But onpy as the 2nd pick. I think the arm strength thing is overblown. He jacked a couple that traveled 55 yards in the air during his pro day and while I realize that loft plays a role in that, there are plenty of players who cant up-down a ball. If he can get thru reads, can take a hit and continue to battle (a la Manning against the 49ers in '11), if he can make some plays with his legs (he's plenty fast), I can deal with him missing a few deep balls.
Joe Montana did not have a very strong arm. Cutcliffe says he throws it better than Peyton or Eli.
We can agree to disagree here. Reference Giantz_comeback post at 10:57 which jtGiants agrees with the assessment. That certainly doesn't sound like the priority is long term. That sounds a lot more like finding a solution that doesn't create controversy for the short term, which has been the MO the past few years.
There's countless commentary from NFL people about why they like jones. I really think it's funny. Non nfl people hate jones but I'm telling you people in the league really like him. He's going top 20 for sure
I’m not disagreeing with you that he’s going top 20. I think he undoubtedly will. All I’m saying is when I hear people talk about Murray, they discuss his all around game. Haskins it’s his arm talent. Lock - same thing - arm talent and ability to make plays outside the pocket. Jones: he learned from Cutcliffe.
And just because NFL people like him doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies. NFL people let Mahomes and Watson slip to 10 and 12, respectively, and they are studs. NFL people drafted Locker and Gabbert inside the top 10 and Ponder at 13 - in the same draft. Gabbert and Locker received much of the same praise that Lock does now: strong arms, mobile, can make plays outside the pocket.
Much like you trust your eyes with Eli, I trust mine with Jones and Lock. I form my own opinions, and I am super high on Murray and Haskins and down on Jones and Lock. NFL people talking Jones up won’t change my opinion of him.
There's countless commentary from NFL people about why they like jones. I really think it's funny. Non nfl people hate jones but I'm telling you people in the league really like him. He's going top 20 for sure
I’m not disagreeing with you that he’s going top 20. I think he undoubtedly will. All I’m saying is when I hear people talk about Murray, they discuss his all around game. Haskins it’s his arm talent. Lock - same thing - arm talent and ability to make plays outside the pocket. Jones: he learned from Cutcliffe.
And just because NFL people like him doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies. NFL people let Mahomes and Watson slip to 10 and 12, respectively, and they are studs. NFL people drafted Locker and Gabbert inside the top 10 and Ponder at 13 - in the same draft. Gabbert and Locker received much of the same praise that Lock does now: strong arms, mobile, can make plays outside the pocket.
Much like you trust your eyes with Eli, I trust mine with Jones and Lock. I form my own opinions, and I am super high on Murray and Haskins and down on Jones and Lock. NFL people talking Jones up won’t change my opinion of him.
The problem with your example is that the interest in Ponder, Locker and Gabbert was isolated to a few teams and they were all surprise picks. The interest in Jones is much more widespread.
AFC scout: "I think he has some upside although there are some things that are just ordinary about him."
NFC scout: "I think he has a good chance of being a bust. Just like every other Tedford-coached quarterback. Thing I struggle with him is he gets sacked a lot. He doesn't have great ability to change the release of the football. He's mechanically very rigid. Brett Favre can change his release point and find different windows. There will be more growing pains with Alex Smith but in the end he has a much better chance to be much better."
NFC scout: "The guys that Tedford has had, what have they developed into? They're too well-schooled. So mechanical. So robotic. I don't know if they become good pro players. I think Rodgers is in that same mold."
AFC scout: "I don't like him. He's a clone of Harrington and Boller. They all throw the same way. What have those guys done? Nothing. If you take him in the second round, fine. Heady guy. They do a marvelous job of coaching quarterbacks there. I don't think he's as good as the top quarterbacks coming out last year."
AFC scout: "I don't think he's in the class of the quarterbacks that came out last year. Strong arm. Pretty good athlete. Still has some holes in his game."
Bill Polian, Indianapolis: "I see a guy who has good arm strength. I see some athletic ability. I see a guy who was pretty good with a good team. I see a guy who's in a pretty efficient offense. Am I certain that he's going to come in and lead my team to the Promised Land? I can't say that. I'm not even sure I can say that about Alex Smith."
AFC scout: "He's a system quarterback. 3-, 5-, 7-step guy. Can't create on his own. Panics under pressure. Gets flustered easy. I don't think there's a quarterback in the draft worthy of a first-round pick. I'm dead serious. None of them are worth it."
Rich Snead, Tennessee: "I like him. I just don't know if he's maxed out. He's more accurate than (Kyle) Boller but probably not as athletic. He's a better player than Akili Smith. He's more athletic than (Trent) Dilfer was. He's a little more mobile than Joey Harrington. He had to go to a JC because no one would recruit him because they said he was too small. He's been busting his (expletive) his whole life to get to this point. I just don't know how much more he has to give."
Does some of that sound familiar? Now before anyone flames away I am not suggesting that Daniel Jones is the next Rodgers I just see a lot of the same comments.
as is being said, then they should take them at 6. Good chance the blue chip on D are gone by that point anyway unless someone deals up for a QB.
If they don't like Lock or Jones enough to take at 6, they should prepare to make a legitimate run at one of the QBs next year i.e. - moving '19 draft assets to '20. Dealing 37 for an extra 1 next year would be an obvious move. All this insider talk, and neither of these options seem to be on the table.
Those who can't understand why some fans are frustrated, this is why. The appearance is of a short sighted strategy out of nostalgia where the likelihood of another ring in the next 1-2 years is highly unlikely.
I don't think you can Plan on trading for 2020 picks. If the situation arises you can take advantage of it but no team is going to trade their 2020 1 for our #2 today
look at the hiring of Gettleman. Say what you want about if this was a good or bad decision but what it was was clearly emphasizing a quick or short term fix.
When hiring him you had to think you will be lucky to get 5 years out of this guy. How many teams hire a GM with that kind of attitude?
Fair enough. In truth I totally disagree. I don't like Haskins at all. I also think Murray will never last in the league. I do like lock and jones better. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
So you assume the Giants view his physical skills exactly as you do so therefor they are just "intrigued" enough with his Manning connection to pull the trigger regardless of the fact that both you and the Giants view him in lockstep regarding his inferior physical QB traits? Are you a scout for the Giants?
I don't think that. My opinion about Jones's physical attributes are mine and mine alone. I am connecting the dots why else the Giants may like Jones - Eli, Duke, Cutcliffe, etc.
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Could he be brilliant enough to be feeding certain asshats with information intended to deflect his interest in Haskins at #6?
It’s common knowledge that some media regularly read Erics bbi and knowing how many media just regurgitate what they hear or read from “sources “.
It just seems weird that Haskins lack of foot speed or agility or whatever you want to call it would cause him to slide. Teams were impressed with his football IQ. Kid has a spotless background, great arm, leadership ability etc etc..... I’m not buying this slide for a minute
This. FWIW I also don't buy the Haskins "slide" and Giants "lack of interest." All the attention they've paid to him, including his visit this week, after they have dropped him down their list? Oh and Gil Brandt backed it up with his opinion re Jones vs. Haskins? Since when is Gil Brandt related to the Giants thought process?
FWIW McShay isn't buying it either, not 100%. He now thinks Haskins has slid on the Giants' draft board, but still rates him as the best QB in his class: most accurate passer, plus arm strength, tremendous improvement during only 1 year as a starter, team leader, played his best ball in the biggest games vs top defenses at the end of the the year, great kid, kills the white board stuff.
Haskins main issue, some footwork stuff, is exactly the kind of thing Shurmur and his staff should refine and improve. How about our asshats' are being fed disinfo re Jones or "defense only" at 6 (jtgiants or JonC)?
Unless there is fear re Haskins' conditioning that he will turn out to be another JaMarcus Russel... but his personality and chalkboard knowledge are nothing like Russel's who was famous for his total disdain for play diagram study or understanding.
If fact right off the bat that was Russel's biggest red flag IIRC. It's one of the Haskins' strong suits.
IMO we are witnessing a masterful job by DG and the FO disseminating disinformation. I am linking McShay's most recent interview re Haskins'. He acknowledges Haskins' slide on the Giants' board relative to some DL players (Oliver, Wilkins, Sweat) but still thinks Haskins is going to be a top 10 pick, and that some team will trade up to get him.
Of course McShay (and I) could be totally wrong. There will be one or another seductive D front 7 player sitting at 6, for sure.
But I still think the Giants want Haskins at 6; they just don't want anyone to trade up above them to get him first. McShay on Haskins, Giants - ( New Window )
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
Its amazing the lengths some people will go to keep supporting Â
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
However, nothing at all is pointing to the Giants liking him. Everything, from the local media to BBI insiders with proven track records, are saying the same thing...defense at 6 and Lock/Jones with a pick involving 17 or more defense. If this is a carefully orchestrated smoke screen, then it will be the first one I've seen following the Giants drafts in the internet era.
RE: RE: You guys can choose to believe what you will Â
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
All that matters is who they expect at #6. I haven't heard Haskins name at all, which usually a good barometer of interest. Smokescreens are something this franchise hasn't been good at, if he was a prime target it would be out there in the media.
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
somebody's grabbing Haskins by pick 15, I think a bit higher. A new CBS mock has Washington jumping the giants to get him at 5. Just a week ago teams were described as over "the moon for him". Now nobody wants him? I don't buy it.
RE: RE: You guys can choose to believe what you will Â
QB and also Gettleman has said as much as he wouldn't mind trading up for a QB. To this I would say we can reach the following conclusions:
1) They don't see a QB worthwhile of the 6 pick. We can't say whether or not Murray would be that or they are just assuming he's gone but either way they don't really seem to be looking for a QB @ 6
2) It seems likely that at least one if not more of Lock, Jones, Haskins (I think perhaps even in that order) will be a pick they are happy to make at 17
3) At least one of those 3 mentioned above they would be willing to trade up from 17 at the right price
4) Very possible they are willing to sit tight and think that they can get another impact player if 4 QBs are drafted before 17 (Bush or Dexter Lawrence would be my guesses for guys they would be happy to take at 17)
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Mayfield stock dropped when he was sacked by that cop so easily. Where was the speed and elusiveness. He was not clean at all.
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
Haskins possibly in the teens is my opinion. He could go to the Bengals, but I won't surprised if he's there even at #17.
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Mayfield stock dropped when he was sacked by that cop so easily. Where was the speed and elusiveness. He was not clean at all.
Sorry in the eyes of fans and the media. No one thought with his question marks someone would risk pick #1 on him. Browns were willing to roll the dice and it seems to be paying off.
Last week he said he read heavily into the fact that Chris Mara left the owners' meetings to attend the Duke workout.
Piecing together what we've been hearing, a defensive player at #6 and a trade up in front of Miami at #13 to get Jones seems like a strong possibility. Remember also that Miami is coached by a Belichick disciple...they seem unlikely to trade up. And in any event, the rumor is they are targeting Tua next year.
Lots of ties to Jones:
- Gettleman mentioning "KC Model"
- Cutcliff connection
- Strong Giants contingent at Duke workout
- Kiper has Jones as top QB; Kiper's mentor is Ernie Accorsi
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
All that matters is who they expect at #6. I haven't heard Haskins name at all, which usually a good barometer of interest. Smokescreens are something this franchise hasn't been good at, if he was a prime target it would be out there in the media.
If your contact(JT answer this as well please) were to tell you, "The Giants are very interested in player XXXX and the Giants are afraid someone will jump in front of them to nab player XXXX" would you leak that the Giants are interested in Player XXXX or help the Giants with disinformation on player XXXX?
RE: I think they've been pretty clear that they aren't going to force Â
QB and also Gettleman has said as much as he wouldn't mind trading up for a QB. To this I would say we can reach the following conclusions:
1) They don't see a QB worthwhile of the 6 pick. We can't say whether or not Murray would be that or they are just assuming he's gone but either way they don't really seem to be looking for a QB @ 6
2) It seems likely that at least one if not more of Lock, Jones, Haskins (I think perhaps even in that order) will be a pick they are happy to make at 17
3) At least one of those 3 mentioned above they would be willing to trade up from 17 at the right price
4) Very possible they are willing to sit tight and think that they can get another impact player if 4 QBs are drafted before 17 (Bush or Dexter Lawrence would be my guesses for guys they would be happy to take at 17)
if this is true it is a weird way to approach the qb position. Letting a qb fall to you, is simply bizarre. in the modern nfl you have to make a decision about who you want and go after him. You are suggesting they are just meh on the position and will take whatever scraps are left over. if true i continue to worry that this front office does not know how to valuate the most important position in the game.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
It was the same thing with Rosen last year. The Giants even went out to dinner with Rosen. I remember both JonC and hitdog mentioning how weird it was that they hadn't heard anything about Rosen from their sources.
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
That will probably be on the defensive side of the ball. He wants a difference maker with that pick on defense. The rest of the draft will play out the same way with BPAs till the 5th round. You can create a BPA by trading up or down as well.
Which is why the Cardinals-Murray connection is mind-boggling... and pretty stupid.
And as stupid and mind-boggling as it is, funny the media isn't killing them for it.
Joe Montana did not have a very strong arm. Cutcliffe says he throws it better than Peyton or Eli.
Id be cool with D at 6 and moving up 17.
I’m not disagreeing with you that he’s going top 20. I think he undoubtedly will. All I’m saying is when I hear people talk about Murray, they discuss his all around game. Haskins it’s his arm talent. Lock - same thing - arm talent and ability to make plays outside the pocket. Jones: he learned from Cutcliffe.
And just because NFL people like him doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies. NFL people let Mahomes and Watson slip to 10 and 12, respectively, and they are studs. NFL people drafted Locker and Gabbert inside the top 10 and Ponder at 13 - in the same draft. Gabbert and Locker received much of the same praise that Lock does now: strong arms, mobile, can make plays outside the pocket.
Much like you trust your eyes with Eli, I trust mine with Jones and Lock. I form my own opinions, and I am super high on Murray and Haskins and down on Jones and Lock. NFL people talking Jones up won’t change my opinion of him.
Quote:
There's countless commentary from NFL people about why they like jones. I really think it's funny. Non nfl people hate jones but I'm telling you people in the league really like him. He's going top 20 for sure
I’m not disagreeing with you that he’s going top 20. I think he undoubtedly will. All I’m saying is when I hear people talk about Murray, they discuss his all around game. Haskins it’s his arm talent. Lock - same thing - arm talent and ability to make plays outside the pocket. Jones: he learned from Cutcliffe.
And just because NFL people like him doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies. NFL people let Mahomes and Watson slip to 10 and 12, respectively, and they are studs. NFL people drafted Locker and Gabbert inside the top 10 and Ponder at 13 - in the same draft. Gabbert and Locker received much of the same praise that Lock does now: strong arms, mobile, can make plays outside the pocket.
Much like you trust your eyes with Eli, I trust mine with Jones and Lock. I form my own opinions, and I am super high on Murray and Haskins and down on Jones and Lock. NFL people talking Jones up won’t change my opinion of him.
The problem with your example is that the interest in Ponder, Locker and Gabbert was isolated to a few teams and they were all surprise picks. The interest in Jones is much more widespread.
NFC scout: "I think he has a good chance of being a bust. Just like every other Tedford-coached quarterback. Thing I struggle with him is he gets sacked a lot. He doesn't have great ability to change the release of the football. He's mechanically very rigid. Brett Favre can change his release point and find different windows. There will be more growing pains with Alex Smith but in the end he has a much better chance to be much better."
NFC scout: "The guys that Tedford has had, what have they developed into? They're too well-schooled. So mechanical. So robotic. I don't know if they become good pro players. I think Rodgers is in that same mold."
AFC scout: "I don't like him. He's a clone of Harrington and Boller. They all throw the same way. What have those guys done? Nothing. If you take him in the second round, fine. Heady guy. They do a marvelous job of coaching quarterbacks there. I don't think he's as good as the top quarterbacks coming out last year."
AFC scout: "I don't think he's in the class of the quarterbacks that came out last year. Strong arm. Pretty good athlete. Still has some holes in his game."
Bill Polian, Indianapolis: "I see a guy who has good arm strength. I see some athletic ability. I see a guy who was pretty good with a good team. I see a guy who's in a pretty efficient offense. Am I certain that he's going to come in and lead my team to the Promised Land? I can't say that. I'm not even sure I can say that about Alex Smith."
AFC scout: "He's a system quarterback. 3-, 5-, 7-step guy. Can't create on his own. Panics under pressure. Gets flustered easy. I don't think there's a quarterback in the draft worthy of a first-round pick. I'm dead serious. None of them are worth it."
Rich Snead, Tennessee: "I like him. I just don't know if he's maxed out. He's more accurate than (Kyle) Boller but probably not as athletic. He's a better player than Akili Smith. He's more athletic than (Trent) Dilfer was. He's a little more mobile than Joey Harrington. He had to go to a JC because no one would recruit him because they said he was too small. He's been busting his (expletive) his whole life to get to this point. I just don't know how much more he has to give."
Does some of that sound familiar? Now before anyone flames away I am not suggesting that Daniel Jones is the next Rodgers I just see a lot of the same comments.
Link - ( New Window )
If they don't like Lock or Jones enough to take at 6, they should prepare to make a legitimate run at one of the QBs next year i.e. - moving '19 draft assets to '20. Dealing 37 for an extra 1 next year would be an obvious move. All this insider talk, and neither of these options seem to be on the table.
Those who can't understand why some fans are frustrated, this is why. The appearance is of a short sighted strategy out of nostalgia where the likelihood of another ring in the next 1-2 years is highly unlikely.
I don't think you can Plan on trading for 2020 picks. If the situation arises you can take advantage of it but no team is going to trade their 2020 1 for our #2 today
When hiring him you had to think you will be lucky to get 5 years out of this guy. How many teams hire a GM with that kind of attitude?
I def thought Ponder was.
Quote:
The fact the Giants are intrigued with Jones because of those peripheral items - like attending the Manning’s camp - is very disconcerting.
If Jones is supposedly liked by many teams, are they all fixated on Jones attending the Manning's camp?
You continue to just fabricate shit out of thin air.
Uh, that's not my narrative. I've heard that from either Kiper or McShay. And I think one of this "insiders" here mentioned that it as a positive.
But your naivete to think those intangibles aren't possibly important to Jints Central is a bit laughable. I
You do realize most of these guys attend the Manning passing academy right?
From just this draft class Lock, Kyle Shurmur, McSorley, Ryan Finley, Tyree Jackson, Stidham, Minshew, Easton Stick & more attended the event.
I do. But, to clean up my point, how many of those guys have worked separately with the Mannings at Duke with Cutcliffe?
So you assume the Giants view his physical skills exactly as you do so therefor they are just "intrigued" enough with his Manning connection to pull the trigger regardless of the fact that both you and the Giants view him in lockstep regarding his inferior physical QB traits? Are you a scout for the Giants?
I don't think that. My opinion about Jones's physical attributes are mine and mine alone. I am connecting the dots why else the Giants may like Jones - Eli, Duke, Cutcliffe, etc.
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
It’s common knowledge that some media regularly read Erics bbi and knowing how many media just regurgitate what they hear or read from “sources “.
It just seems weird that Haskins lack of foot speed or agility or whatever you want to call it would cause him to slide. Teams were impressed with his football IQ. Kid has a spotless background, great arm, leadership ability etc etc..... I’m not buying this slide for a minute
This. FWIW I also don't buy the Haskins "slide" and Giants "lack of interest." All the attention they've paid to him, including his visit this week, after they have dropped him down their list? Oh and Gil Brandt backed it up with his opinion re Jones vs. Haskins? Since when is Gil Brandt related to the Giants thought process?
FWIW McShay isn't buying it either, not 100%. He now thinks Haskins has slid on the Giants' draft board, but still rates him as the best QB in his class: most accurate passer, plus arm strength, tremendous improvement during only 1 year as a starter, team leader, played his best ball in the biggest games vs top defenses at the end of the the year, great kid, kills the white board stuff.
Haskins main issue, some footwork stuff, is exactly the kind of thing Shurmur and his staff should refine and improve. How about our asshats' are being fed disinfo re Jones or "defense only" at 6 (jtgiants or JonC)?
Unless there is fear re Haskins' conditioning that he will turn out to be another JaMarcus Russel... but his personality and chalkboard knowledge are nothing like Russel's who was famous for his total disdain for play diagram study or understanding.
If fact right off the bat that was Russel's biggest red flag IIRC. It's one of the Haskins' strong suits.
IMO we are witnessing a masterful job by DG and the FO disseminating disinformation. I am linking McShay's most recent interview re Haskins'. He acknowledges Haskins' slide on the Giants' board relative to some DL players (Oliver, Wilkins, Sweat) but still thinks Haskins is going to be a top 10 pick, and that some team will trade up to get him.
Of course McShay (and I) could be totally wrong. There will be one or another seductive D front 7 player sitting at 6, for sure.
But I still think the Giants want Haskins at 6; they just don't want anyone to trade up above them to get him first.
McShay on Haskins, Giants - ( New Window )
is it your opinion that the Giants are out on Rosen?
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
Quote:
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
All that matters is who they expect at #6. I haven't heard Haskins name at all, which usually a good barometer of interest. Smokescreens are something this franchise hasn't been good at, if he was a prime target it would be out there in the media.
Quote:
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
somebody's grabbing Haskins by pick 15, I think a bit higher. A new CBS mock has Washington jumping the giants to get him at 5. Just a week ago teams were described as over "the moon for him". Now nobody wants him? I don't buy it.
Quote:
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
is it your opinion that the Giants are out on Rosen?
I've heard nothing new indicating interest in Rosen.
?? at #17 (depends on how the draft goes)
- could be a QB like Lock or Jones, another D player, or OT
I think they'd like Lock or Jones, but they don't seem married to it. If the draft is falling a certain way, we may see a trade up or down with #17
Should be interesting
1) They don't see a QB worthwhile of the 6 pick. We can't say whether or not Murray would be that or they are just assuming he's gone but either way they don't really seem to be looking for a QB @ 6
2) It seems likely that at least one if not more of Lock, Jones, Haskins (I think perhaps even in that order) will be a pick they are happy to make at 17
3) At least one of those 3 mentioned above they would be willing to trade up from 17 at the right price
4) Very possible they are willing to sit tight and think that they can get another impact player if 4 QBs are drafted before 17 (Bush or Dexter Lawrence would be my guesses for guys they would be happy to take at 17)
Quote:
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Mayfield stock dropped when he was sacked by that cop so easily. Where was the speed and elusiveness. He was not clean at all.
Quote:
a sneaking suspicion the Giants are going to be in on Rosen and go defense at #6 and #17.
This too is a likely scenario IMO, and another one that contradicts jtgiants consistent info.
JT - no personal issue with you and I like others appreciate your info here. But I can't adjust the big picture and what I see with my own eyes to fit some of the info you've been fed. Same with JonC's stance about Haskins sliding to the teens. No way the Bengals don't grab him at 11 if he's still available.
Just MHO.
Haskins possibly in the teens is my opinion. He could go to the Bengals, but I won't surprised if he's there even at #17.
Quote:
In comment 14389870 djm said:
Quote:
The vocal majority here didn’t take mayfield seriously until the browns did.
Wake up people.
I don't think this is true. Mayfield had off the field issues that were very concerning. And his size was a concern. He wasn't the cleanest prospect...
Mayfield stock dropped when he was sacked by that cop so easily. Where was the speed and elusiveness. He was not clean at all.
Sorry in the eyes of fans and the media. No one thought with his question marks someone would risk pick #1 on him. Browns were willing to roll the dice and it seems to be paying off.
Piecing together what we've been hearing, a defensive player at #6 and a trade up in front of Miami at #13 to get Jones seems like a strong possibility. Remember also that Miami is coached by a Belichick disciple...they seem unlikely to trade up. And in any event, the rumor is they are targeting Tua next year.
Lots of ties to Jones:
- Gettleman mentioning "KC Model"
- Cutcliff connection
- Strong Giants contingent at Duke workout
- Kiper has Jones as top QB; Kiper's mentor is Ernie Accorsi
Quote:
In comment 14390241 JonC said:
Quote:
This front office hasn't been good at disguising intentions.
Saying that then wouldn't you be saying they love Haskins. They have spent more time on him than any other QB in this draft. I think the reason you don't hear about Haskins is because they are going Def at 6 no matter what and don't think he will be there to take at 17. That is my opinion though.
All that matters is who they expect at #6. I haven't heard Haskins name at all, which usually a good barometer of interest. Smokescreens are something this franchise hasn't been good at, if he was a prime target it would be out there in the media.
1) They don't see a QB worthwhile of the 6 pick. We can't say whether or not Murray would be that or they are just assuming he's gone but either way they don't really seem to be looking for a QB @ 6
2) It seems likely that at least one if not more of Lock, Jones, Haskins (I think perhaps even in that order) will be a pick they are happy to make at 17
3) At least one of those 3 mentioned above they would be willing to trade up from 17 at the right price
4) Very possible they are willing to sit tight and think that they can get another impact player if 4 QBs are drafted before 17 (Bush or Dexter Lawrence would be my guesses for guys they would be happy to take at 17)
if this is true it is a weird way to approach the qb position. Letting a qb fall to you, is simply bizarre. in the modern nfl you have to make a decision about who you want and go after him. You are suggesting they are just meh on the position and will take whatever scraps are left over. if true i continue to worry that this front office does not know how to valuate the most important position in the game.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
Now I have my wet dream scenario that someone jumps ahead of them to take Jones too.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
Quote:
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Quote:
In comment 14390315 BigBlueCane said:
Quote:
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
Quote:
In comment 14390389 Amtoft said:
Quote:
In comment 14390315 BigBlueCane said:
Quote:
I believe the Giants historically send a lot of people out to players they have a lot of question marks about.
I think it was when they drafted Kenny Philips (or another player), Reese said they didn't send anyone b/c they didn't have any questions about him.
The fact that they sent the house to investigate him and are continuing to investigate him as much as they are, could also be viewed as them having a lot more question marks about him.
I mean I guess so. Seems like a lot of time and energy spent on a player though that they are reported here as having zero interest in. Just doesn't add up to me.
They also spent a lot of time with Daniel Jones and Kyler Murray this year and Josh Rosen, Aaron Donald, and Josh Allen last year.
Exactly because they had interest in them. Doesn't mean after they have spent as much time as they have on him to say they have zero interest doesn't add up for me. Doesn't mean they like him better than Daniel Jones or Lock or Murray for example. However to say zero interest with all we have done... Don't be shocked if he is the pick and don't be shocked if he isn't.
It was the same thing with Rosen last year. The Giants even went out to dinner with Rosen. I remember both JonC and hitdog mentioning how weird it was that they hadn't heard anything about Rosen from their sources.
Jon, By this statement I am going to assume that we want a Pass Rusher at 6 and a QB at 17 or a slight trade up ( Jones being the target )?
Sound about right?