Obviously, the Daniel Jones pick is going to define the franchise for years to come and either Gettlemen will be proven a genius or all the people who are scratching their heads and calling the pick a reach will be validated.
As a thought experiment, if we are to project Jones as the bust that most pundits outside of Gil Brandt seem to think he'll be, then I think the organization needs to take a long look in the mirror and ask themselves if they're doing things the right way.
One of my favorite parts of the Giants during the Couglin/Reese/Accorsi regime was that the organization was loyal and not reactionary. They gave the coach and GM time to implement a game plan and build a team. They looked within to implement stability even when changes were made and I felt like in an era where the players changed constantly that this was a reason to root for an organization and it wasn't just about "rooting for a jersey".
Fast forward to the future, and let's just say Jones is a flop, then all those traits that I loved about the organization are seen through a different prism. That loyalty becomes nepotism and cronyism. The stability becomes stubbornness and unwilling to accept that the fundamental tenants of how the game is play have changed. The Daniel Jones pick, with his ties to Cutcliffe and the Mannings, could be a crystalized example of the unwillingness to go beyond the organizational known. I think if this regime fails, then Mara has to see that his hiring of Accorsi, his hire of Gettlemen, the idea of building around Eli, the drafting of Barkley and the public scoffing over modern analytic techniques, all these moves that he thought would be embraced by the fanbase comes off as pandering and as resistance to change.
I'll be rooting for Daniel Jones because I love the Giants. I want him to succeed, like I want the team to succeed. But if he doesn't, I want real change. I don't want the lip service change that came before this.
In a draft with better QB supply, our new QB might have gone round 2,3.
So, the opportunity to have Oliver AND Dexter, or Allen and Dexter, or Oliver wilkins, etc., Might be one of those silly fan what ifs
Basically forced him to. And it was the best move the club made in the last 60 years.
Not sure why you and others are bringing up familiarity. Think about it.
Not sure why you and others are bringing up familiarity. Think about it.
Even if you discount that connection, the organizations picks are chock full of relying on past connections for future hires. Hiring Ernie Accorsi as an independent analyst to find a GM? Come on. Keeping Couglin and Reese as long as they did. Giving Reese an extra two years. Hiring McAdoo from within instead of another candidate.
Throw a rock you can come up with an example of how the organization leans toward people they have a connection with. And if you think that Eli isn't a part of that family by now, then I don't know what to tell you.