched rumor is yet another indication that the Giants are willing to cut off their nose to spite their face in honor of Eli Manning. It can't possibly be because of reluctance on the part of the Seahawks to trade him, within the conference no less, or to give him a record setting setting contract, or whatever other reasons lead players to other teams that play positions other than QB. Or are they all trying to stay away from the stink of Eli's corpse too?
All of a sudden, one week later, McAdoo and Reese are gone, Eli is reinstated as the starter, and since that time there has been not a single shred of evidence that the Giants have even considered for a second anyone but Eli Manning being the quarterback. The current GM and coach both said he would be back and he would be the starter the day that they were hired and they have not waivered in that sentiment since.
So, what happened in that week when we went from Eli no more to Eli forever? Why did everything change and why are we still almost 2 years and just 5 more wins later still living in the aftershock? If your answers is "strictly football reasons," then I have a bridge I would like to sell you.
Took the words right out of my mouth
Which they've been trying to do for the past couple years in earnest, and have declared with more public intensity than ever before that they are looking to find a QB in the draft in a couple weeks. Out of every single QB that has changed teams or been drafted the last 2 offseasons, there is 1 that anybody can point to as a QB of the future they'd like to have (Sam Darnold). They could very well come away with a prospect on his level in less than 2 weeks, and have Barkley to pair that player with.
Let's see what happens in 2 weeks, the rest is just noise. Choosing the wrong QB of the future will set the franchise back further than hanging on to Eli for an extra year or two.
Quote:
39 next season’s playoffs. He can go in the dumper at ANY time! Hell her could show up in camp and be toast. Then they are screwed. They are playing Russian roulette here. Not smart. That’s why they need to get his successor in here sooner rather than later. To be ready when the inevitable happens.
Which they've been trying to do for the past couple years in earnest, and have declared with more public intensity than ever before that they are looking to find a QB in the draft in a couple weeks. Out of every single QB that has changed teams or been drafted the last 2 offseasons, there is 1 that anybody can point to as a QB of the future they'd like to have (Sam Darnold). They could very well come away with a prospect on his level in less than 2 weeks, and have Barkley to pair that player with.
Let's see what happens in 2 weeks, the rest is just noise. Choosing the wrong QB of the future will set the franchise back further than hanging on to Eli for an extra year or two.
What exactly is the evidence that the Giants have been trying "in earnest" to replace Eli Manning? I think it is the exact opposite.
Quote:
considering Eli was decidedly better when Tuck was let go
I assume he is talking about his current level of play
And how do we know how correct it is?
What exactly is the evidence that the Giants have been trying "in earnest" to replace Eli Manning? I think it is the exact opposite.
They drafted 2 QB's higher than they have in any other time during Eli's career and were heavily involved in evaluating first round prospects both years. They liked Mahomes in '17, they wined and dined every big QB last year but didn't have a consensus choice over Barkley. Gettleman has publicly said they want to find his successor in the draft this year.
That's all been confirmed to a far greater extent by reporting than the original rumor this thread was based on (Russell Wilson) and the corresponding leap of faith that they fear replacing Eli.
The answer is very very dense.
All of a sudden, one week later, McAdoo and Reese are gone, Eli is reinstated as the starter, and since that time there has been not a single shred of evidence that the Giants have even considered for a second anyone but Eli Manning being the quarterback. The current GM and coach both said he would be back and he would be the starter the day that they were hired and they have not waivered in that sentiment since.
So, what happened in that week when we went from Eli no more to Eli forever? Why did everything change and why are we still almost 2 years and just 5 more wins later still living in the aftershock? If your answers is "strictly football reasons," then I have a bridge I would like to sell you.
Quote:
In comment 14381114 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
considering Eli was decidedly better when Tuck was let go
I assume he is talking about his current level of play
And how do we know how correct it is?
Are you asking how truthful story is you or are you asking if Justin Tuck knows football?
He's not going to show up one day and be Mark Sanchez. That's not how it works. But the day has already come where he showed up and wasn't Eli Manning.
That plus player at QB is gone. He's never, ever coming back.
When a guy is as durable and plays through what you can only imagine Manning has played through -- it happens.
He's played a full season more games than Roethlisberger. Twenty-two more games than Rivers. He's attempting more than 800 throws than either.
So with his arrow pointing down, again, is this a guy to build a champion around?
Quote:
In comment 14381126 ron mexico said:
Quote:
In comment 14381114 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
considering Eli was decidedly better when Tuck was let go
I assume he is talking about his current level of play
And how do we know how correct it is?
Are you asking how truthful story is you or are you asking if Justin Tuck knows football?
How truthful it is, why would you think I would say Tuck doesn't know Football? That's just silly
I have had some very negative comment about Eli: that his HoF credentials are very shaky; that he himself is most responsible for a very mediocre career record of 116-114 after 15 years; that he has rightfully been ranked top 5 among his QB peers in only 2 of those 5 years; that his #2 spot in the all-time NFL career earning list can only be secured by relentless pursuing it, never leaving a dollar on the table; that starting from force a trade on his first day in the NFL to his current hard stance of not-taking-a-pay-cut-and-not-waiving-the-no-trade ... every one of his NFL action/decision was to maximize his own interest; and, therefore, that the Giants organization and fans do not owe him a damn thing; any feeling of mis-treating him by the team or fans is absurd. In fact the Giants should have parted way with him several years ago.
But, since 2004 I have also watched the Giants play live in six different NFL stadiums, including the 2012 NFC title game at Candlestick then Super Bowl 46 at Indy two weeks later, loudly cheering for the team on each occasions, mostly when Eli handled the ball.
I have also purchased an Eli Manning game-day jersey, and a helmet with his signature. These two items, plus the print-editions of Newspaper and SI after his Super Bowl 42 and 46, will follow me to the grave.
So, tell me, have I had proper "respect" for Mr. Elisha Nelson Manning?
All of a sudden, one week later, McAdoo and Reese are gone, Eli is reinstated as the starter, and since that time there has been not a single shred of evidence that the Giants have even considered for a second anyone but Eli Manning being the quarterback. The current GM and coach both said he would be back and he would be the starter the day that they were hired and they have not waivered in that sentiment since.
So, what happened in that week when we went from Eli no more to Eli forever? Why did everything change and why are we still almost 2 years and just 5 more wins later still living in the aftershock? If your answers is "strictly football reasons," then I have a bridge I would like to sell you.
one of the best posts I have read this offseason...
1. The Giants had a picture of Beckham’s one-handed catch next to their SB trophies. Not Eli related, but I really hope this isn’t true.
2. Lombardi insists the Giants LOVED Davis Webb (I’m assuming Reese/McAdoo). Supposedly he was the highest rated QB on their board, even above Mahomes.
3. Peter King made the point and it’s a good one - the Giants have spent a 3rd & 4th rounder on QB’s in each of the last 2 years, yet by halfway through the season the Giants had no interest in playing them. It’s likely Lauletta doesn’t break camp with the team.
Which leads me to believe it is a QB talent evaluation issue and not an Eli mandate issue.
Dumb and dumber weren’t expecting Eli to do what he did. And neither was Mara. He was caught off guard with no explanation.
That’s why they were fired immediately. They lied to Mara. And that’s why neither has a job or Marc Ross does til this day.
See last year leading up to the draft when Gettleman locked onto SB as his top rated player despite QB being a much bigger need going forward for the future of the franchise.
Nothing is going to change until people making the decisions are changed.
He lost his nerve. And then when he felt the backlash, on top of Eli’s crybaby act, he needed sacrificial lambs to take spotlight off his role. It was an act of cowardice.
Which leads me to believe it is a QB talent evaluation issue and not an Eli mandate issue.
Why can’t it be both?
He lost his nerve. And then when he felt the backlash, on top of Eli’s crybaby act, he needed sacrificial lambs to take spotlight off his role. It was an act of cowardice.
Bullshit. There is no fucking way an owner tells a HC to take a player out of the game if he isn’t playing well which is EXACTLY why he was fired immediately after the decision. They flat out agreed that if the giants were losing and out of the game to play other QBs. Not to take them out mid way through the game.
Plus he was benched for a guy who didn’t deserve to play either. A guy who had shown NOTHING in the league.
Again three people involved in the decision are still jobless. And there’s a reason for that. Everything Mara said after the fact was a straight cover up to diffuse the fire. But what the two idiots did was not thenplan they told Mara.
Reese and McAdoo, two people who squarely put us in the position we are in now are martyrized by many just to further the bias against Eli.
And not surprisingly, the people taking that stance called the Gettleman hiring a sham and wanted both him and Shurmur fired in year one of their tenures.
In a further slap in the face of logic, they urge the rest of the board to be rational.
You want to blame Mara for everything that happened after the firings, that’s fine.
Get the hell out of here...
You ok with that?
Again get the hell out of here..
Quote:
He lost his nerve. And then when he felt the backlash, on top of Eli’s crybaby act, he needed sacrificial lambs to take spotlight off his role. It was an act of cowardice.
Reese and McAdoo, two people who squarely put us in the position we are in now are martyrized by many just to further the bias against Eli.
And not surprisingly, the people taking that stance called the Gettleman hiring a sham and wanted both him and Shurmur fired in year one of their tenures.
In a further slap in the face of logic, they urge the rest of the board to be rational.
Hell, there were threads after we took Barkley questioning whether Gettleman should be fired before the team even took the field in his first season!
The Barkley over QB pick really drove some people bonkers. Never seen anything like it, honestly.
Terps....we get it...anyone who pays the slightest attention to BBI knows your take. And all the others that slide in right behind you
We get it...but it seems like it's turning into an obsession for you...
You checked the Beckham box...fair
You are over the top at this point...
I have always respected your opinion when it comes to football in general...but I'm not sure why you keep beating this drum.
We get it...
John Mara:
“I was hoping that Eli would play so well that it would be impossible to take him out. In any event, it is what it is. But you ought to stop blaming Ben and Jerry. If you want to blame anybody, blame me. I certainly have the power to overrule if I wanted to. I chose not to do it.”
Hmmmmm..... - ( New Window )
I think Mara wants to win, badly. As Lombardi said, there are a ton of voices in the building - Mara, Tisch, Gettleman, Abrams, Chris Mara & Shurmur. Collectively, I believe they think they can still win with Eli. I find this to be more believable than Mara refusing any alternative to Eli and putting his head in the sand.
Add another voice, too...Ernie Accorsi. Just a couple weeks with Francesa Gettleman brought up that he'd spoken to Accorsi the day before.
Bullshit it was.
It didn't fit what you wanted him to do.
And I'm damn glad you aren't a GM
Add another voice, too...Ernie Accorsi. Just a couple weeks with Francesa Gettleman brought up that he'd spoken to Accorsi the day before.
This is where I think sentimentality probably does come in. The Giants aren’t looking at the cap objectively with Eli. They aren’t going to cut him loose & play Jacoby Brissett for lack of a better example. I think the optics of who replaces Eli may have a role in things.
This is why increasingly, I tend to think Lock or Jones will be Giants in a few weeks. It makes for an easy transition to sell the next QB taking the reigns in 2020 & allowing Eli to play out his contract.
Screw over Eli? Is that a joke? What if he wants to play until he's 45? Are the Giants just supposed to keep trotting him out there?
That said, sometimes when I hear the team talk about the subject, I come away feeling like it’s sounds just a bit like they’ve been talking themselves into something.
Quote:
...
John Mara:
“I was hoping that Eli would play so well that it would be impossible to take him out. In any event, it is what it is. But you ought to stop blaming Ben and Jerry. If you want to blame anybody, blame me. I certainly have the power to overrule if I wanted to. I chose not to do it.”
He said what he said to settle the situation. Of course you believe what he said here because it fits your agenda but anything else Mara says and he’s full of shit, right?
Anyone who believes what Mara said after the benching is a fool.
"Eli can still play."
Quote:
Gettleman's performance in year one was fireable...it was that bad. Shurmur was worse.
Bullshit it was.
It didn't fit what you wanted him to do.
And I'm damn glad you aren't a GM
I don't believe you are capable of having a straight down the list dialogue on what were the good and bad moves last offseason.
Do you think you are?
Jt, no disrespect intended, and a lot of guys set great store by your posts, but I'm curious to know how 'connected' are you? Front office? Mid-level? I've seen your commentary, and it's more than just the usual 'guy who hears things'. I find you are pretty knowledgeable about what's going on, and what is happening behind the scenes.
Thanks in advance.
Quote:
In comment 14381584 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Gettleman's performance in year one was fireable...it was that bad. Shurmur was worse.
Bullshit it was.
It didn't fit what you wanted him to do.
And I'm damn glad you aren't a GM
I don't believe you are capable of having a straight down the list dialogue on what were the good and bad moves last offseason.
Do you think you are?
That's directed at me instead of Terps??
There are people here who literally think Gettleman didn't make a single move that was right.
Despite drafting Barkley. Despite getting rid of Flowers and Hart. Despite making continuous moves to improve the OL.
We still hear about the Jonathan Stewart contract.
If we are going to have a dialogue, at the very least there has to be an understanding that not everything Gettleman did was poor, nor were his moves fireable.
But I don't think that's what you are getting at.
He said what he said to settle the situation. Of course you believe what he said here because it fits your agenda but anything else Mara says and he’s full of shit, right?
Anyone who believes what Mara said after the benching is a fool.
I'm just a fair-minded BBI poster/journalist doing my best to provide unbiased information to better educate this audience... ;)
The team won 5 games
Now he’s going with plan b-
He drafted well year 1 though-
You ok with that?
Again get the hell out of here..
In most coach-player relationships the coach doesn’t ask the player for permission to bench him. That was BM’s mistake.
Terps....we get it...anyone who pays the slightest attention to BBI knows your take. And all the others that slide in right behind you
We get it...but it seems like it's turning into an obsession for you...
You checked the Beckham box...fair
You are over the top at this point...
I have always respected your opinion when it comes to football in general...but I'm not sure why you keep beating this drum.
We get it...
Seeing that jtGiants is pretty dialed in and if we aren’t making the right decisions because we don’t want to hurt Eli’s feelings, then yes this is warranted. It didn’t need to be barried in another thread. It should be discussed because no business is successful operating the way being described. It’s concerning if true.
I call it like I see it, and I'm not just going to go the way the fucking blue wind blows. And if I sound like a pessimist, it's because the Giants have been a pathetic joke and deserve every ounce of criticism they get.
Go back to what jtgiants is quoted as saying in the thread starter...the Giants aren't going to screw over Eli, damage his legacy, and/or sever the relationship. That way of doing business in the NFL is, frankly, fucked. We're trying to compete with the likes of Bill Belichick for Christ's sake...you think he's wasting his time on this kind of bullshit?
I personally think things have been way overblown and way overstated, and even jt points to this.
Eli isn't being kept because of backlash. He's being kept because they believe he is the best QB for them through this transition period.
Nobody has been hired because they had to keep Eli.
I call it like I see it, and I'm not just going to go the way the fucking blue wind blows. And if I sound like a pessimist, it's because the Giants have been a pathetic joke and deserve every ounce of criticism they get.
Go back to what jtgiants is quoted as saying in the thread starter...the Giants aren't going to screw over Eli, damage his legacy, and/or sever the relationship. That way of doing business in the NFL is, frankly, fucked. We're trying to compete with the likes of Bill Belichick for Christ's sake...you think he's wasting his time on this kind of bullshit?
Agreed. Who the fuck cares about Elis feelings? This is the NFL. Not some support group. Guy is set for life and can have anything he wants. You play like dog shit and you are gone or replace. I don’t feel bad for him for ONE SECOND!
There are people here who literally think Gettleman didn't make a single move that was right.
Despite drafting Barkley. Despite getting rid of Flowers and Hart. Despite making continuous moves to improve the OL.
We still hear about the Jonathan Stewart contract.
If we are going to have a dialogue, at the very least there has to be an understanding that not everything Gettleman did was poor, nor were his moves fireable.
But I don't think that's what you are getting at.
Commentary aside, all things equal -- let's do this -- here are the things last offseason I thought were materially good and bad moves, let's see your's.
Good
- trading Pierre Paul
- drafting Hernandez, Hill, and Carter
- signing Haley
- picking up Coleman
- cutting Flowers, Hart, Jerry
- trading Apple
Bad
- drafting Barkely over Darnold
- extending Beckham
- signing Solder, Omameh, Martin
- trading Snacks
- not trading Jenkins and Collins
- trading for Ogletree
Within what feels like minutes, Accorsi hires Gettleman, who was with the Giants as Accorsi's right hand man when Eli was drafted. It's public knowledge Gettleman loves Eli.
Gettleman hires a HC in Shurmur, who at the time just pulled Case Keenum off the scrap heap and guided him to a career year, finishing 2nd in the league in QBR.
It appears Eli is either on or near that same scrap heap...
Within a few weeks, this new brain trust exits from their caves of study and simultaneously declare Eli a QB with plenty left in the tank.
Yes, yes, yes - BBI. Keeping Eli was just four men independently arriving at the same conclusion. Nothing to see here but pure coincidence...
And its a awful strategy and they suck at it...
Dumb and dumber weren’t expecting Eli to do what he did. And neither was Mara. He was caught off guard with no explanation.
That’s why they were fired immediately. They lied to Mara. And that’s why neither has a job or Marc Ross does til this day.
Lol. It cracks me up when people present conjecture as if it was fact.
So Barkley over Darnold is not available for conclusion at this time. Darnold could be a HOF QB for 15 years or a jag. don't know. And unless that team gets better he could be great but we wouldn't know and he could be bad and good or he could be injured often. Ditto Barkley at this time.
Name what left tackle was available at the time? We had no left or right tackles at the time and no center or left guard or right guard. Name a better low risk sure fire winner of a better choice at the time? Name the other teams willing to sign him? Id call it a disappointing result so far but not a nutty choice
Stewart was a wtf signing. Omameh? Whiff. Martin? Whiff imo.
Had to sign OBJ he was in the process of holding out which would have decreased his impact on the team and his trade value so it was a hedge on upside and a hedge on downside future value. Many, many a talented high risk contract is signed to optimize which ever way it goes. I have no problem with the contract or trading him.
Don't think that is a credit or a debit to DG...classic strategy for the asset and situation. To me, OBJ is a wash on DGs record.
Ogletree a slight ding on DG.
Snacks not yet enough information on his future value
Jenkins, given how poor this years FA and draft choices are...I dunno. And he may yet get traded. I suspect he will halfway through the season to a playoff bound team that may overpay for a good CB. So once again, too early to tell.
Poor ROA regarding Collins. A clear ding imo
Eli...don't have the data yet. Until they have a better Qb signed on the roster they shouldn't release the one they have.
They don't have the cap room for a decent FA QB and there is no data yet that anyone outside of Mayfield (unavailable) was available and better.
Making some kinds of decisions at the last possible moment...usually a good idea over the long run
Im kinda in favor of building a better team this year and then going after a replacement when cap allows more options and pulling 2021 slots into a trade up is less likely to rob peter to pay paul on a talent deficient team.
I think much emotional speculation has vastly embraced one scenario so much that another equally plausible scenario is hardly considered.
Coming off the 11-5 2016 season I think ownership may have dictated to DG that he go for the short term. Being new and without hands on the scouting or talent assessment practices...DG followed orders. Those were the orders that would have been given to any GM. Period. Full Stop.
When that vision of ownership, based on a horrible misunderstanding of the actual talent on the team was proven wrong...to his credit DG got ownership to switch visions pretty quickly and executed the switch pretty rapidly.
That's as plausible as any other bullshit spun as fact.
Here is why I give it some credence and this is why its hard to read some of the made up realities and magical thinking of some posters:
Completely by accident and having nothing to do with any standing on my part; I know that DG was allowed to pick the new HC. He went after some pretty bold, young, heavy analytics devoted based HC talent. One he lost as he was not allowed to go higher in bidding for him. One signed and then rescinded and one we just missed. That's before the current coach who Im not yet impressed by.
imo...and its just imo...DG:
- Inherited a mess on the field and a ownership he needed to re educate and move into a more appropriate box ( ever try to manage owners from below? Its very hard).
- Had a debilitating course of treatment for cancer
- Had his hands tied on some major items
- Actually embraced and deliberately went after head coaches and coordinators known for embracing and incorporating analytics and trying new approaches for winning in the NFL.
Wish he would shut up instead of the shambling rambling routines with the media...but a good draft this year and that's beyond minor
But I think we can all agree that there is no one on the site who knows for sure and no one who could remotely do the job. As usual, with us humans, that never humbles us from charging full on screech from our high horses without even a shield or visor of facts
Is it really though? I'm on board with moving on from Eli, but just 'pragmatically' speaking... What rookie QB is going to come in and put up the numbers Eli will? I think Mayfield is the only one who put up comparable numbers as a rookie out of that class of 4 can't miss QBs (not including your favorite). Rosen isn't even likely to see a second season at the helm in AZ. It's not like you draft an Eli replacement every year. I think you're way underselling what Eli actually offers a team in the short run. I also think your fundamental philosophical difference from convention over what a QB looks like gets in the way of having a reasonable take on Giants management. You don't believe in a franchise QB. That will change how you perceive the normative move. I think that they traded Beckham shows just how far away they are from a perspective like yours in the FO. And frankly, considering their success as an organization, I'm glad they're holding to their views.
Quote:
That said, sometimes when I hear the team talk about the subject, I come away feeling like it’s sounds just a bit like they’ve been talking themselves into something.
"Eli can still play."
Given that they've paid Eli more than any other NFL player has ever made, maybe it'll help attract free agents?
Quote:
In comment 14381554 dep026 said:
Quote:
...
John Mara:
“I was hoping that Eli would play so well that it would be impossible to take him out. In any event, it is what it is. But you ought to stop blaming Ben and Jerry. If you want to blame anybody, blame me. I certainly have the power to overrule if I wanted to. I chose not to do it.”
He said what he said to settle the situation. Of course you believe what he said here because it fits your agenda but anything else Mara says and he’s full of shit, right?
Anyone who believes what Mara said after the benching is a fool.
I couldn't agree more. And an even bigger fool (or maybe just delusional) if you don't realize that Mara absolutely signed off on the whole thing before they spoke with Eli and thought the offer to extend the streak would suffice. Everything else that followed was lip service and spin.
If you choose to see it another way, you're just as guilty of the bias and agenda nonsense that you toss at everyone you disagree with.
I'll take that bet in a heartbeat.
What's the stakes?
Quote:
In comment 14381580 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 14381554 dep026 said:
Quote:
...
John Mara:
“I was hoping that Eli would play so well that it would be impossible to take him out. In any event, it is what it is. But you ought to stop blaming Ben and Jerry. If you want to blame anybody, blame me. I certainly have the power to overrule if I wanted to. I chose not to do it.”
He said what he said to settle the situation. Of course you believe what he said here because it fits your agenda but anything else Mara says and he’s full of shit, right?
Anyone who believes what Mara said after the benching is a fool.
I couldn't agree more. And an even bigger fool (or maybe just delusional) if you don't realize that Mara absolutely signed off on the whole thing before they spoke with Eli and thought the offer to extend the streak would suffice. Everything else that followed was lip service and spin.
If you choose to see it another way, you're just as guilty of the bias and agenda nonsense that you toss at everyone you disagree with.
Right. He agreed with it so much that he fired the two the day after the game and has ignored what he signed off on for 2 years and running. And the two people who misled Mara are still out of football without jobs.
But yeah.... he signed off on taking Eli out of the game no matter the score or how well he is playing. I am sure you still believe in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny... but again how dare we question almighty GatoradeDunk “the smartest guy on BBI”.
And before you dismiss my last statement you should know you sure as hell act like it.
- trading Pierre Paul
- drafting Hernandez, Hill, and Carter
- signing Haley
- picking up Coleman
- cutting Flowers, Hart, Jerry
- trading Apple
Bad
- drafting Barkely over Darnold
- extending Beckham
- signing Solder, Omameh, Martin
- trading Snacks
- not trading Jenkins and Collins
- trading for Ogletree
Good
- trading Pierre Paul
- Drafting Barkley - best overall player in the draft
- drafting Hernandez, Hill, and Carter
- signing Haley
- picking up Coleman
- cutting Flowers, Hart, Jerry
- trading Apple
- trading for Ogletree
Bad
- Extending Beckham
- signing Stewart, Omameh, Barwin
- Trading Snacks at the time he did
- Drafting Lauletta (seeing the way he was/wasn't utilized)
What I don't get is if the lists are fairly even and he's had to come in after several years of terrible drafts and poor roster construction - why would anyone insinuate that the moves he made were "fireable offenses"?
As bad of an offseason I feel general management had last year, this year has been great. At the risk of setting a smoke grenade, the "plan" this year feels more cogent. Get younger, shed bad contracts, pick up draft picks, spend frugally.
Minor difference of opinion on Solder and Beckham last year.
I don't subscribe to the no alternative theory when it comes to assets. I'd genuinely rather do nothing than something unwise. Hindsight and all that, but Solder's previous employer made a far better choice at the position. That's one viable choice the Giants didn't entertain.
Again with hindsight -- but I'd rather the Giants traded Beckham last offseason for one first round pick and change and kept the 22M they paid for the 12 games.
If Giants had moved him to the 49ers for their 2018 1st and 3rd and all things transpire the same the Giants land a stud tackle, a starting LB, and 22M to put toward free agency.
And (maybe) importantly for Gettleman, it would have led some credence to his claim he wanted to improve culture. There aren't enough Jonathan Stewart's in the world to counter the face of the org in bed doing drugs, questioning the quarterback, questioning the coach, and not showing up for a quarter of the season.
That is the story here...nothing else.
Another positive is that he signed Jamon Brown and cut Omameh after realizing a mistake.
I also think both trades of OV and Beckham are positive moves.
A negative for me - not from a personnel standpoint, but from a personality standpoint is that he says too many things to try and sound old school and that often backfires with the Media (and some fans).
I also don't know if he foresaw the Colllins situation as it will likely turn out as a positive, but letting him walk without a trade was poor, even though we have Peppers and will likely get a 3rd round comp pick (which is about what a trade would have given)
Again - when you add it all up, for posters to say he had fireable offenses just looks like fuzzy math
After that you can put any spin you want on it. Personally, I don't think a move of that magnitude happens without the blessing of Mara. It doesn't have to be as nefarious as Mara agreeing with and being right there in planning the deposition. At the very least, Mara let his head coach and GM make the move, knowing full well he had veto power - to me that is de facto being ok with the move.
Afterwards, Mara threw them both under the bus when the backlash hit much harder than he had anticipated.
Regarding DG being a hire with a mandate of keeping Eli: that is one way of spinning it. Another is hiring a GM who is of like mind with the way the Maras were thinking. If you own a team that you take an active role in running, and you have an opinion on the direction your team should take, you're going to hire someone who is going in that direction. Hence, it would be no real surprise that the Maras and DG/PS all seemed to think Eli had gas left in the tank.
Mara caved to fan outrage and threw those guys under the bus, plain and simple.
ron mexico : 8:29 am : link : reply
Hoping he was playing so well that it would be impossible to take him out? Give me a fucking break, did he watch any games that year? It was virtually impossible for that to happen.
And yet two weeks after the Oakland game was the infamous game against Philly where Manning Manning threw for 434 yards and 3TD's.
Impossible they say!!!
Mara caved to fan outrage and threw those guys under the bus, plain and simple.
You know it was rhetorical, right? My thinking that you didnt catch the sarcasm, even for how true it is.
Mara caved into fan outrage so much now that 18 months later, and soon to be over 2 years - he is still trying to soothe the souls of peopel who saw this benching as idiotic.
Yep. Makes perfect sense.
Quote:
That quote from Mara above is such bullshit
ron mexico : 8:29 am : link : reply
Hoping he was playing so well that it would be impossible to take him out? Give me a fucking break, did he watch any games that year? It was virtually impossible for that to happen.
And yet two weeks after the Oakland game was the infamous game against Philly where Manning Manning threw for 434 yards and 3TD's.
Impossible they say!!!
He threw an INT in that game that I am sure was a game changing one.
I'd be willing to bet our guy DG doesn't look so bad.
A couple of other things I'd point out when having this discussion.
First, the 2018 QB class is massively overhyped as of right now. Mayfield (who wasn't available) looked the best, the others were a mix of injured, wildly inconsistent, and in the case of Allen and Jackson, it's still hard to be convinced there's anything special there.
Second, the career span of Saquon Barkley and running backs in general has been reduced to just a couple of seasons according to the popular BS narrative on BBI that Gettleman did something unthinkable by selecting the best overall prospect not only in the last year's draft, but the last 25 years of drafts.
Finally, stop confusing "the Giants don't have a plan" with "the Giants aren't executing the plan I wish to see". It is clear they have a vision for what type of future roster they'd like to build, and in the meantime, they want to win as many games as they can. There is no tanking, this is not the NBA, there is so much parity and so much is dependent on injuries and overall health that it's always worth a shot.
As far as the non-Eli related moves, think culture, culture, culture. That's been the basis of nearly every move they've made the last two years. Snacks, DRC, Apple, Collins, Beckham all gone. The franchise probably looks different right now if the 2017 team didn't fold like a tent after getting punched in the mouth early in the season. Then came the reports of the secondary implosion, Snacks not wanting to be a leader. Beckham doing his thing. Here we are.
Nothing they have done has mortgaged the future. They have 12 picks. They are on the verge of millions of dollars in cap space. We can probably argue about whether or not you think the roster is improved but I'd describe it as so. Less talented, but improved.
For those complaining about Manning, the GM told you he knows he needs to find his successor. He's going to pick his man either this month or next year. Either way, it's not some situation of gross negligence. If you take a step back and look at what's happening, it actually makes a lot of sense.
The funny thing is the best thing he could have done for Eli's legacy is cut him after that season. He would have gone out as a sympathetic character with fans thinking he can still play.
Mara is taking the cowards way out which will likely end with an empty stadium in December and a loosing record for the year and possibly Elis career.
The funny thing is the best thing he could have done for Eli's legacy is cut him after that season. He would have gone out as a sympathetic character with fans thinking he can still play.
Mara is taking the cowards way out which will likely end with an empty stadium in December and a loosing record for the year and possibly Elis career.
Yeah, that's it. That's how I run a half a billion dollar business.
Couldn't just be as simple as rebuilding a roster to win games.
We know one thing and one thing only as fact and that is actual quotes. What Mara actually said and what DG actually said. We can ascribe whatever motivations to the team's actions, including keeping Eli on the team, playing Eli, whatever. But, when we say "they are doing this or doing that because..." it's pure fantasy at best or, more likely delusion. And repetitively portray our own delusions as fact in order to rope others so that we can have group-think, is propaganda.
The truth is, nobody here has any evidence for anything, *other* than direct quotes from Mara and DG.
The funny thing is the best thing he could have done for Eli's legacy is cut him after that season. He would have gone out as a sympathetic character with fans thinking he can still play.
Mara is taking the cowards way out which will likely end with an empty stadium in December and a loosing record for the year and possibly Elis career.
Where is this making it up to Eli bullshit coming from? Holy making up narratives to fit agendas.
It’s gonna be over 2 years. It’s time for fans to realize that the culprits are the ones out of the league. The supporting of McAdoo and Reese in this site is truly astonishing.
We know one thing and one thing only as fact and that is actual quotes. What Mara actually said and what DG actually said. We can ascribe whatever motivations to the team's actions, including keeping Eli on the team, playing Eli, whatever. But, when we say "they are doing this or doing that because..." it's pure fantasy at best or, more likely delusion. And repetitively portray our own delusions as fact in order to rope others so that we can have group-think, is propaganda.
The truth is, nobody here has any evidence for anything, *other* than direct quotes from Mara and DG.
Propoganda? Lol. This isn't WWII. This is opinions on the internet.
And quotes are borderline facts. Quotes can be spun or outright lies.
Quote:
must be true" on this thread.
We know one thing and one thing only as fact and that is actual quotes. What Mara actually said and what DG actually said. We can ascribe whatever motivations to the team's actions, including keeping Eli on the team, playing Eli, whatever. But, when we say "they are doing this or doing that because..." it's pure fantasy at best or, more likely delusion. And repetitively portray our own delusions as fact in order to rope others so that we can have group-think, is propaganda.
The truth is, nobody here has any evidence for anything, *other* than direct quotes from Mara and DG.
Propoganda? Lol. This isn't WWII. This is opinions on the internet.
And quotes are borderline facts. Quotes can be spun or outright lies.
But it's *so* much more than you've got for support. Which is simply gas.
After that you can put any spin you want on it. Personally, I don't think a move of that magnitude happens without the blessing of Mara. It doesn't have to be as nefarious as Mara agreeing with and being right there in planning the deposition. At the very least, Mara let his head coach and GM make the move, knowing full well he had veto power - to me that is de facto being ok with the move.
Afterwards, Mara threw them both under the bus when the backlash hit much harder than he had anticipated.
Regarding DG being a hire with a mandate of keeping Eli: that is one way of spinning it. Another is hiring a GM who is of like mind with the way the Maras were thinking. If you own a team that you take an active role in running, and you have an opinion on the direction your team should take, you're going to hire someone who is going in that direction. Hence, it would be no real surprise that the Maras and DG/PS all seemed to think Eli had gas left in the tank.
To be fair to Mara, he tries to not get involved in the coaching decisions as the season starts. Not like a Jerruh for example.
Let's go back and look at the whole Eli thing in 2017. The Giants had just lost on a Thursday Night game at Washington, a 20-10 snoozefest to drop the team to 2-9. The Giants only TD in the game was a Jackrabbit pick 6. Eli put up a 13-27, 113 yards and 1 pick with 4 sack performance.
The season had been lost, but by that point any hopes of making the playoffs were gone. Mara had said he was not going to stand in the way of changes once the team was out of the playoffs.
McAdoo didn't like Eli. That's not a secret to anyone. McAdoo didn't think Eli could run his offense and could play with the offensive line he had. Remember his comment before the 2017 season
Anyway, the buzzards were already circling for McAdoo and Reese. McAdoo lost the team in the LA Rams game. I went to that game and it was the first time since I have been going to games 1987 that I actually got up and left a game in the 3rd quarter because I couldn't stand how much it was clear the team didn't give a shit (that and it was a misty/cold rain and I had my 9 year old son and his friends there and it felt like child abuse to keep them there).
When Jim Fassel made his "push his chips to the center of the table, we're going to the playoff speech" in 2000, I'm always amused how much play it got in the vein of Joe Namath. The Giants had come off back to back blow out losses at home to the Rams and Lions. They fell to 7-4 and were watching the season unravel. If Fassel missed the playoffs, he was getting fired. It was his Hail Mary play because he was at the end of his rope. And it worked.
McAdoo pushing Eli out was his push his chips to the center of the table moment. Only it wasn't the playoffs. He was banking and blaming Eli for the Giants not winning. He put his faith in Geno Smith, of all people. McAdoo's inability to read the room, which was apparent from his first press conference when he couldn't find a fucking suit that fit, cost him his job. And Reese was tied to him, so they both had to go. Bottom line, McAdoo went after a 2 time Super Bowl winning QB to blame for his own incompetence as a head coach. Now, that's not to discount what he fully said about Eli's shortcomings. He was right. He just was the wrong messenger.
I can find a quote about him being surprised by the fan reaction and not wanting an ugly scene in the stadium after the benching.
Are you arguing against me or Bill here?
Another positive is that he signed Jamon Brown and cut Omameh after realizing a mistake.
I also think both trades of OV and Beckham are positive moves.
A negative for me - not from a personnel standpoint, but from a personality standpoint is that he says too many things to try and sound old school and that often backfires with the Media (and some fans).
I also don't know if he foresaw the Colllins situation as it will likely turn out as a positive, but letting him walk without a trade was poor, even though we have Peppers and will likely get a 3rd round comp pick (which is about what a trade would have given)
Again - when you add it all up, for posters to say he had fireable offenses just looks like fuzzy math
I think all your takes are reasonable.
I agree fireable is hyperbole. I think he tried too many angles, and it backfired.
I think after all the spending and all the moves, and the draft picks he netted an unimpressive number of core players in 2018.
With 4 top 70 picks and committing well in excess of 100M in contract guarantees, I think it was a bad offseason.
- Barkley, Hernandez, Hill, Carter in the draft
- Solder and Ogletree in acquisitions
- Coleman, Beal, and McIntosh as major wild cards
2019 looks much, much better.
as a bad move. Sorry, just can not wrap my head around that and never will be able to.
His yards last year were the 4th highest of his career.
His completion percentage was the highest of his career
His interceptions were the 2nd lowest of his career (not counting year 1)
He also had 3 games with 0 TD’s and 7 games with 1 TD.
If Eli Manning puts up a few more TD’s in those games... We are talking about how Eli (at 37) put up one of the best statistical seasons of his career.
I think the talk of his demise has been highly exaggerated. Let’s not forget also, that NONE of those stats were garbage time stats. Outside the Saints and TENN games, The Giants were in every one of those games last year. Margin of loss was less than 7 points.
There is reason for optimism. The boys played hard for PS. Character issue guys are gone (for the most part) and we SHOULD have an upgraded OL.
I can’t wait for the draft. There is reason for optimism.
There are tens of thousands of words written here daily, but most of your minds on Gettleman were made up with that single pick.
If we had taken Darnold, all of the other moves would have been excused and all of you would be preaching patience.
Zero doubt in my mind.
There are tens of thousands of words written here daily, but most of your minds on Gettleman were made up with that single pick.
If we had taken Darnold, all of the other moves would have been excused and all of you would be preaching patience.
Zero doubt in my mind.
Do you ever take a step back and contemplate why so many exchanges you participate in become unconstructive, and how potentially your massive assumptions about "most of us" are the primary reason?
Quote:
In comment 14381642 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14381580 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 14381554 dep026 said:
Quote:
...
John Mara:
“I was hoping that Eli would play so well that it would be impossible to take him out. In any event, it is what it is. But you ought to stop blaming Ben and Jerry. If you want to blame anybody, blame me. I certainly have the power to overrule if I wanted to. I chose not to do it.”
He said what he said to settle the situation. Of course you believe what he said here because it fits your agenda but anything else Mara says and he’s full of shit, right?
Anyone who believes what Mara said after the benching is a fool.
I couldn't agree more. And an even bigger fool (or maybe just delusional) if you don't realize that Mara absolutely signed off on the whole thing before they spoke with Eli and thought the offer to extend the streak would suffice. Everything else that followed was lip service and spin.
If you choose to see it another way, you're just as guilty of the bias and agenda nonsense that you toss at everyone you disagree with.
Right. He agreed with it so much that he fired the two the day after the game and has ignored what he signed off on for 2 years and running. And the two people who misled Mara are still out of football without jobs.
But yeah.... he signed off on taking Eli out of the game no matter the score or how well he is playing. I am sure you still believe in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny... but again how dare we question almighty GatoradeDunk “the smartest guy on BBI”.
And before you dismiss my last statement you should know you sure as hell act like it.
So I guess it's on brand for me to let you know that it's "Santa Claus" without the e? Unless you're just a big fan of Tim Allen, which I suppose is possible.
I did forget about the Philly game... but there weren’t any games that come to mind where the Giants racked up a bunch of garbage yards. And the games where we got blown out: Scored 0 against TENN. 13 against PHL, and 18 against NO. Those would have been the garbage time stat games.
I could be remembering wrong as well. Was a while ago.
What would be constructive would be people accepting the reality that the Giants didn't do things the way they wanted them to do and instead of starting this same thread over and over every day, talk about things that are actually happening with the team.
Do you think that if we start this same Eli/Ownership thread over and over, and put it out there into the universe enough that you can actually will it into existence?
Keep up the good work.
If that is directed at me, my opinion is not really based heavily on stats. So as far as I am concerned, yes you can not count the garbage time ints and fumbles.
I think all your takes are reasonable.
I agree fireable is hyperbole. I think he tried too many angles, and it backfired.
I think after all the spending and all the moves, and the draft picks he netted an unimpressive number of core players in 2018.
With 4 top 70 picks and committing well in excess of 100M in contract guarantees, I think it was a bad offseason.
- Barkley, Hernandez, Hill, Carter in the draft
- Solder and Ogletree in acquisitions
- Coleman, Beal, and McIntosh as major wild cards
2019 looks much, much better.
I think the bolded point is spot on and I think a major factor that led to it was the success of 2016. Rightly or wrongly, the org hoped the roster was more up to the level of what happened in 2016 vs. 2017. Rightly or wrongly Shurmur thought he could get through to Beckham. Rightly or wrongly they gave some of the old regimes players a fresh slate to turn things around. None of those things worked out, but even with hindsight it's hard to envision an alternative strategy that would have had dramatically different results. It's not like they didn't also turnover a good chunk of the roster. Most importantly they had a great draft. If Graham Gano misses a 63 yard kick we might have even had a semi-interesting season.
Quote:
the personal line in the sand was drawn when Gettleman picked Barkley over Darnold.
There are tens of thousands of words written here daily, but most of your minds on Gettleman were made up with that single pick.
If we had taken Darnold, all of the other moves would have been excused and all of you would be preaching patience.
Zero doubt in my mind.
Do you ever take a step back and contemplate why so many exchanges you participate in become unconstructive, and how potentially your massive assumptions about "most of us" are the primary reason?
You exposed your truth when you list picking Barkley as a bad pick.
Any reasonable person, whether they wanted a QB or not, could not list Barkley as a bad move after the season he just had.
You could say "failure to address the QB position already" I guess (even though he's repeated stated it's on his radar and he's only been here 1 year, but I digress), but Barkley over Darnold a bad move? Please.
I bet it would change yours, too, since it was your number one bad move.
Is that a leap of logic?
Quote:
That's a huge stretch. More than a few games were under 7 points Because of garbage time stats
I did forget about the Philly game... but there weren’t any games that come to mind where the Giants racked up a bunch of garbage yards. And the games where we got blown out: Scored 0 against TENN. 13 against PHL, and 18 against NO. Those would have been the garbage time stat games.
I could be remembering wrong as well. Was a while ago.
I'm not going to go through all the game logs but the first one I looked at was week 2 vs dallas.
Dallas scored with 5:45 left in the 4th to make the score 20-3
the final score was 20-13 with a TD at 1.27 and a FG at 0:11 (why the fuck they kicked a FG at that time boggles the mind). Vast majority of the points were garbage time.
Keep up the good work.
exactly what a Tim Allen fan would say...
Quote:
bringing very little to the table while coming across as a condescending ass.
Keep up the good work.
exactly what a Tim Allen fan would say...
This makes absolutely zero sense. And nor is it even remotely funny.
His yards last year were the 4th highest of his career.
His completion percentage was the highest of his career
His interceptions were the 2nd lowest of his career (not counting year 1)
He also had 3 games with 0 TD’s and 7 games with 1 TD.
If Eli Manning puts up a few more TD’s in those games... We are talking about how Eli (at 37) put up one of the best statistical seasons of his career.
I think the talk of his demise has been highly exaggerated. Let’s not forget also, that NONE of those stats were garbage time stats. Outside the Saints and TENN games, The Giants were in every one of those games last year. Margin of loss was less than 7 points.
There is reason for optimism. The boys played hard for PS. Character issue guys are gone (for the most part) and we SHOULD have an upgraded OL.
I can’t wait for the draft. There is reason for optimism.
Context matters. It's overwhelmingly a passing league, and those statistics actually aren't particularly impressive. Check out where each of those totals ranks relative to the league for last season - that's much more significant than where Eli's totals from last season rank for his career.
Quote:
In comment 14382186 dep026 said:
Quote:
bringing very little to the table while coming across as a condescending ass.
Keep up the good work.
exactly what a Tim Allen fan would say...
This makes absolutely zero sense. And nor is it even remotely funny.
My bad, as a Tim Allen fan, you are the expert on comedy
Keep up the good work.
It's only condescending if you feel that way. I'm sure a complete denial of statistical evidence and a consistent deification of Eli to the exclusion of all other points of view is definitely contributing more to the conversation. You're right - I'm the one bringing very little to the table.
Sorry that you can't see Mara's actions and statements in the wake of the Eli benching for what they actually were at the time - total spin to repair the franchise's position in a delicate matter that had gone sideways on them, and a pound of flesh to appease an infuriated fanbase.
That's the point to make.
Every day - there is a thread or threads posted that has the failures of Eli at the core of the message.
There truly are fans who believe Eli is the main driver for the poor record, if not the sole reason.
To use a word I often do - Ponderous.
Context matters. It's overwhelmingly a passing league, and those statistics actually aren't particularly impressive. Check out where each of those totals ranks relative to the league for last season - that's much more significant than where Eli's totals from last season rank for his career.
Yards - 9th
% - 16th
INTs - t-15
TDs - t-17th
YPA- 15th
So many of them come in league average and one in the top 10. The TDs should be higher, I agree. INTs werent bad considering 11 isnt that high of a number in a throwing league. Like to see YPA a little higher as well.
But considering how pathetic the OL was to start the year, with better OL - some of the stats figure to get better - no?
My bad, as a Tim Allen fan, you are the expert on comedy
WTF are you talking about. Holy shit you truly make this site fucking miserable.
Quote:
bringing very little to the table while coming across as a condescending ass.
Keep up the good work.
It's only condescending if you feel that way. I'm sure a complete denial of statistical evidence and a consistent deification of Eli to the exclusion of all other points of view is definitely contributing more to the conversation. You're right - I'm the one bringing very little to the table.
Sorry that you can't see Mara's actions and statements in the wake of the Eli benching for what they actually were at the time - total spin to repair the franchise's position in a delicate matter that had gone sideways on them, and a pound of flesh to appease an infuriated fanbase.
You rarely do bring little to the table. We all know this. Hell, even you know this.
See heres the thing with the benchign of Eli. You have so many posters who have shitted on Mara from everything from Eli's benching, to DG's hiring, to the direction of the franchise, etc..... and whenever he says something - people scoff at it. But when it comes to ONE particular event.... an event that was so fucked up from the beginning. One in which Mara did not openly talk about until after firing two men.... then that is the ONE time everyone is going to believe what is said? Bullshit.
McAdoo went to Eli and said we will play you in a half, and regardless of how you play - we are going to put in Geno Smith. Really? You really think Mara signed off on that idea? You really believe that an owner of a team that wants to win would sign off on benching a player "if" he was playing well and the team was winning? Do you believe that? Cause many of the posters here sure as hell do.
And what about the promise that was made to Webb? That he would start the last 3-4 games? Oh really? Thats the plan. So if geno Smith had a huge day in Oakland - Mara would have been fine saying - "Oh great job geno, I dont want to see you play anymore."
For as smart as many people here are (or claim to be), its almost comical how you guys view this situation. No time in history of the NFL has a QB been purposely benched in the middle of the game to see another QB play. We arent talking rotating. We are flat talking - ok time for you to sit. Thanks for the 3 drives.
The season was over. The only thing Eli had left was his streak. And to continue it just for the sake of continuing it was a slap in the face to him. Thats why there was outrage. For Geno Smith nonetheless. Not a rookie QB. A proven unworthy QB who stunk for his career and also in the preseason.
The two main men are still out of a job and just because Mara put out a few quotes weeks after - then thats the time to believe him? Sure. But lets pretend the Mara was ok with taking a QB out of the game despite how he was playing. Fits the BBI narrative much much much better.
Is it the way to do business as a rule? No. But he’s an exception and he’s not shitting the bed repeatedly.
One year of a big and final cap hit. BFD. Stop this bullshit narrative about money. It doesn’t matter in the long term. It’s fucking insufferable already.
Tim Allen is generally unfunny to a lot of people.
Hence the comments that have been made.
Diving down this rabbit hole was unexpected....
Quote:
Context matters. It's overwhelmingly a passing league, and those statistics actually aren't particularly impressive. Check out where each of those totals ranks relative to the league for last season - that's much more significant than where Eli's totals from last season rank for his career.
Yards - 9th
% - 16th
INTs - t-15
TDs - t-17th
YPA- 15th
So many of them come in league average and one in the top 10. The TDs should be higher, I agree. INTs werent bad considering 11 isnt that high of a number in a throwing league. Like to see YPA a little higher as well.
But considering how pathetic the OL was to start the year, with better OL - some of the stats figure to get better - no?
I would hope so, with the commitment to the supporting cast, especially the OL. But I also think that you and I fundamentally disagree about Eli being in decline. I expect that the improvements around Eli will only help him tread water from 2018 to 2019, but I certainly hope that I'm wrong and he puts up a great year behind a solid OL. Otherwise, it will be tiresome to have the Giants be irrelevant yet again this year.
You do see my point though, don't you? Simply looking at last season vs. Eli's career doesn't paint the picture, IMO. Comparing his performance vs. the league yields a much more accurate view - Eli was basically league average last season. And I feel like that's basically what he is at this point.
I bet it would change yours, too, since it was your number one bad move.
Is that a leap of logic?
It's a material leap of logic.
All of the acquisitions I noted are bad if Rosen is QB or Barkley is the running back.
I genuinely don't think Barkley was the right pick. I think his pass catching stats are the symptom of a major problem, and despite a really productive season, the Giants were still a bottom 3rd rushing team.
I always, and will always think a good quarterback is exponentially more valuable than a great running back. That's a consistent view I've held, no reason to change that now. History backs me up pretty well on that.
I like Gettleman, he's having a great offseason this year. I think there are good quarterbacks (none as good as Darnold) and I think he should pick one this year.
If the Giants can get better QB play, and pair that with a great running back, alls well that ends well for the future of the team.
Tim Allen is generally unfunny to a lot of people.
Hence the comments that have been made.
Diving down this rabbit hole was unexpected....
see, aren't we having fun now!
How much would taking Darnold instead of Barkley change your view of Gettleman's first season?
Is it the way to do business as a rule? No. But he’s an exception and he’s not shitting the bed repeatedly.
One year of a big and final cap hit. BFD. Stop this bullshit narrative about money. It doesn’t matter in the long term. It’s fucking insufferable already.
Thank you, at least one poster can be honest.
I happen to think Mara is going Eli more harm than good with his actions, but we agree that it isn't the end of the world. And who knows, maybe Eli does still have it and it will be a fun and competitive season.
How much would taking Darnold instead of Barkley change your view of Gettleman's first season?
This is a question for anybody, really.
Tim Allen is generally unfunny to a lot of people.
Hence the comments that have been made.
Diving down this rabbit hole was unexpected....
it shouldnt be unexpected with some posters...
There are a number of posters adamant that this is not possible.
Quote:
Allen did a movie called The Santa Clause. With the "e".
Tim Allen is generally unfunny to a lot of people.
Hence the comments that have been made.
Diving down this rabbit hole was unexpected....
it shouldnt be unexpected with some posters...
I'm sort of having to explain it to you.
Stop looking at porn and watch some Tim Allen!!!
I would hope so, with the commitment to the supporting cast, especially the OL. But I also think that you and I fundamentally disagree about Eli being in decline. I expect that the improvements around Eli will only help him tread water from 2018 to 2019, but I certainly hope that I'm wrong and he puts up a great year behind a solid OL. Otherwise, it will be tiresome to have the Giants be irrelevant yet again this year.
You do see my point though, don't you? Simply looking at last season vs. Eli's career doesn't paint the picture, IMO. Comparing his performance vs. the league yields a much more accurate view - Eli was basically league average last season. And I feel like that's basically what he is at this point.
See this is where I love selected reading. I have pointed out more times than I like too that I wanted Darnold over barkley. I would have loved Darnold to start starting games as soon as we were out of the playoff picture last year.
I have been ok with moving on from Eli (as long as we dont mortgage futures for trading for Russell Wilson or signing mediocre QBs to overflated contracts like Foles). If they take Lock or Jones - then great.
But this decline issue is boring. Brady is in decline. Rivers is in decline. Brees is. Ben is as well. It doesnt mean you cant win with them. And it doesnt mean they can get the job done.
We all know Eli is in decline, but to definitively state he is finished is BS because the team surrounding him has been utter garbage for years so its impossible to tell. Thats been my point.
Is it the way to do business as a rule? No. But he’s an exception and he’s not shitting the bed repeatedly.
One year of a big and final cap hit. BFD. Stop this bullshit narrative about money. It doesn’t matter in the long term. It’s fucking insufferable already.
It should be pretty easy to understand that IF this is in fact even a part of the reason that Mara has retained and is retaining Eli, that a lot of fans think it's absolutely awful, or "fucking insufferable".
I give you credit for openly admitting that you're OK with placing the sentimentality and "owing it to Eli" ahead of regaining a current and sustainable winning trajectory. To expect, with such disdain, that others would share that view is silly.
Eli Manning has never been truly embraced for whatever reason. Kind of reminds me of the way Knicks fans treated Patrick Ewing except Eli has a pair of titles.
In the last few years alone we've heard that Eli's 2016 season was not good. That he "benched himself" in 2017, and when Beckham was still here we had to deal with people propping up Beckham at Eli's expense. All of which seem totally unacceptable to me coming from any real Giants fan. Hell, we have the people who are still mad about the Barkley pick laughing at the idea that Eli's record may dip below .500 almost as if they are rooting for it.
I think Eagles fans might love Nick Foles more than a large portion of Giants fans love Eli. Sad but true.
For example, (and I really dont feel like arguing this again) he definitely did bench himself. In my mind that is 100% clear.
No to you that makes me a Eli hater when the truth is the exact opposite. I'm a huge Eli fan.
It would also mean you have zero appreciation of the player Eli has been and the way he's represented this franchise for the last 15 years, but that is already very obvious.
See heres the thing with the benchign of Eli. You have so many posters who have shitted on Mara from everything from Eli's benching, to DG's hiring, to the direction of the franchise, etc..... and whenever he says something - people scoff at it. But when it comes to ONE particular event.... an event that was so fucked up from the beginning. One in which Mara did not openly talk about until after firing two men.... then that is the ONE time everyone is going to believe what is said? Bullshit.
McAdoo went to Eli and said we will play you in a half, and regardless of how you play - we are going to put in Geno Smith. Really? You really think Mara signed off on that idea? You really believe that an owner of a team that wants to win would sign off on benching a player "if" he was playing well and the team was winning? Do you believe that? Cause many of the posters here sure as hell do.
And what about the promise that was made to Webb? That he would start the last 3-4 games? Oh really? Thats the plan. So if geno Smith had a huge day in Oakland - Mara would have been fine saying - "Oh great job geno, I dont want to see you play anymore."
For as smart as many people here are (or claim to be), its almost comical how you guys view this situation. No time in history of the NFL has a QB been purposely benched in the middle of the game to see another QB play. We arent talking rotating. We are flat talking - ok time for you to sit. Thanks for the 3 drives.
The season was over. The only thing Eli had left was his streak. And to continue it just for the sake of continuing it was a slap in the face to him. Thats why there was outrage. For Geno Smith nonetheless. Not a rookie QB. A proven unworthy QB who stunk for his career and also in the preseason.
The two main men are still out of a job and just because Mara put out a few quotes weeks after - then thats the time to believe him? Sure. But lets pretend the Mara was ok with taking a QB out of the game despite how he was playing. Fits the BBI narrative much much much better.
On the other hand, dep would have you believe that McAdoo, a first time NFL HC, and Reese, a very quiet unassuming GM, would feel so passionate about benching Eli that they would risk committing career suicide to get their way over Mara.
Which begs the question - who has really gone off the deep end here?
Quote:
McAdoo, a first time NFL HC, and Reese, a very quiet unassuming GM
Like I said earlier in this thread, the defense of these 2 is just comical right now.
I named my kid after Eli. He's my favorite all time Giant, but is that supposed to prevent me from seeing what's obvious on the field?
Quote:
Eli Manning has never been truly embraced for whatever reason.
I named my kid after Eli. He's my favorite all time Giant, but is that supposed to prevent me from seeing what's obvious on the field?
I dont think he was referring to you. I think its referring the posters who have shitted on him for years and now claiming that they always liked him and are just being impartial.
We have posters here going back to BBWC who have shitted on him.
no I wouldn't. This is a perfect example of the persecution complex certain people have regarding Eli.
I'm sure some people enjoy bashing Eli, but I'm not one of them. But some of the things certain fans say are tough to accept with a straight face and need to be rebuked.
Who said shy? I just can't connect the dots why McAdoo would risk career suicide in the NFL...
Strangely, you can.
Quote:
Eli Manning has never been truly embraced for whatever reason.
I named my kid after Eli. He's my favorite all time Giant, but is that supposed to prevent me from seeing what's obvious on the field?
but as an adult you dont have a life size fathead on your ceiling in your bedroom- so that doesnt count--- HATER!!! lol---
Just a small, but crucial edit - "steamrolled by a manipulative....John Mara..."
yes, but not for the reason you think.
Quote:
Mara knew EXACTLY what McAdoo and Reese planned. In fact, he mentioned that he never got back with McAdoo to approve the plan because he was out of town at that time.
He lost his nerve. And then when he felt the backlash, on top of Eli’s crybaby act, he needed sacrificial lambs to take spotlight off his role. It was an act of cowardice.
Bullshit. There is no fucking way an owner tells a HC to take a player out of the game if he isn’t playing well which is EXACTLY why he was fired immediately after the decision. They flat out agreed that if the giants were losing and out of the game to play other QBs. Not to take them out mid way through the game.
Plus he was benched for a guy who didn’t deserve to play either. A guy who had shown NOTHING in the league.
Again three people involved in the decision are still jobless. And there’s a reason for that. Everything Mara said after the fact was a straight cover up to diffuse the fire. But what the two idiots did was not thenplan they told Mara.
I have to ask - why on Earth would the Owner even be involved with this?
Why would th Owner need to approve the HC benching a player in a losing game that is also not playing well?
If the HC needs to ask permission to bench a poorly performing player in a game that is being lost then they are not the HC.
Quote:
innocent victims that got steamrolled by a manipulative, vindictive Eli Manning.
Just a small, but crucial edit - "steamrolled by a manipulative....John Mara..."
Yes, indeed. Innocent victims paying the price for somebody else's failures....
Surely somebody would have seen this and hired one of them by now.
I don't know if the 2019 partnership is best for NYG or Eli but that's the course they've all chosen. I can see the arguments for and against it.
I do disagree with the notion that the Giants are being negligent or don't have a plan. Obviously they still think he can lead a winning team in 2019. As far as life after that? I think they're set to address it either this month or next year.
I have no problem with disagreeing with that, I've always had a problem with how many NYG fans (not you specifically) disrespect a 2-time SB winning QB.
Quote:
to the media in discussing his displeasure with Eli. Where would I ever come up with that?
Who said shy? I just can't connect the dots why McAdoo would risk career suicide in the NFL...
Strangely, you can.
Cause they probably thought they could get away with or didnt see the big deal with it. Probably why both were pretty inept at their job.
McAdoo and Reese had the sense to know how much Eli meant to Mara and they smartly went to Mara with a plan. A plan, and I've discussed this endlessly, that Mara supported AND signed-off on....
Btw weren't there rumors Belichek wanted to replace Brady?
McAdoo and Reese had the sense to know how much Eli meant to Mara and they smartly went to Mara with a plan. A plan, and I've discussed this endlessly, that Mara supported AND signed-off on....
The plan that he has now turned around on for what will be 2 years and counting!!!!
Cause they probably thought they could get away with or didnt see the big deal with it. Probably why both were pretty inept at their job.
Look, you seem like a bright guy. You really can't believe there was this type of subterfuge going on. It just doesn't make sense.
Quote:
innocent victims that got steamrolled by a manipulative, vindictive Eli Manning.
Just a small, but crucial edit - "steamrolled by a manipulative....John Mara..."
Not farfetched at all. I do think Mara wanted to get rid of them, and this episode was a prime opportunity,
- new GM
- new head coach
- #2 pick in the draft
- strong QB class
- Eli had an out in his contract that made cutting him financially
In the NFL world that's as serendipitous as it gets. The only fly in the ointment was Eli. Had he retired, Sam Darnold would have been the pick instead of Barkley, and not a person on this board would have complained.
The Giants instead opted to ignore two universal maxims:
#1 Finding RBs is easy; finding QBs is hard.
#2 Better a year early than a year late.
#1 was universally accepted before we picked Barkley. Since then we've had posters try to tell us we can find a QB some other time - as we look at this draft we are learning it doesn't really work that way.
#2 is something that is being countered with the flaccid "Eli can still play" mantra. So he can "still play". Super. Do we expect that to get us to a title? Had we moved on after 2017 we'd be a year into the next QB cycle and building towards better things. Instead we're chained to Eli, and we're (maybe) looking at lesser QBs in this draft.
And what are Britt, FMIC, and dep going to say if/when Eli gets an extension?
fixed.
Quote:
Cause they probably thought they could get away with or didnt see the big deal with it. Probably why both were pretty inept at their job.
Look, you seem like a bright guy. You really can't believe there was this type of subterfuge going on. It just doesn't make sense.
Here's what makes sense.
1. McAdoo never like Eli - we can agree with that.
2. Reese wanted to move on from Eli, cause he never had his own QB - makes sense, right?
3. Mara, Reese, McAdoo all wanted to see other QBs - we can agree, right?
Now this is where it gets tricky. But it makes perfect sense to me. They all knew the streak was involved. ending it the right way would be complicated. Reese and McAdoo came up with the idea of playing him for a half to appease him. That way they could see the other QBs for at least a half. The pitch to Mara would be something liek that without details. They told Mara that they wanted to see the other QBs.... basically explaining to Mara that they would see mop up time. Mara sees it this way and agrees to it.
Is that so unplausible?
You honestly think that Reese and McAdoo went to Mara and told him despite how Eli was playing that he would only play half? even if he was playing great - they would take him out? And that makes sense?
And like i said earlier.... if Geno Smith played really well against Raiders - he would be then be benched for Webb - because webb did say McAdoo promised him he would start the last 3-4 games?
it makes absolutely zero sense.
Is this the same Reese who was often called arrogant, the smartest guy in the room and dismissive and the guy who put the Super Bowl clock on?
Quiet and assuming?
And bw will tell you he doesn't have an agenda. It is either that or he's a complete moron, so let's see which option he takes.
my stance will not have changed. I will say that was a possibility, as I've been saying for two years now, to buy them time in order to transition to the next guy while simultaneously rebuilding the roster.
It changes nothing. The Eli Manning era is winding down. Expecting him to play past 40 is not likely.
They are buying time while figuring it out.
- new GM
- new head coach
- #2 pick in the draft
- strong QB class
- Eli had an out in his contract that made cutting him financially
In the NFL world that's as serendipitous as it gets. The only fly in the ointment was Eli. Had he retired, Sam Darnold would have been the pick instead of Barkley, and not a person on this board would have complained.
The Giants instead opted to ignore two universal maxims:
#1 Finding RBs is easy; finding QBs is hard.
#2 Better a year early than a year late.
#1 was universally accepted before we picked Barkley. Since then we've had posters try to tell us we can find a QB some other time - as we look at this draft we are learning it doesn't really work that way.
#2 is something that is being countered with the flaccid "Eli can still play" mantra. So he can "still play". Super. Do we expect that to get us to a title? Had we moved on after 2017 we'd be a year into the next QB cycle and building towards better things. Instead we're chained to Eli, and we're (maybe) looking at lesser QBs in this draft.
And what are Britt, FMIC, and dep going to say if/when Eli gets an extension?
Positioning Barkley as just another RB is ingenuous. He is an exceptional player who was well worth the #2 pick. You can't just find another player like him later. However you could find another Darnold.
Because it will come on the heels of a successful season.
The bigger question is what will people say coming off a successful season with a QB who clearly can't be successful anymore?
Quote:
Very rarely do things line up for the Giants the way they did after the 2017 season:
- new GM
- new head coach
- #2 pick in the draft
- strong QB class
- Eli had an out in his contract that made cutting him financially
In the NFL world that's as serendipitous as it gets. The only fly in the ointment was Eli. Had he retired, Sam Darnold would have been the pick instead of Barkley, and not a person on this board would have complained.
The Giants instead opted to ignore two universal maxims:
#1 Finding RBs is easy; finding QBs is hard.
#2 Better a year early than a year late.
#1 was universally accepted before we picked Barkley. Since then we've had posters try to tell us we can find a QB some other time - as we look at this draft we are learning it doesn't really work that way.
#2 is something that is being countered with the flaccid "Eli can still play" mantra. So he can "still play". Super. Do we expect that to get us to a title? Had we moved on after 2017 we'd be a year into the next QB cycle and building towards better things. Instead we're chained to Eli, and we're (maybe) looking at lesser QBs in this draft.
And what are Britt, FMIC, and dep going to say if/when Eli gets an extension?
Positioning Barkley as just another RB is ingenuous. He is an exceptional player who was well worth the #2 pick. You can't just find another player like him later. However you could find another Darnold.
Some are too stupid to see we drafted a future HoFer, while the Jets got a softer Andy Dalton and Cards got severe buyers remorse. Way easier to find.
They are losing behind a porous roster at the LOS and a swiss cheese defense.
Tougher to say, unless you feel Sam Darnold would have immediately come in and played better regardless of how poorly the offensive line played (47 sacks overall with 31 of those coming in the first 8 games, as well as Eli having one of the shortest times to throw in the league, under 2.5 seconds).
But it isn't independent of that.
Just like it isn't for Rosen or Darnold playing for bad teams.
Or even established guys like Dalton or Stafford.
But that's not even the point. The point is we have a descending player at QB who is already playing at a poor level. Darnold may have been worse than Eli in 2018, I don't know...but he'd be an ascending player who many feel has a shot to be very good. The same could be said for Rosen, who we're about to pass on for the second time in a calendar year so that we can continue forward with our descending, poor QB...who costs 4 or 5 times more than Darnold, by the way.
There's a fundamental truth here: Eli is either completely done or at the precipice of done. We had a golden opportunity to make as easy a transition at QB as can possibly happen in the NFL, and we threw it away.
And now instead we're "biding time".
Football is, was, and always will be a team sport. 11 moving parts on offense. Some more critical than others. A team is the sum of it's parts. If an engine has one belt or gear out of alignment or broken, it throws the whole thing off, no matter how well the steering wheel works.
Mayfield was gone.
Darnold flashed brilliance and ineptitude
Rosen is rumored to be traded
Allen had the same accuracy issues as in college, but ran well
If we abandoned a golden opportunity to learn that none of the QB's weren't golden - then it isn't even a mistake, let alone a lost opportunity.
And of course, that is unknown at this time, so it would be nice to not have to continually hear that it has been decided.
In the big picture, this is fairly inconsequential. The Giants will be good again. But it's going to take time. Ditching Eli and throwing in a rookie doesn't automatically turn it around. There are a lot of things that need to happen in order for it to turn around.
It's about managing priorities.
Back to my engine analogy. Let's say you have a bunch of things that are wrong with your engine, and it's going to cost a decent amount of money, which you don't have, to replace them.
You're going to replace them in the order of what will get the car up and running, first, and then address each thing as you can, in order of priority.
Right now, they don't feel Eli Manning is keeping their car from running. They see a bunch of other problems. So they're addressing those while saving up to replace Manning later.
But even if you put the blame entirely on the offensive line, your argument doesn't hold water. Darnold can better cope with a shitty line because he can move. Further, he's still going to be young and improving by the time we fix our offensive line. Eli is not improving, and his cost makes it harder to fix our offensive line than it would have been if we had Darnold (or Rosen).
We opted for an expensive (then) 37 year old over a less expensive 21 year old at the most important position on the field.
And now what? What's the plan at QB? Where are we?
Eventually, all of it needs to be replaced. That process has started. Patience is now needed as they prioritize the order and process to do that.
In the big picture, this is fairly inconsequential. The Giants will be good again. But it's going to take time. Ditching Eli and throwing in a rookie doesn't automatically turn it around. There are a lot of things that need to happen in order for it to turn around.
It's about managing priorities.
Back to my engine analogy. Let's say you have a bunch of things that are wrong with your engine, and it's going to cost a decent amount of money, which you don't have, to replace them.
You're going to replace them in the order of what will get the car up and running, first, and then address each thing as you can, in order of priority.
Right now, they don't feel Eli Manning is keeping their car from running. They see a bunch of other problems. So they're addressing those while saving up to replace Manning later.
What if you could replace one piece with a much cheaper aftermarket part and in doing so, be able to afford to repair the rest of the engine that much more quickly?
You do realize that your analogy is more of a justification than anything else, right?
Quote:
We had a golden opportunity to make as easy a transition at QB as can possibly happen in the NFL, and we threw it away.
Mayfield was gone.
Darnold flashed brilliance and ineptitude
Rosen is rumored to be traded
Allen had the same accuracy issues as in college, but ran well
If we abandoned a golden opportunity to learn that none of the QB's weren't golden - then it isn't even a mistake, let alone a lost opportunity.
And of course, that is unknown at this time, so it would be nice to not have to continually hear that it has been decided.
+1. So far the only QB who has shown the potential to be a top QB is Mayfield, who was gone. Allen, Rosen, and Darnold have not done much of anything, and the jury is still out. Investing in them, and passing on Barkley who is already an all-pro caliber after 1 season, so far looks like the wrong decision to me.
But even if you put the blame entirely on the offensive line, your argument doesn't hold water. Darnold can better cope with a shitty line because he can move. Further, he's still going to be young and improving by the time we fix our offensive line. Eli is not improving, and his cost makes it harder to fix our offensive line than it would have been if we had Darnold (or Rosen).
We opted for an expensive (then) 37 year old over a less expensive 21 year old at the most important position on the field.
And now what? What's the plan at QB? Where are we?
We're talking about money again. You have a finite number of years of cost controlled QB.
Why waste them on a rebuilding roster? Why not build the roster and maximize those years of cost control. Won't we all be better for extending the window of winning football by building an awesome roster and THEN inserting a young QB?
Eventually, all of it needs to be replaced. That process has started. Patience is now needed as they prioritize the order and process to do that.
Is the order in which a team is constructed or rebuilt truly just a formality though? That doesn't seem consistent with how DG described it a year and a half ago:
Isn't that precisely what happens when you build up the rest of the roster before you address your succession plan at QB? It's not what you want to see happen though, which is why I said that your engine analogy is really more of a justification than anything else, IMO.
Seems to me, if you value those five years that much, you'd want everything else in place first before pulling that trigger, no?
Seems to me, if you value those five years that much, you'd want everything else in place first before pulling that trigger, no?
Britt is making a great argument here. He's right
They will have an abundance of cap space next offseason.
Even if you like none of the QBs this year, the 2020 draft class is on track to be better than 2018 or 2019.
Where is this wilderness they are supposedly stuck in?
They referenced the Eagles as an example of drafting Wentz would the lines were mostly already in place.
They referenced the Bills an an example of nothing being set & trading away assets to get the QB.
Interesting listen.
And if we don't pick a QB this year, what then? We sit and hope the Fromm/Herbert/Tua class all stays healthy and somehow we have a shot at them. Maybe we have a decent year this year (I think Beckham will prove to be enormous addition by subtraction) and go 8-8...that's going to put those QBs out of reach. Then what? We trade huge assets to move up and get one? Do we wait ANOTHER year and trade 1% of the franchise for the right to move up to get Lawrence (who knows what he'll be by that point)?
By then, it's possible that Gettleman has retired and/or Shurmur has been fired. What then?
You can't build a team this way.
no it wouldn't. it would have been a valuable year of experience for the QB. The next QB for the Giants will likely have a similar up and down season just like Eli had to start his career.
Thats part of the reason to get the process started sooner rather than later.
There is also a decent probability that the next guy doesn't pan out, and we need to move on. The longer we wait to start the process the longer we wait to return to competitiveness.
How much would taking Darnold instead of Barkley change your view of Gettleman's first season?
It would have been better, but not great. Signing Solder, Omameh, Martin, Stewart, and extending Beckham would have been bad moves. In fact dumping resources into those veterans would have been even worse because the timelines change more with a rookie QB.
But the reality on the ground today is much different and I'd argue much better.
The roster is largely cleared of bad contracts, there are very few starters who will be UFA after this season, and if the Giants grab a young, talented QB in this draft, they'll be on a good path.
the Rams used that formula. You could argue the Bears did too - but I'm not a big Trubisky fan. You could even say the Texans did too.
Britt, what is your view on Haskins/Lock/Jones? Are you open to any being drafted?
Quote:
If we don't pick a QB this year, there's always next year. And we'll be one year better overall with the roster rebuild.
Britt, what is your view on Haskins/Lock/Jones? Are you open to any being drafted?
I'm open to drafting any and every QB that the Giants deem to be worthy of the pick. I do not think they are throwing darts, here. I don't pretend to know enough otherwise.
I believe the Giants have a plan/vision. I also believe they will strategically pull the trigger when the right guy aligns with all of the other moving parts, one of which is Eli's decline.
Seems to me, if you value those five years that much, you'd want everything else in place first before pulling that trigger, no?
I think it goes to the crux of the argument though, and specifically where you and I tend to disagree. If one believes that part of the reason why they're years away specifically is the QB position, then no, you wouldn't wait for that to be the cherry on top.
Chances are, the right answer is probably a little bit of your POV and a little bit of mine, and a whole lot of other stuff that's above our pay grade.
Quote:
then why bother drafting a QB now when you'd just be wasting years of cost control.
Seems to me, if you value those five years that much, you'd want everything else in place first before pulling that trigger, no?
I think it goes to the crux of the argument though, and specifically where you and I tend to disagree. If one believes that part of the reason why they're years away specifically is the QB position, then no, you wouldn't wait for that to be the cherry on top.
Chances are, the right answer is probably a little bit of your POV and a little bit of mine, and a whole lot of other stuff that's above our pay grade.
Now this is something I may be wrong about.... but when DG referred to the "KC plan" everyone assumed it was about the rookie QB sitting and then playing his 2nd year like Mahomes did.
But maybe the KC plan was to get the OL, surround the QB with talent (Hill, Hunt, kelce, Watkins...) and then plug the QB in when everything else was in place.
I dont think Mahomes sitting was the "KC plan" but getting the team around him first.
They referenced the Eagles as an example of drafting Wentz would the lines were mostly already in place.
They referenced the Bills an an example of nothing being set & trading away assets to get the QB.
Interesting listen.
Have not heard it but this sort of echoes my sentiment.
Quote:
then why bother drafting a QB now when you'd just be wasting years of cost control.
Seems to me, if you value those five years that much, you'd want everything else in place first before pulling that trigger, no?
I think it goes to the crux of the argument though, and specifically where you and I tend to disagree. If one believes that part of the reason why they're years away specifically is the QB position, then no, you wouldn't wait for that to be the cherry on top.
Chances are, the right answer is probably a little bit of your POV and a little bit of mine, and a whole lot of other stuff that's above our pay grade.
I don't think Eli is the problem. He clearly isn't what he was, but he's fine for where we are. The OL, and defense sucked, they need to be fixed. A rookie QB is going to get killed, and the team will do even worse. Now if your argument is the team will suck so save money at QB, I think Britt perfectly killed that argument.
Quote:
In comment 14382526 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
then why bother drafting a QB now when you'd just be wasting years of cost control.
Seems to me, if you value those five years that much, you'd want everything else in place first before pulling that trigger, no?
I think it goes to the crux of the argument though, and specifically where you and I tend to disagree. If one believes that part of the reason why they're years away specifically is the QB position, then no, you wouldn't wait for that to be the cherry on top.
Chances are, the right answer is probably a little bit of your POV and a little bit of mine, and a whole lot of other stuff that's above our pay grade.
Now this is something I may be wrong about.... but when DG referred to the "KC plan" everyone assumed it was about the rookie QB sitting and then playing his 2nd year like Mahomes did.
But maybe the KC plan was to get the OL, surround the QB with talent (Hill, Hunt, kelce, Watkins...) and then plug the QB in when everything else was in place.
I dont think Mahomes sitting was the "KC plan" but getting the team around him first.
Interesting perspective, and definitely more consistent with DG's actions than his silly "QB hell" soundbite that I've referenced. I don't know that I agree, but it's not my call to make. I'm satisfied with anything that resembles a real plan (rather than DG just saying "there's a plan, you just don't see it"), even if it isn't the one I've been arguing in favor of.
Related, I think we should probably retire his 2017-18 soundbites from early on (QB hell, hand of God, and the worst of them, IMO, hog mollies) because I think he was playing to the media at first and liked giving those little nuggets much in the same way Accorsi used to.
Here's what makes sense.
1. McAdoo never like Eli - we can agree with that.
2. Reese wanted to move on from Eli, cause he never had his own QB - makes sense, right?
3. Mara, Reese, McAdoo all wanted to see other QBs - we can agree, right?
Now this is where it gets tricky. But it makes perfect sense to me. They all knew the streak was involved. ending it the right way would be complicated. Reese and McAdoo came up with the idea of playing him for a half to appease him. That way they could see the other QBs for at least a half. The pitch to Mara would be something liek that without details. They told Mara that they wanted to see the other QBs.... basically explaining to Mara that they would see mop up time. Mara sees it this way and agrees to it.
Is that so unplausible?
You honestly think that Reese and McAdoo went to Mara and told him despite how Eli was playing that he would only play half? even if he was playing great - they would take him out? And that makes sense?
And like i said earlier.... if Geno Smith played really well against Raiders - he would be then be benched for Webb - because webb did say McAdoo promised him he would start the last 3-4 games?
it makes absolutely zero sense.
I mostly agree with 1,2 and 3 - yes.
You have the details wrong. These three spoke about getting Webb and/or Geno playing time with the season being lost after week 11. Mara agreed that is was time to see the bench strength. So HE asked Reese and McAdoo to draw-up a plan. They did, presented it, and Mara agreed to it. There weren't a bunch of "If-Then" assumptions - e.g. "If Eli is playing great...he can then play the entire game..."
As the week wore on, Mara, who was out of town, wanted to call Reese and McAdoo to say HE wanted more flexibility in the plan. In other words, Mara wanted the caveat that if Eli was playing great they would agree to keep Eli in the game. But Mara NEVER CALLED THEM BACK! And he's admitted as much.
So McAdoo and Reese were ready to execute the plan as designed. Eli plays a half, then the second half would be at McAdoo's discretion. But in the days leading up to the game in Oakland, Eli had his crying-fit, suited up as the martyr, throws down the gauntlet, and the firestorm ensured...
And when Mara saw that firestorm, he was completely cornered and caught off guard. Visions of Phil Simms danced in his head. So he went into survival mode and distanced himself from the f-ckin plan he approved! He saw which way the wind was blowing in the city and decided to make McAdoo and Reese pay for this problem Mara actually created. It was a professional football homicide. And, IMV, showed that Mr. Class wasn't so classy afterall...
Eli is the martyr and McAdoo and Reese are just the sacrificial lambs......
Wrong:
Mara said "Isn't it time we saw some of these other guys"?
Jerry said "I already talked to Ben about it last week".
The end.
Quote:
But in the days leading up to the game in Oakland, Eli had his crying-fit, suited up as the martyr, throws down the gauntlet, and the firestorm ensured...
Eli is the martyr and McAdoo and Reese are just the sacrificial lambs......
Eli says publicly it wouldnt be fair for a QB to come in mid game and play at his highest level. So he tells McAdoo that if he is going to play Smith, let him start so he can have his best chance to succeed.
Youre right.... what a fucking baby.
Remember this as well.... Once Eli told McAdoo this.... ben could have easily just kept on with eli. He still makes the call. When Eli said this to him, it was Christmas to him a month early cause he finally got what he wanted. With this action, the fans ultimately got what they wanted.... McAdoo fired.
Eli (or his management team, most likely) knew exactly what they were doing when they requested that press release. That was a masterstroke in controlling the public sentiment.
Eli (or his management team, most likely) knew exactly what they were doing when they requested that press release. That was a masterstroke in controlling the public sentiment.
I get what you're saying - but lets not act like it wouldnt be a massive story either way.
Translation: please ignore a dark episode in our franchise's recent history in which our beloved savior did indeed have some blood on his own hands.
Irrelevant to our current situation, anything prior.
Magical thinking, as Bill put it.
Quote:
I think people forget that Eli insisted on having the team put out a press release about him being benched. That was the shot across the bow, IMO. He knew he was at odds with McAdoo (and by extension, Reese), and he lit the match for the firestorm that ensued.
Eli (or his management team, most likely) knew exactly what they were doing when they requested that press release. That was a masterstroke in controlling the public sentiment.
I get what you're saying - but lets not act like it wouldnt be a massive story either way.
Oh, it absolutely would have been. But Eli's people controlled the timing, the message, the positioning, all of it. They had him out in front of the media as a sympathetic figure before Mara was even on a plane back to NJ. He correctly identified that McAdoo was operating from a position of weakness and desperation, and he struck first. All of it was perfectly orchestrated, from the refusal to go along with McAdoo's plan (which in a vacuum was insubordination on a very basic level), to the press release, to the follow-up conversation with Mara himself once JM got back.
I happen to think most fans were so quick to react to Eli being benched that they failed to see the puppet strings being pulled by Team Manning (or maybe they just didn't care because they were squarely in Eli's corner either way). It was a truly impressive display of understanding how to manipulate the media. Nobody in the NFL is better at that than the Mannings no matter how many times people insist on some anti-Eli media narrative.
Magical thinking, as Bill put it.
Whatever you say, Britt. You're definitely the balanced voice of reason on this topic.
Let's go back to every time you assumed that any time someone mentioned giving a big contract to an aging veteran that they must be criticizing your beloved rather than realizing that there are other aging veterans that are overpaid.
Off of on year on a loaded team. Are we assuming he would have transformed the Giants by himself.
I am not proclaiming mahomes as bad or not a great player - but if there was ever a player headed for a decline this year... it would be him.
Quote:
but if we'd granted his request Patrick Mahomes would be our QB. He was a million percent right on that score.
Off of on year on a loaded team. Are we assuming he would have transformed the Giants by himself.
I am not proclaiming mahomes as bad or not a great player - but if there was ever a player headed for a decline this year... it would be him.
Let's even step further back from that. The way people bandy about the Mahomes/McAdoo connection it is almost like McAdoo quit because Mahomes wasn't brought here and his lasting legacy will have been the suggestion of Mahomes, not completely losing the team.
And even putting that aside, Mahomes is talked about as an all-time great after one season.
Contrast that with how Barkley is viewed...
Doesn’t mean we would be a better team or faster on the rebuild.
Quote:
Mahomes could decline by 50% and still be a better option for the Giants than Eli.
Doesn’t mean we would be a better team or faster on the rebuild.
What?
Quote:
Mahomes could decline by 50% and still be a better option for the Giants than Eli.
Doesn’t mean we would be a better team or faster on the rebuild.
Say what? If our new franchise QB was in place, we'd be at least 2 seasons ahead of where we are now in the rebuild..excuse me...build.
Quote:
In comment 14382526 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
Now this is something I may be wrong about.... but when DG referred to the "KC plan" everyone assumed it was about the rookie QB sitting and then playing his 2nd year like Mahomes did.
But maybe the KC plan was to get the OL, surround the QB with talent (Hill, Hunt, kelce, Watkins...) and then plug the QB in when everything else was in place.
I dont think Mahomes sitting was the "KC plan" but getting the team around him first.
Ok let's say this is the KC plan.
1. Hunt the 4th round RB was one of the FINAL pieces and I think that's what everyone says in relation to Barkley. RB is a last piece and there isn't really any precedent for having a top RB win a SB in the modern age without a cost controlled QB. No surrounding team, no cost controlled QB makes the RB pick something strategically out on a limb at best. (I'm not like some others even willing to call it bad but calling it good after the way the TEAM performed last year is kind of crazy)
2. Want to build a team? Look at what the Colts did with their first 4 picks after trading back.
Quenton Nelson
Darius Leonard
Braden Smith
Kemoko Turay
Turay not as great of a season as the rest but still was better in the PFF rankings that Kareem Martin and way more cost effective. Hernandez as no doubt a great pick but at very generously is a wash for Nelson but our season might have looked completely different with Smith at RT and certainly with Leonard on the D. Draft a RB or hey, I don't think Gallman would have been that bad behind an improved line but anyway more picks are good and that Jets offer is a real offer that we could have gotten as a point of comparison. (Plus one more 2nd round pick according to the draft value chart)
And that's where I think you kind of have to have your blinders on to not be concerned about DG the person. DG the personnel guy is again no doubt, top notch. But part of minimizing mistakes is having a team around you that widens your perspective and that you trust. Salivating so hard after one player so much so that you ignore even the idea of positional value (mocking analytics) / asset allocation and don't take calls for a trade to see if you could be blown away is just kind of irresponsible on it's face. People talk about DG as if he is this mastermind but in his first year alone he had some very real things both said and done that are definite mixes of overconfidence and carelessness.
Maybe this is how the Mara's and the old guard like decisions to be made but while it might have worked in the past it is far from best practices now.
I don't know why more universally we can't say some things about our process could be improved without anybody getting fired or anything. But the kind of larger issue is that nobody's mind should ever be made up to such an extent that they don't even want to hear about other possibilities.
No matter what you have to say about Barkley there was a trade package out there more valuable than him. I don't think that is as true of a QB you are sold on, kind of the definition of positional value though. But even then you are sitting in the drivers seat and you can say you are basically going to have to completely blow me out of the water to not take that player. And maybe they do, you never know how much anyone is going to overvalue an asset if desperate.
Also anyone that's going to say you can't make that trade with the Jets, that's exactly what bad management is, letting an emotional argument trump your value assessment. You don't like Darnold enough fine, there were teams that very much did.
Come on where? You're saying Mahomes made hill, kelce, and hunt all pro players? Cause I am pretty damn sure they already were before Mahome started.
being coached by McAdoo and being hamstrung with a bad team would have taken him longer to get to his peak.
Oh, it absolutely would have been. But Eli's people controlled the timing, the message, the positioning, all of it. They had him out in front of the media as a sympathetic figure before Mara was even on a plane back to NJ. He correctly identified that McAdoo was operating from a position of weakness and desperation, and he struck first. All of it was perfectly orchestrated, from the refusal to go along with McAdoo's plan (which in a vacuum was insubordination on a very basic level), to the press release, to the follow-up conversation with Mara himself once JM got back.
I happen to think most fans were so quick to react to Eli being benched that they failed to see the puppet strings being pulled by Team Manning (or maybe they just didn't care because they were squarely in Eli's corner either way). It was a truly impressive display of understanding how to manipulate the media. Nobody in the NFL is better at that than the Mannings no matter how many times people insist on some anti-Eli media narrative.
This is very well explained. Never underestimate the craftiness of Tom Condon in this. He quickly mobilized Team Eli and probably had DeNiro on the phone to make sure Eli really nailed down the crying piece... ;)
being coached by McAdoo and being hamstrung with a bad team would have taken him longer to get to his peak.
I so believe in the greatness of Mahomes that I feel very comfortable saying he gets us into or very close to the playoffs last year. His improvisation skills create more opportunities for points. A rare talent who can create chicken salad.
Do you think OBJ is happier with Mahomes, btw??
Alex Smith was a Pro Bowler himself with that offense, and all combined they were the 6th ranked scoring offense in the NFL in 2017.
Mahomes had a fantastic year in 2018. But the rest of the pieces were already in place.
This is what I would like the Giants to build to. No reason Eli Manning can't be the Alex Smith in this scenario.
Quote:
the greatness of Mahomes has a lot to do with being coached by Andy Reid and have all-pros ready in place. In most certainly sped up his timeline.
being coached by McAdoo and being hamstrung with a bad team would have taken him longer to get to his peak.
I so believe in the greatness of Mahomes that I feel very comfortable saying he gets us into or very close to the playoffs last year. His improvisation skills create more opportunities for points. A rare talent who can create chicken salad.
Do you think OBJ is happier with Mahomes, btw??
Maybe you’re right. Maybe I am. No one can know for sure. But let’s not act like he wasn’t handed a better playing hand in KC than he would have been for us.
As far as Beckham. Fuck him.
He is the ultimate force multiplier.
Kudos to the much underrated McAdoo for seeing the potential in Mahomes and insisting on a trade! ;)
He is the ultimate force multiplier.
Kudos to the much underrated McAdoo for seeing the potential in Mahomes and insisting on a trade! ;)
He wouldn’t have had either engram or Barkley since the price of moving up to get mahomes was a first in 2017 and 2018.
Thanks for this post.
Did I miss Terps' retraction and apology for getting your point completely wrong?
Quote:
Mahomes would have had some good weapons here last year - SB, OBJ, Shep, Engram. That's not bad. And this is crucial, he would be able to manipulate around this OL. Chiefs have a very solid OL, but Mahomes made what seemed like a thousand plays outside the tackles.
He is the ultimate force multiplier.
Kudos to the much underrated McAdoo for seeing the potential in Mahomes and insisting on a trade! ;)
He wouldn’t have had either engram or Barkley since the price of moving up to get mahomes was a first in 2017 and 2018.
True. But RBs are RBs. Tons of solutions there... ;)
Eli (or his management team, most likely) knew exactly what they were doing when they requested that press release. That was a masterstroke in controlling the public sentiment.
Eli clotheslined Reese and Mcadoo, but they did it to themselves largely with their chickenshit plan to bench Eli.
"So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth." Revelation 3:16
Quote:
In comment 14382629 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
I think people forget that Eli insisted on having the team put out a press release about him being benched. That was the shot across the bow, IMO. He knew he was at odds with McAdoo (and by extension, Reese), and he lit the match for the firestorm that ensued.
Eli (or his management team, most likely) knew exactly what they were doing when they requested that press release. That was a masterstroke in controlling the public sentiment.
I get what you're saying - but lets not act like it wouldnt be a massive story either way.
Oh, it absolutely would have been. But Eli's people controlled the timing, the message, the positioning, all of it. They had him out in front of the media as a sympathetic figure before Mara was even on a plane back to NJ. He correctly identified that McAdoo was operating from a position of weakness and desperation, and he struck first. All of it was perfectly orchestrated, from the refusal to go along with McAdoo's plan (which in a vacuum was insubordination on a very basic level), to the press release, to the follow-up conversation with Mara himself once JM got back.
I happen to think most fans were so quick to react to Eli being benched that they failed to see the puppet strings being pulled by Team Manning (or maybe they just didn't care because they were squarely in Eli's corner either way). It was a truly impressive display of understanding how to manipulate the media. Nobody in the NFL is better at that than the Mannings no matter how many times people insist on some anti-Eli media narrative.
This is amazing stuff. Maybe you could work in the part the reverse vampires played in the scheme.
Quote:
In comment 14382641 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14382629 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
I think people forget that Eli insisted on having the team put out a press release about him being benched. That was the shot across the bow, IMO. He knew he was at odds with McAdoo (and by extension, Reese), and he lit the match for the firestorm that ensued.
Eli (or his management team, most likely) knew exactly what they were doing when they requested that press release. That was a masterstroke in controlling the public sentiment.
I get what you're saying - but lets not act like it wouldnt be a massive story either way.
Oh, it absolutely would have been. But Eli's people controlled the timing, the message, the positioning, all of it. They had him out in front of the media as a sympathetic figure before Mara was even on a plane back to NJ. He correctly identified that McAdoo was operating from a position of weakness and desperation, and he struck first. All of it was perfectly orchestrated, from the refusal to go along with McAdoo's plan (which in a vacuum was insubordination on a very basic level), to the press release, to the follow-up conversation with Mara himself once JM got back.
I happen to think most fans were so quick to react to Eli being benched that they failed to see the puppet strings being pulled by Team Manning (or maybe they just didn't care because they were squarely in Eli's corner either way). It was a truly impressive display of understanding how to manipulate the media. Nobody in the NFL is better at that than the Mannings no matter how many times people insist on some anti-Eli media narrative.
This is amazing stuff. Maybe you could work in the part the reverse vampires played in the scheme.
Nah, I'll stick to what actually did happen, just like I wrote above.
Quote:
I think people forget that Eli insisted on having the team put out a press release about him being benched. That was the shot across the bow, IMO. He knew he was at odds with McAdoo (and by extension, Reese), and he lit the match for the firestorm that ensued.
Eli (or his management team, most likely) knew exactly what they were doing when they requested that press release. That was a masterstroke in controlling the public sentiment.
Eli clotheslined Reese and Mcadoo, but they did it to themselves largely with their chickenshit plan to bench Eli.
"So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth." Revelation 3:16
Speaking of revelation, are you ever going to let us know what your previous handle(s) was?
And I hope we would too if that was offered to us.
Quote:
And who knows, maybe Eli does still have it and it will be a fun and competitive season.
There are a number of posters adamant that this is not possible.
Thats the great thing about sports. Anything can happen.
If the predicted outcome always happened it would be pretty boring.
Quote:
If we called the Chiefs right now and offered them 6, Barkley, Engram and Hernandez for Mahomes they would laugh.
And I hope we would too if that was offered to us.
Huh? You wouldn't trade that for Mahomes? What game are you watching? Like seriously when you turn on a football game what do you think is going on there? Mahomes is worth three Barkleys, assuming Mahomes continues to play at or near his 2018 level. Barkley is a damn running back. You can get three journeymen at RB and have the best rushing attack in the league. I seriously don't understand the things you say. You seem like a fairly intelligent fellow.. Mahomes is damn near worth the entire Giants roster. If I could take nothing but Mahomes and build fresh or have the Giants roster I would take the former.
1. Nostalgia and sentimentality
or
2. Inability to assess QBs
It has to be one of those two, because paying Eli $23M to be the QB this season is not a logical position to take.
1. Nostalgia and sentimentality
or
2. Inability to assess QBs
It has to be one of those two, because paying Eli $23M to be the QB this season is not a logical position to take.
So true. Look a player, like Eli for instance, might put up stats that appear to be 3/4 as good as Rodgers or Wilson or Mahomes but in actuality his worth is not 3/4 of those guys. Eli is at or below replacement level. If you're playing at 3/4 the level of Rodgers you are worth less than half. Baseball gets this. Mike trout gets 35 mil a year and the guys who are 3/4 of Mike Trout get a lot less. The reason Mahomes is worth the entire Giants roster, and Rodgers and Wilson... is they guarantee you playoff visits and perennial contention for Super Bowls.. There are what 5 to 7 QBs like that, and everyone wants one. And when you have that guy you don't let him go. You're not ever getting peak Rodgers. You can't ever offer enough.
Do we wait for mathematical elimination like in 17?
When do you start giving QB2 larger share of practice with the 1s?
Do you go with a clean switch or keep Eli as the starter and only play the guy when games are out of hand?
Does the plan change if it's a rookie vs Rosen vs guy already in the roster?
Or does Eli start all 16?
Do we wait for mathematical elimination like in 17?
When do you start giving QB2 larger share of practice with the 1s?
Do you go with a clean switch or keep Eli as the starter and only play the guy when games are out of hand?
Does the plan change if it's a rookie vs Rosen vs guy already in the roster?
Or does Eli start all 16?
Most teams who are grooming an heir start the new QB when he is ready. Full stop, end of story. They make the transition immediately when they think the high draft pick heir gets it and plays at the same speed as the game. This is usually within eight games of the first season. KC may have been a slightly different case because they were already a super bowl contender with Alex Smith playing the best ball of his career. IMO, the Giants are not equivalent to KC. They are obviously not a super bowl contender, Therefore, if they acquire the heir this year, he should start as soon as he is deemed to be ready to start for the team.
Quote:
In comment 14382924 Thegratefulhead said:
Quote:
If we called the Chiefs right now and offered them 6, Barkley, Engram and Hernandez for Mahomes they would laugh.
And I hope we would too if that was offered to us.
Huh? You wouldn't trade that for Mahomes? What game are you watching? Like seriously when you turn on a football game what do you think is going on there? Mahomes is worth three Barkleys, assuming Mahomes continues to play at or near his 2018 level. Barkley is a damn running back. You can get three journeymen at RB and have the best rushing attack in the league. I seriously don't understand the things you say. You seem like a fairly intelligent fellow.. Mahomes is damn near worth the entire Giants roster. If I could take nothing but Mahomes and build fresh or have the Giants roster I would take the former.
Giving up Barkley engram hill and this years 6th overall pick for one player? Are you fucking insane. What the hell would Mahomes do with this roster? No run game? No defense.
Seriously this place has no clue how to manage a team.
And you still don’t contribute a single thread you participate in. Great job as always.
Quote:
What do you think should be the plan to get another QB playing time if the season goes south?
Do we wait for mathematical elimination like in 17?
When do you start giving QB2 larger share of practice with the 1s?
Do you go with a clean switch or keep Eli as the starter and only play the guy when games are out of hand?
Does the plan change if it's a rookie vs Rosen vs guy already in the roster?
Or does Eli start all 16?
Most teams who are grooming an heir start the new QB when he is ready. Full stop, end of story. They make the transition immediately when they think the high draft pick heir gets it and plays at the same speed as the game. This is usually within eight games of the first season. KC may have been a slightly different case because they were already a super bowl contender with Alex Smith playing the best ball of his career. IMO, the Giants are not equivalent to KC. They are obviously not a super bowl contender, Therefore, if they acquire the heir this year, he should start as soon as he is deemed to be ready to start for the team.
I think you overestimate how much work the back ups get in season.
Unless he starts getting work with the 1s, how can you tell when he is ready?
Quote:
In comment 14382939 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14382924 Thegratefulhead said:
Quote:
If we called the Chiefs right now and offered them 6, Barkley, Engram and Hernandez for Mahomes they would laugh.
And I hope we would too if that was offered to us.
Huh? You wouldn't trade that for Mahomes? What game are you watching? Like seriously when you turn on a football game what do you think is going on there? Mahomes is worth three Barkleys, assuming Mahomes continues to play at or near his 2018 level. Barkley is a damn running back. You can get three journeymen at RB and have the best rushing attack in the league. I seriously don't understand the things you say. You seem like a fairly intelligent fellow.. Mahomes is damn near worth the entire Giants roster. If I could take nothing but Mahomes and build fresh or have the Giants roster I would take the former.
Giving up Barkley engram hill and this years 6th overall pick for one player? Are you fucking insane. What the hell would Mahomes do with this roster? No run game? No defense.
Seriously this place has no clue how to manage a team.
This is a joke, right? You would never get Mahomes for that package. If it was offered to you, you accept immediately and go celebrate. The NFL is a passing league, now more than ever. The QB reigns now more than at any other time. The top QB is invaluable, just ask Bill Belichick. Mahomes is not just one player. He is a golden ticket. Put a team around him and you are a perennial contender. That's not Barkley, I hate to tell you this. It is a binary. Either you have one of those guys or you don't. Mahomes is one of those guys. It is stupid to even discuss what it would take to trade for him because you don't have enough. They would never trade him.
This is why Lauletta should have started every game after 1-7 last season. That was one of many Gettleman/Shurmur errors in year 1.
Quote:
the player most likely headed for decline, Wilson is overrated, but Eli is still good. Got it!
And you still don’t contribute a single thread you participate in. Great job as always.
Come on man. I know you and I don’t see eye to eye. But the Mahomes claim was outrageous and the opposite of the truth.
Quote:
In comment 14382981 ron mexico said:
Quote:
What do you think should be the plan to get another QB playing time if the season goes south?
Do we wait for mathematical elimination like in 17?
When do you start giving QB2 larger share of practice with the 1s?
Do you go with a clean switch or keep Eli as the starter and only play the guy when games are out of hand?
Does the plan change if it's a rookie vs Rosen vs guy already in the roster?
Or does Eli start all 16?
Most teams who are grooming an heir start the new QB when he is ready. Full stop, end of story. They make the transition immediately when they think the high draft pick heir gets it and plays at the same speed as the game. This is usually within eight games of the first season. KC may have been a slightly different case because they were already a super bowl contender with Alex Smith playing the best ball of his career. IMO, the Giants are not equivalent to KC. They are obviously not a super bowl contender, Therefore, if they acquire the heir this year, he should start as soon as he is deemed to be ready to start for the team.
I think you overestimate how much work the back ups get in season.
Unless he starts getting work with the 1s, how can you tell when he is ready?
When you draft or acquire a young heir one of your main jobs is to figure out when he is ready to step in. Somehow the four big guys all started by midseason last year: Mayfield, Darnold. Allen, Rosen. You invest a first rounder in a guy like that and the clock starts ticking. They supplant the veteran as soon as they are ready. Anything else is malpractice. The longer you put off starting him, the longer you are delaying the success of your program. For GMs and coaches, with their jobs on the line, they need to transition as quickly as they can.
Do we wait for mathematical elimination like in 17?
When do you start giving QB2 larger share of practice with the 1s?
Do you go with a clean switch or keep Eli as the starter and only play the guy when games are out of hand?
Does the plan change if it's a rookie vs Rosen vs guy already in the roster?
Or does Eli start all 16?
Well, for me, as soon as Eli has a bad half I go with the new QB... ;)
With Rosen, I would start him immediately. But I realize that's Fantasy Island thinking. But since he's had NFL experience, I have a much tighter leash on Eli if things start to go poorly - like 2 or 3 games in a row where he plays poorly and the team loses. Then he gets the hook and Rosen is in. So if Eli is spitting the bit after the first three weeks in September, adios.
Otherwise, probably when we are at 8 losses, or mathematically eliminated. Whichever comes first.
With a rookie, I'm probably waiting until half way through the season. In games where we are losing big in the 4th quarter, maybe bring him in for a few series to get his feet wet. But it's still probably 8 losses or mathematically out.
But even then, I would like to start the rookie right away. I think there is enough offensive infrastructure to ease him into more responsibility as the season progresses. Alas, Eli's presence stunts that deep-end-of-the-pool growth opportunity...
All Mahomes did was throw for an additional 1,000 yards and almost twice as many touchdowns as the Pro Bowl QB he replaced. If you're trying to dismiss what Mahomes accomplished simply because the guy who he replaced happened to be competent, you might be reaching a new low.
Keep after it though, I know you can beat your high score tomorrow.
He's the reigning MVP. I'm pretty sure he's getting love on all the boards. Someone should go over to the Chiefs board and see if they would do that deal suggested here. I'm pretty sure if you posted it on the Raiders/Chargers boards they would say the Chiefs should jump at the deal. I'm pretty sure they are not excited about the prospect of contending with Mahomes for the next 15 years.
Quote:
In comment 14382956 Ned In Atlanta said:
Quote:
the player most likely headed for decline, Wilson is overrated, but Eli is still good. Got it!
And you still don’t contribute a single thread you participate in. Great job as always.
Come on man. I know you and I don’t see eye to eye. But the Mahomes claim was outrageous and the opposite of the truth.
You know what decline means? It means he threw for over 5000 yards and 50 TDS.... the chances of him repeating that is going to be quite difficult. Hence why I think he declines.
Quote:
In comment 14382988 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14382956 Ned In Atlanta said:
Quote:
the player most likely headed for decline, Wilson is overrated, but Eli is still good. Got it!
And you still don’t contribute a single thread you participate in. Great job as always.
Come on man. I know you and I don’t see eye to eye. But the Mahomes claim was outrageous and the opposite of the truth.
You know what decline means? It means he threw for over 5000 yards and 50 TDS.... the chances of him repeating that is going to be quite difficult. Hence why I think he declines.
Oh I do totally agree he is likely to regress somewhat from that special season. But all the greats do after their signature seasons, but they put up a few more before they retire. But most importantly they don't ever have or rarely have, crap seasons. An average Peyton Manning season is amazing for most other qbs.
You put Mahomes on most rosters last year and he probably throws for 35-40 TDs.
The same sad Giants offense swapping Mahomes and Eli would have been one of the top ones in the league with Mahomes. Oline warts and all.
I honestly can't believe this has turned into a Mahomes is one the decline not as good as you think he is thread. The lengths people go to prop up Eli are truly amazing. They know no bounds.
You put Mahomes on most rosters last year and he probably throws for 35-40 TDs.
The same sad Giants offense swapping Mahomes and Eli would have been one of the top ones in the league with Mahomes. Oline warts and all.
I honestly can't believe this has turned into a Mahomes is one the decline not as good as you think he is thread. The lengths people go to prop up Eli are truly amazing. They know no bounds.
For some who claims to be smart. You can’t read.
No one is comparing Eli to Mahomes. Not one single poster. And the decline comment is in regards to his stats due to the fact of how great they were last year.
But other than that.... just a great job of analysis.
Quote:
In comment 14382988 dep026 said:
Quote:
In comment 14382956 Ned In Atlanta said:
Quote:
the player most likely headed for decline, Wilson is overrated, but Eli is still good. Got it!
And you still don’t contribute a single thread you participate in. Great job as always.
Come on man. I know you and I don’t see eye to eye. But the Mahomes claim was outrageous and the opposite of the truth.
You know what decline means? It means he threw for over 5000 yards and 50 TDS.... the chances of him repeating that is going to be quite difficult. Hence why I think he declines.
Saying his play declines or his stats decline?
Or are they the same thing?
This is why Lauletta should have started every game after 1-7 last season. That was one of many Gettleman/Shurmur errors in year 1.
I get the feeling that Eli likes to get as many practice reps as he can. It's how he is used to preparing. It's what makes him such a pro.
It's not so easy to start sitting up those reps.
Quote:
The same guy who had a pro bowl in the same offense pro bowler Alex Smith dif.
He's the reigning MVP. I'm pretty sure he's getting love on all the boards. Someone should go over to the Chiefs board and see if they would do that deal suggested here. I'm pretty sure if you posted it on the Raiders/Chargers boards they would say the Chiefs should jump at the deal. I'm pretty sure they are not excited about the prospect of contending with Mahomes for the next 15 years.
Very reminiscent of Trent Green and Kurt Warner.
Branch out and let us know...
As a fan I always want the team building towards a championship. That pursuit is a continuum sometimes, I accept that.
I hope it's a given to fans the QB has a disproportionately big impact on a team relative to other positions. It's the most important position.
A QB in my view has three phases in his career
; ascending, peaking, declining. The bounds are different based on myriad factors. Very often the peak is unimpressive, virtually never is the decline impressive.
Manning's peak was impressive. Is his decline? I'd say no, which makes him equal to every QB short of Elway, Favre, and Brady in the last 25 years.
So in his decline what value does Manning serve to the Giants? If the goal is to always be building toward a championship, where does Manning fit?
Yeah, probably not. I imagine LC fans are all like, "men, he's not so great. Smith was doing just as well."
I hate phones.
As a fan I always want the team building towards a championship. That pursuit is a continuum sometimes, I accept that.
I hope it's a given to fans the QB has a disproportionately big impact on a team relative to other positions. It's the most important position.
A QB in my view has three phases in his career
; ascending, peaking, declining. The bounds are different based on myriad factors. Very often the peak is unimpressive, virtually never is the decline impressive.
Manning's peak was impressive. Is his decline? I'd say no, which makes him equal to every QB short of Elway, Favre, and Brady in the last 25 years.
So in his decline what value does Manning serve to the Giants? If the goal is to always be building toward a championship, where does Manning fit?
You mention John Elway. Where did John Elway fit going into 1996, 1997? He was nearing the end and four seasons of .500 or sub .500 years and his numbers and performance was dropping off. But under a new coach, and revitalized running attack offense, he managed the game and led the team to two titles. We all have visions of that first Superbowl of him putting it all on the line and helicoptering into the endzone, but what made that so impressive, and "this one's for John", was that he was old and that was a flash of the old Elway.
What purpose did Kurt Warner serve in Arizona going into 2008 and 2009? He was washed up by all accounts and not capable of playing at a high level anymore, and hadn't really been since 2001 with the Rams (yeah, he started 5-4 with the Giants but his performance was as much a reason for his benching as Manning waiting in the wings).
By your definition of what a team is... "building towards a championship", then outside of 6-7 teams the rest of the entire NFL should be looking for a new QB, no? Where do most of the QB's in the NFL fit?
There are quite a few examples of QB's saddled with poor teams who aren't considered the only problem.
The NFL is fluid. I know it doesn't seem like it, but with a couple of right moves and a couple of good bounces, a team can go from a sub .500 team to fighting for a playoff spot pretty quickly.
Manning can be a placeholder, while we find the new QB, and hey, what if? What if the team gets a couple breaks next season, we're sitting at 5-4, or 6-4, and in the hunt. Things are clicking, team starts playing with a little confidence. That's where having an Eli Manning over a Ryan Fitzpatrick has value.
And that may not happen either, and we may go 5-11 again next year as many of you predict, and we'll be looking at the top 10 in the draft again. Okay, well there's no harm done if that happens either. Insert the new QB (or draft him at that time), and move on from Manning.
The real problem with this conversation is that those that support management's decision to hang with Eli also see the need to draft a new QB and have a plan for the future. They all to a man acknowledge that and want that. Conversely, those of you that don't want Manning on the team anymore in any shape or form can't, or refuse to, acknowledge that in some scenarios he can still provide value. That's the stalemate. You want Manning gone at all costs, even if it means we have a scrub at QB for a year. And as much as you beat the drum for logic and reason, that is the illogical, narrow minded, and unreasonable take.
On their backs collecting a ring as the Trent Dilfer of that team. I'm sure you're trying to make a point there, but I'm not sure what it is. That a team that's constructed incredibly efficiently can overcome having a washed-up Manning at QB?
Yes, the obstinate one here is clearly me. No question about it.
I guess you think if you say anything often enough it'll be true, whether it's about Eli, or about people failing to see your point. Can't wait for your inevitable chest-puff thread after Eli's first big game this season. That'll be a blast.
Quote:
you can't, or refuse to, see the point.
Yes, the obstinate one here is clearly me. No question about it.
I guess you think if you say anything often enough it'll be true, whether it's about Eli, or about people failing to see your point. Can't wait for your inevitable chest-puff thread after Eli's first big game this season. That'll be a blast.
Seems to me the ones that are trying to will something into existence are the ones starting two to three threads a day on this subject.
So what exactly am I trying to make true?
Always love to see the D give up 400+ yards and a late TD to overcome a late score by NYG only to hear that the game was lost on a 1st quarter INT. Those are much more illuminating.....
Quote:
Can't wait for your inevitable chest-puff thread after Eli's first big game this season. That'll be a blast.
Always love to see the D give up 400+ yards and a late TD to overcome a late score by NYG only to hear that the game was lost on a 1st quarter INT. Those are much more illuminating.....
I’m partial to Eli leading us from behind with multiple TDs in the 4th quarter only to fail to get a score with under a minute to go therefore showing he doesn’t have it anymore.
As a fan I always want the team building towards a championship. That pursuit is a continuum sometimes, I accept that.
I hope it's a given to fans the QB has a disproportionately big impact on a team relative to other positions. It's the most important position.
A QB in my view has three phases in his career
; ascending, peaking, declining. The bounds are different based on myriad factors. Very often the peak is unimpressive, virtually never is the decline impressive.
Manning's peak was impressive. Is his decline? I'd say no, which makes him equal to every QB short of Elway, Favre, and Brady in the last 25 years.
So in his decline what value does Manning serve to the Giants? If the goal is to always be building toward a championship, where does Manning fit?
Manning is keepin the most important position of the field stable and capable, while we build up the numerous areas in the team that we need to. That is what value he is adding, and its a critical part. You can't change everything and also QB, that would become a complete mess and actually hurt the process. The players would have no hope, becomes disgruntled, and the good ones leave. New free agents wouldn't want to come, and the rookie QB would be taking a pounding that could actually hurt his development. When the team has improved enough, hopefully after this season, plug in the future QB and deal with the growing pains under a rookie cheap contract. Ideally he could sit for a year to learn the system, gain the respect of the players, and minimize the growing pains.
So what exactly am I trying to make true?
Only one team in the NFC has lost more games than the Giants dating back to their last SB victory in 2011. Let's not pretend like this organization is infallible just because they happen to be making a decision you agree with.
Throwing Peyton's role on a stacked Broncos team out as some sort of guiding example absolutely comes across as an attempt to justify your opinion as anything other than the same sentimentality that this thread's premise is based upon.
Quote:
That's what I thought would happen, and what I think should happen.
So what exactly am I trying to make true?
Only one team in the NFC has lost more games than the Giants dating back to their last SB victory in 2011. Let's not pretend like this organization is infallible just because they happen to be making a decision you agree with.
Throwing Peyton's role on a stacked Broncos team out as some sort of guiding example absolutely comes across as an attempt to justify your opinion as anything other than the same sentimentality that this thread's premise is based upon.
It wasn't used as a guiding example. It was used as a response to a very specific question.
Why are you locked in on that one single example? There were other examples given.
Outside of Barkley, every player on the team is only getting faint praise.
That's what happens on bad teams where fingers are pointed in multiple directions. Name a player other than Barkley who gets or got a ton of praise? Collins? Nope. People soured on him. Beckham? Ha ha.
This isn't the point being debated anyway is it? There are basically a large group of posters who flat out believe Eli can't play anymore. That's always the point being kicked until mutilation.
Quote:
In comment 14383521 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
That's what I thought would happen, and what I think should happen.
So what exactly am I trying to make true?
Only one team in the NFC has lost more games than the Giants dating back to their last SB victory in 2011. Let's not pretend like this organization is infallible just because they happen to be making a decision you agree with.
Throwing Peyton's role on a stacked Broncos team out as some sort of guiding example absolutely comes across as an attempt to justify your opinion as anything other than the same sentimentality that this thread's premise is based upon.
It wasn't used as a guiding example. It was used as a response to a very specific question.
Why are you locked in on that one single example? There were other examples given.
Because that one stuck out as a wild example. And just like you were trying to avoid the onslaught of pushback for saying Eli is still capable of championship-level football, I may have been doing the same by avoiding saying that Eli has never been in Elway's league as a QB, even in their respective primes. But your Elway example is much more consistent with what we should be hoping for than your Peyton example. The more recent Broncos team won that SB in spite of Peyton, not because of him.
You do it even there. You don't say, "Eli is playing at a championship level". You say "is capable of playing at championship level".
And it's not just you and other posters, it's the team. They don't say, "Eli is still playing well", they say, "Eli can still play".
There seems to be an acknowledgement that he hasn't been getting the job done, even if the belief is that he still can.
I dislike him so much that I didn't even want to entertain that one.
Quote:
or backhanded comments, it's only because I'm measuring my words to avoid the verbal onslaught that would ensue if I said that I do, in fact, think Eli is still capable of playing at championship level. Because I know my opinion would be dismissed if I said that and I'm trying to have a "constructive" dialog about it.
You do it even there. You don't say, "Eli is playing at a championship level". You say "is capable of playing at championship level".
And it's not just you and other posters, it's the team. They don't say, "Eli is still playing well", they say, "Eli can still play".
There seems to be an acknowledgement that he hasn't been getting the job done, even if the belief is that he still can.
there's a lot of religion in it. "Eli can still play" are precisely the unassailable set of words that the viewpoint requires.
Which doesn't qualify it as 'wrong' out of hand, IMO. But for people to act like the opposite viewpoint is crazy or uninformed is what I find baffling.
To be fair, it started terribly, with Terp intentionally misstating someone else's post. Got it so bad that the OP came to the thread and corrected him.
But the agenda is strong.
Elway in ‘97 and ‘98 still had a great asset - his arm talent. That never went away. His only skill that eroded was his maneuverability. So it made sense to continue to ride with him.
Same with Favre. At least you knew he could still make every throw.
Eli’s physical skills are eroding. If you can’t see it, you’re either too stubborn or don’t understand the game. He can’t make every throw game after game. It’s just not there. And his movement is just brutally bad. So what’s his value? His mind? That’s been overrated since he arrived. He’s been a turnover machine with his “great decision” making.
Britt, Fat-Mara, dep et al are the part of the fan base Mara targets. The dreamers; those who have endless hope. They are delusional enough to think - “well, if Brady and Brees can do it, so can our 38 year old 2x champion...” This type of thinking is hindering this organization’s ability to think clearly and get to a brighter future.
And the Peyton/Denver example is almost as dumb. Indeed, Peyton was washed up. But that D was tremendous and controlled the game by creating great field position and turnovers. Manning was a passenger and needed to make a few plays per game, especially in the playoffs where Denver had home field.
Remind of the great D we have so Eli can manage the game, please.
bw is a Giants’ troll and has been for the 18+ years I know him.
😂😂
Yeah, he’s been calling him that for awhile now..
That's been mischaracterized, and mostly by my arch nemesis Fat-Mara.
bw is a Giants’ troll and has been for the 18+ years I know him.
I'm the biggest Giants fan on this board. And the most honest. ;)
Quote:
bw is a Giants’ troll and has been for the 18+ years I know him.
I'm the biggest Giants fan on this board. And the most honest. ;)
😂😂😂
Quote:
so there's that.
That's been mischaracterized, and mostly by my arch nemesis Fat-Mara.
I was picturing more like my Archie (since you dislike the name so much) vs. Jughead!!
Elway was a top-five QB in 1995 and 1996 before their eventually Superbowl runs in 97' and 98'. His team was also the Number 1 seed in the AFC in 96'! How is that situation comparable to Eli?!
In the stretch that Rivers missed the playoffs 7 of 8 years, the chargers had four winning seasons and one .500 season. They only actually had three losing seasons in this stretch. Plus Rivers played well throughout, throwing 33 touchdowns in their 2016 5-11 season. It's a lot easier to make the case that the team improvement is greater priority than replacing the QB.
Warner is probably the best example, except he hadn't been a full time starter for a while until was re-instated in 2007. He went 5-6 and played above-average - not great - which was enough to get him the job in 2008. Most similar to Eli but even he was playing better at the time.
Elway was a top-five QB in 1995 and 1996 before their eventually Superbowl runs in 97' and 98'. His team was also the Number 1 seed in the AFC in 96'! How is that situation comparable to Eli?!
In the stretch that Rivers missed the playoffs 7 of 8 years, the chargers had four winning seasons and one .500 season. They only actually had three losing seasons in this stretch. Plus Rivers played well throughout, throwing 33 touchdowns in their 2016 5-11 season. It's a lot easier to make the case that the team improvement is greater priority than replacing the QB.
Warner is probably the best example, except he hadn't been a full time starter for a while until was re-instated in 2007. He went 5-6 and played above-average - not great - which was enough to get him the job in 2008. Most similar to Eli but even he was playing better at the time.
More ESPN imagineering fake news. Warner qbr 3 years before Arizona, 67, 72, 86. Elway 60s and 70s during the prime of his career.
And derp, Rivers always generally had a better rating. Helps when you play with HoFers on offense, while Eli played with 0.
You tell us...
More ESPN imagineering fake news. Warner qbr 3 years before Arizona, 67, 72, 86. Elway 60s and 70s during the prime of his career.
And derp, Rivers always generally had a better rating. Helps when you play with HoFers on offense, while Eli played with 0.
Learn reading comprehension, then re-read what I wrote, then try replying again.
Yeah, it was a good season by Eli, at age 35, it was a reasonable position to try reloading for one last run behind him, much like the Chargers did with Rivers.
The situation is different then what is happening now in 2019, though I've actually become more ok with it and the idea of building the team and adding the QB.
I, however, strongly disagree with some of the things that jtgiants has intimated, namely that the team is trying to engage in short-term moves to win in 2019.
At ages 36 & 37 Elway was a combined 25-6 including his highest TD numbers of his career and a Super Bowl Victory.
At ages 36 & 37 Eli Manning was 8-23.
Elway and Peyton were both playing great football on fantastic teams at the age Eli Manning will be going into next season.
Can that be said said about Eli Manning? Is he playing fantastic football on a fantastic team?
And derp, Rivers always generally had a better rating. Helps when you play with HoFers on offense, while Eli played with 0.
I dunno. If you make a top-10 list of the receivers from both the Giants and Chargers since 2004, how many spots do you have to go before you hit a Charger? What Charger would rank ahead of Burress, Nicks, OBJ, and even Cruz?
Quote:
And derp, Rivers always generally had a better rating. Helps when you play with HoFers on offense, while Eli played with 0.
I dunno. If you make a top-10 list of the receivers from both the Giants and Chargers since 2004, how many spots do you have to go before you hit a Charger? What Charger would rank ahead of Burress, Nicks, OBJ, and even Cruz?
Keenan Allen is definitely in that group.
Vincent Jackson isn’t far behind.
Oh and there’s that whole Antonio Gates guy ;)
At ages 36 & 37 Elway was a combined 25-6 including his highest TD numbers of his career and a Super Bowl Victory.
At ages 36 & 37 Eli Manning was 8-23.
Elway and Peyton were both playing great football on fantastic teams at the age Eli Manning will be going into next season.
Can that be said said about Eli Manning? Is he playing fantastic football on a fantastic team?
Excellent summary. Says quite a bit.
Of course, expect the typical retorts - they had better Ds, better coaches, better drafting, better OLs, etc.
Just improve the Oline! Barkley just has to take the ball from him!
Quote:
At ages 36 & 37 Peyton Manning was a combined 26-6, including arguably the best season a QB has ever had and a Super Bowl appearance.
At ages 36 & 37 Elway was a combined 25-6 including his highest TD numbers of his career and a Super Bowl Victory.
At ages 36 & 37 Eli Manning was 8-23.
Elway and Peyton were both playing great football on fantastic teams at the age Eli Manning will be going into next season.
Can that be said said about Eli Manning? Is he playing fantastic football on a fantastic team?
Excellent summary. Says quite a bit.
Of course, expect the typical retorts - they had better Ds, better coaches, better drafting, better OLs, etc.
My opinion is and has always been the Giants are not close to championship-level, and that Eli Manning will not be viable when the roster catches up.
The cautionary tale with Peyton and Elway is they were dynamite at 36 & 37 on ascending teams. As their play declined, and it did, the surrounding teams could buoy them.
If the Giants won a ring with Manning at at age 38 or 39, that would be the most improbable championship in NFL history.
Oh absolutely -- Elway's final year wasn't in the same neighborhood as Peyton's.
I think history remembers Elway a little less kindly than warranted. He was very good in 96, 97 and banged up in 98.
There's no question TD was great, and a big part of that great stretch. But Elway wasn't a passenger.