He was an inconsequential blip on the radar that affected nothing.
Why do some of you keep harping on that? Do you know how many aging veterans are signed every year in the NFL as depth and don't make much impract?
Dorsey Levens was impressive against the Eagles (some of you will get that reference).
Ease up on the coffee.
Yeah, that was a bit harsh.
But it's getting annoying with these inconsequential things constantly being used to drive some narrative that Gettleman stinks. He did a lot more good than bad this/last season.
OT, but congrats on the Canes, on to Game 7. Ovechkin was spewing some foul Russian s..t--very translatable to English, LOL--after Caps' tying goal was waved off. The booth had no clue for about ten minutes as to why other than suspecting that the refs lost sight of the puck, only to have that explanation changed to goalie interference, on #8, the way I heard it.
And, damn, isn't William a magician with his stick? First, the high stick (over his shoulder) to bring the puck down and then to flick it over Holtby, rightly disallowed, and then the deflection to go up 4-2. Teams feed off him in the playoffs.
OT, but congrats on the Canes, on to Game 7. Ovechkin was spewing some foul Russian s..t--very translatable to English, LOL--after Caps' tying goal was waved off. The booth had no clue for about ten minutes as to why other than suspecting that the refs lost sight of the puck, only to have that explanation changed to goalie interference, on #8, the way I heard it.
And, damn, isn't William a magician with his stick? First, the high stick (over his shoulder) to bring the puck down and then to flick it over Holtby, rightly disallowed, and then the deflection to go up 4-2. Teams feed off him in the playoffs.
Thanks! Hopefully, we can pull off one more upset.
, but at the time I agreed with the idea of bringing in a veteran RB to stabilize the position and possibly mentor Barkley if the Giants were fortunate enough to draft him. It just happened that Stewart had little left in the tank.
, but at the time I agreed with the idea of bringing in a veteran RB to stabilize the position and possibly mentor Barkley if the Giants were fortunate enough to draft him. It just happened that Stewart had little left in the tank.
And he got hurt before the line stabilized itself at the bye.
, but at the time I agreed with the idea of bringing in a veteran RB to stabilize the position and possibly mentor Barkley if the Giants were fortunate enough to draft him. It just happened that Stewart had little left in the tank.
And he got hurt before the line stabilized itself at the bye.
He hadn’t averaged over 3.8 ypc since 2015. Not sure a stabilized line would have done much.
He only played 3 games before getting put on IR.... Â
But why wouldn’t the previous years have an impact on the signing? Seeing his previous years production and then saying he hasn’t lost a step is why Gettleman still gets shit over it.
You guys make to much out of little comments that people make. Â
for several years. DG was pretty defiant when he signed him and then he pretty much showed that he was in fact cooked (aside: when is DG not defiant?).
I get that he is a real quality individual and teammate and was also here to help with the dysfunction. But at the end of the day, he was a total zero of a signing.
Here's what Jim Fassel said when he signed Dorsey Levens Â
"What Dorsey Levens brings to us is true professionalism," Giants coach Jim Fassel said. "He is an experienced pro who knows what it takes to win. I like his leadership ability, and that is the thing I look for in any free agent that we bring in here."
The Stewart signing was in the same vein, except Stewart got hurt while Levens played 11 games for us. Both were cut after one season, even though they both signed multi-year deals.
I don't remember any hand wringing over the Levens signing as a reason to fire Accorsi or Fassel.
paying him $4M guaranteed when he was pretty clearly washed up and there was zero indications anybody else would pay him anything close to that would make a reasonable person question the competence of our GM.
paying him $4M guaranteed when he was pretty clearly washed up and there was zero indications anybody else would pay him anything close to that would make a reasonable person question the competence of our GM.
exactly. it's the money that made this a terrible signing. if he signed him for vet minimum - which is what he would've gotten anywhere else - nobody would care. DG's the one who hyped him up.
RE: RE: RE: Good god enough with this Jonothan Stewart crap. Â
He was an inconsequential blip on the radar that affected nothing.
Why do some of you keep harping on that? Do you know how many aging veterans are signed every year in the NFL as depth and don't make much impract?
Dorsey Levens was impressive against the Eagles (some of you will get that reference).
Ease up on the coffee.
Yeah, that was a bit harsh.
But it's getting annoying with these inconsequential things constantly being used to drive some narrative that Gettleman stinks. He did a lot more good than bad this/last season.
I don't think it's entirely about the signing itself - I agree with you that a lot of aging veterans get signed to rosters all the time, and they're basically inconsequential.
Where I think some take issue with Gettleman is how fiercely proud he was about the signing, and how wrong he wound up being about it. Nobody forced him to even mention Stewart when he said that Stewart hadn't lost anything in ten years - he volunteered that at a press conference about Barkley. And he was saying it in the context of not believing in positional value. If the crux of his argument was reliant on Jonathan Stewart's ability to ward off the physical decline that RBs tend to experience earlier than other positions, then there's a real question that still remains.
So the question is, do we think that DG has changed his view at all on positional value and physical decline? Or, if you believe it was much ado about nothing all along, do we think that DG just likes to talk for the sake of talking when he's within earshot of a microphone and it was just an off-the-cuff response about something that he doesn't place any value in?
People with an agenda will milk this Gettleman gaffe as long as they Â
It was never the signing or the intent of the signing.
It was the general wisdom of the cost vs. the value. At 3.5M Stewart was getting paid like a bottom tier starter.
If he was here for his presence, many of us would just have preferred a vet minimum salary. That's a sound criticism.
For reference Bethea got about the same amount of money as an older, quality character guy, and he's actually still productive and pegged to start. No one is complaining about that one.
The signing itself wasn't a mistake, the issue is we were outbidding Â
Against gettleman would have to keep mentioning Stewart. He also paid Patrick Omameh about 10m dollars to stink and not even survive a full season. Stewart is small potatoes.
It's not just contract. It's the evaluation to think he should have gotten a contract.
GD....I think DG just likes to hear himself talk. Â
Stewart was effective in short yardage his last two years as Panther, but that is it. Is that worth 3.5 million? I feel like DG really wanted his presence for Saquon and figured he'd have a short yardage back as well.
, but at the time I agreed with the idea of bringing in a veteran RB to stabilize the position and possibly mentor Barkley if the Giants were fortunate enough to draft him. It just happened that Stewart had little left in the tank.
And he got hurt before the line stabilized itself at the bye.
He hadn’t averaged over 3.8 ypc since 2015. Not sure a stabilized line would have done much.
I don't believe I said anything about the OL, much less anything about stabilizing it. Stewart was brought in to mentor a young backfield and bring some stability to it.
You want to praise Gettleman for his good moves you need to be honest and acknowledge the poor ones.
It has pretty much been universally said that the Stewart signing was a poor move.
Not a crippling one like some want to harp on. That's the difference.
Agree, however I have said that Stewart was brought in here to add some veteran leadership more so than to be a featured running back. Just my opinion anyway. I think BBI was reading the wrong tea leaves with that signing.
You want to praise Gettleman for his good moves you need to be honest and acknowledge the poor ones.
It has pretty much been universally said that the Stewart signing was a poor move.
Not a crippling one like some want to harp on. That's the difference.
no one said it was crippling....stop making things up
People are more concerned with his judgment and blind spot for guys he lines than the $4 mil
If it was his judgement that you and others had, then I disagree. I was not moved by his signing, but I understood, undoing the McAdoo culture, such as it was, was paramount to DG, imo. A guy like Stewart was simply a step to improve said culture as he saw first hand, how well Stewart blended in with the culture in Carolina. That’s how I always viewed it
You want to praise Gettleman for his good moves you need to be honest and acknowledge the poor ones.
It has pretty much been universally said that the Stewart signing was a poor move.
Not a crippling one like some want to harp on. That's the difference.
no one said it was crippling....stop making things up
People are more concerned with his judgment and blind spot for guys he lines than the $4 mil
If it was his judgement that you and others had, then I disagree. I was not moved by his signing, but I understood, undoing the McAdoo culture, such as it was, was paramount to DG, imo. A guy like Stewart was simply a step to improve said culture as he saw first hand, how well Stewart blended in with the culture in Carolina. That’s how I always viewed it
Then I stand by my question above. Gettleman could have made the statement that JS was brought on board at least partially to correct the culture. Instead, the point he hung his hat on was that positional value in general and the sharp age-related decline of RBs in particular were both farces. And yet, we obviously know now that Father Time caught Stewart from behind taking the handoff in the backfield.
I don't expect DG to walk that statement back - ultimately it was not a huge thing anyway. But as he was so wrong about Stewart not having lost anything, I can't help but wonder if he's at least considered that his view on positional value could evolve as well.
He never had to dig his heels in on this - it was entirely his own choice and really his own creation. He could just as easily have said, "sure positional value might tell you that it's not a wise investment to take a RB at #2, but Saquon Barkley is not just a RB." and left it at that. It would have been true, it would have been appropriate, and no one would have batted an eyelash.
Instead, he decided that this would be his moment to rage against the machine, along with his silly typing demonstration at the very same press conference. That's the context of the Stewart comment and why, at least IMO, it's a little bit more than just a run of the mill veteran signing that didn't work out.
although he was paid too much. at the time of his signing, the cupboard was bare. and the OLine stunk too - funny how backs who are past their prime cannot overcome that
And if he was brought in to clean up the locker room Â
Why do some of you keep harping on that? Do you know how many aging veterans are signed every year in the NFL as depth and don't make much impract?
Dorsey Levens was impressive against the Eagles (some of you will get that reference).
Why do some of you keep harping on that? Do you know how many aging veterans are signed every year in the NFL as depth and don't make much impract?
Dorsey Levens was impressive against the Eagles (some of you will get that reference).
Ease up on the coffee.
Quote:
He was an inconsequential blip on the radar that affected nothing.
Why do some of you keep harping on that? Do you know how many aging veterans are signed every year in the NFL as depth and don't make much impract?
Dorsey Levens was impressive against the Eagles (some of you will get that reference).
Ease up on the coffee.
Yeah, that was a bit harsh.
But it's getting annoying with these inconsequential things constantly being used to drive some narrative that Gettleman stinks. He did a lot more good than bad this/last season.
We should give him a pass though, especially on a position as replaceable as RB. We're not talking about a QB here or anything.
Link - ( New Window )
And, damn, isn't William a magician with his stick? First, the high stick (over his shoulder) to bring the puck down and then to flick it over Holtby, rightly disallowed, and then the deflection to go up 4-2. Teams feed off him in the playoffs.
And, damn, isn't William a magician with his stick? First, the high stick (over his shoulder) to bring the puck down and then to flick it over Holtby, rightly disallowed, and then the deflection to go up 4-2. Teams feed off him in the playoffs.
Thanks! Hopefully, we can pull off one more upset.
:>(
better than Trey Junkin though
Quote:
"Not DG's finest moment..."
, but at the time I agreed with the idea of bringing in a veteran RB to stabilize the position and possibly mentor Barkley if the Giants were fortunate enough to draft him. It just happened that Stewart had little left in the tank.
And he got hurt before the line stabilized itself at the bye.
Quote:
Quote:
"Not DG's finest moment..."
, but at the time I agreed with the idea of bringing in a veteran RB to stabilize the position and possibly mentor Barkley if the Giants were fortunate enough to draft him. It just happened that Stewart had little left in the tank.
And he got hurt before the line stabilized itself at the bye.
He hadn’t averaged over 3.8 ypc since 2015. Not sure a stabilized line would have done much.
He got hurt. We'll never know.
He got hurt. We'll never know.
What about 2016 and 2017?
Signings like that are made in the NFL all the time.
He got hurt, we cut bait. That's really the whole story.
But why wouldn’t the previous years have an impact on the signing? Seeing his previous years production and then saying he hasn’t lost a step is why Gettleman still gets shit over it.
I get that he is a real quality individual and teammate and was also here to help with the dysfunction. But at the end of the day, he was a total zero of a signing.
The Stewart signing was in the same vein, except Stewart got hurt while Levens played 11 games for us. Both were cut after one season, even though they both signed multi-year deals.
I don't remember any hand wringing over the Levens signing as a reason to fire Accorsi or Fassel.
Signings like that are made in the NFL all the time.
He got hurt, we cut bait. That's really the whole story.
Yea those guys get the vet league minimum not 3 million dollars
exactly. it's the money that made this a terrible signing. if he signed him for vet minimum - which is what he would've gotten anywhere else - nobody would care. DG's the one who hyped him up.
Quote:
In comment 14399321 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
He was an inconsequential blip on the radar that affected nothing.
Why do some of you keep harping on that? Do you know how many aging veterans are signed every year in the NFL as depth and don't make much impract?
Dorsey Levens was impressive against the Eagles (some of you will get that reference).
Ease up on the coffee.
Yeah, that was a bit harsh.
But it's getting annoying with these inconsequential things constantly being used to drive some narrative that Gettleman stinks. He did a lot more good than bad this/last season.
I don't think it's entirely about the signing itself - I agree with you that a lot of aging veterans get signed to rosters all the time, and they're basically inconsequential.
Where I think some take issue with Gettleman is how fiercely proud he was about the signing, and how wrong he wound up being about it. Nobody forced him to even mention Stewart when he said that Stewart hadn't lost anything in ten years - he volunteered that at a press conference about Barkley. And he was saying it in the context of not believing in positional value. If the crux of his argument was reliant on Jonathan Stewart's ability to ward off the physical decline that RBs tend to experience earlier than other positions, then there's a real question that still remains.
So the question is, do we think that DG has changed his view at all on positional value and physical decline? Or, if you believe it was much ado about nothing all along, do we think that DG just likes to talk for the sake of talking when he's within earshot of a microphone and it was just an off-the-cuff response about something that he doesn't place any value in?
In the grand scheme though, it was not a big deal. Name one GM that hasn't made a mistake in free agency.
It was the general wisdom of the cost vs. the value. At 3.5M Stewart was getting paid like a bottom tier starter.
If he was here for his presence, many of us would just have preferred a vet minimum salary. That's a sound criticism.
For reference Bethea got about the same amount of money as an older, quality character guy, and he's actually still productive and pegged to start. No one is complaining about that one.
It's not just contract. It's the evaluation to think he should have gotten a contract.
Quote:
In comment 14399401 Beer Man said:
Quote:
Quote:
"Not DG's finest moment..."
, but at the time I agreed with the idea of bringing in a veteran RB to stabilize the position and possibly mentor Barkley if the Giants were fortunate enough to draft him. It just happened that Stewart had little left in the tank.
And he got hurt before the line stabilized itself at the bye.
He hadn’t averaged over 3.8 ypc since 2015. Not sure a stabilized line would have done much.
It has pretty much been universally said that the Stewart signing was a poor move.
Not a crippling one like some want to harp on. That's the difference.
Quote:
You want to praise Gettleman for his good moves you need to be honest and acknowledge the poor ones.
It has pretty much been universally said that the Stewart signing was a poor move.
Not a crippling one like some want to harp on. That's the difference.
Agree, a poor move, but in no shape or form monetarily impactful. Stupid narrative that’s gone on far too long, even for BBI..
Quote:
You want to praise Gettleman for his good moves you need to be honest and acknowledge the poor ones.
It has pretty much been universally said that the Stewart signing was a poor move.
Not a crippling one like some want to harp on. That's the difference.
Agree, however I have said that Stewart was brought in here to add some veteran leadership more so than to be a featured running back. Just my opinion anyway. I think BBI was reading the wrong tea leaves with that signing.
Quote:
You want to praise Gettleman for his good moves you need to be honest and acknowledge the poor ones.
It has pretty much been universally said that the Stewart signing was a poor move.
Not a crippling one like some want to harp on. That's the difference.
no one said it was crippling....stop making things up
People are more concerned with his judgment and blind spot for guys he lines than the $4 mil
Quote:
In comment 14400036 Les in TO said:
Quote:
You want to praise Gettleman for his good moves you need to be honest and acknowledge the poor ones.
It has pretty much been universally said that the Stewart signing was a poor move.
Not a crippling one like some want to harp on. That's the difference.
no one said it was crippling....stop making things up
People are more concerned with his judgment and blind spot for guys he lines than the $4 mil
If it was his judgement that you and others had, then I disagree. I was not moved by his signing, but I understood, undoing the McAdoo culture, such as it was, was paramount to DG, imo. A guy like Stewart was simply a step to improve said culture as he saw first hand, how well Stewart blended in with the culture in Carolina. That’s how I always viewed it
Quote:
In comment 14400040 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
In comment 14400036 Les in TO said:
Quote:
You want to praise Gettleman for his good moves you need to be honest and acknowledge the poor ones.
It has pretty much been universally said that the Stewart signing was a poor move.
Not a crippling one like some want to harp on. That's the difference.
no one said it was crippling....stop making things up
People are more concerned with his judgment and blind spot for guys he lines than the $4 mil
If it was his judgement that you and others had, then I disagree. I was not moved by his signing, but I understood, undoing the McAdoo culture, such as it was, was paramount to DG, imo. A guy like Stewart was simply a step to improve said culture as he saw first hand, how well Stewart blended in with the culture in Carolina. That’s how I always viewed it
Then I stand by my question above. Gettleman could have made the statement that JS was brought on board at least partially to correct the culture. Instead, the point he hung his hat on was that positional value in general and the sharp age-related decline of RBs in particular were both farces. And yet, we obviously know now that Father Time caught Stewart from behind taking the handoff in the backfield.
I don't expect DG to walk that statement back - ultimately it was not a huge thing anyway. But as he was so wrong about Stewart not having lost anything, I can't help but wonder if he's at least considered that his view on positional value could evolve as well.
He never had to dig his heels in on this - it was entirely his own choice and really his own creation. He could just as easily have said, "sure positional value might tell you that it's not a wise investment to take a RB at #2, but Saquon Barkley is not just a RB." and left it at that. It would have been true, it would have been appropriate, and no one would have batted an eyelash.
Instead, he decided that this would be his moment to rage against the machine, along with his silly typing demonstration at the very same press conference. That's the context of the Stewart comment and why, at least IMO, it's a little bit more than just a run of the mill veteran signing that didn't work out.
One of a few shitty free agent signings by DG in his first year as GM. He lags behind Reese in this area so far.
Anyway, back to Stewart.. can we still put him in the ring of honor even if he’s retiring a Panther?
why did we still need to trade apple, snacks and OBJ and let Collins walk?
Looks like he was pretty ineffective in his covert role as well