Is Gettleman doing a good job?

which suggests he's striking and inking without enough quality info on the veteran(s).

DG's UFA usage with the Giants as head of pro personnel was strong. He needs to regain that touch.

Markus Golden was a great signing on a prove it deal. If he doesn't improve from last year he is just a solid 1 year stopgap.

Mike Remmers was a cheap stopgap as well.

Olsen Pierre was signed for the league minimum and he had 5.5 sacks in a rotational role under Bettcher two seasons ago. Perhaps returning to a 3-4 defense will improve his productivity again.

Rod Smith is another league min signing that will compete for the 3rd RB spot.

Golden Tate was the only expensive FA he signed and time will tell if this was a good pickup.

Antoine Bethea is another stopgap/locker room leader that the team needed. His signing won't prevent Sean Chandler or any of the other young kids from beating him out.

with the exception of Tate. Last year, it seemed he rushed into his UFA decisions, perhaps because he'd be out of work for a bit and wasn't really armed with the correct info.

Ogletree is fantastic. He's a serviceable LB.

Quote:

... christian : 5/26/2019 5:12 pm : link : reply Ogletree is a really good athlete and catches the ball well, but I'd be careful to connect interceptions and pass coverage, especially at linebacker where many of the opportunities to snag the ball aren't a product of coverage, but position. He had his share of bad looks in coverage, gave up his share of TDs, and Collins strongly intimated missed assignments at the LB position caused a lot of the bad plays last year.

But when a poster calls moves like that complete blunders as if they retard the growth of the team instead of try to bring some order back, it is just a ridiculous comment.

It's hard enough to get past typos and random capitilizations, but continually harping on Omameah and Stewart as evidence that Gettleman is doing poorly and then calling Solder (or "Soldier") and Ogletree complete blunders is just trying to magnify an issue that isn't there.

From the attention Omameah and Stewart get, you'd have thought they carry millions of dead weight into this season.

We will see this year if Gettleman has turned teh roster around, but calling moves of players who have been solid "complete blunders" is just a steaming pile of horseshit.

In comment 14456434 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

In comment 14456256 giantstock said: Quote: SOldier making 4 yr $62m Omameh signed 3 yrs $15m Stewart sighned --e stiamte gaurantted $3m 2 years so say $1.5M Hubbard gets 5 years $37.5m Fulton gets 4 years $28m. You can see the money fits. DG had the opportunity to offer more. Instead on a team devoid of talent he stupidly went after one above average player instead of two albeit lesser at tackle in 2018 BUT YOU ARE REBUILDING IN 2018. The better Soldier is doesn;t outweigh what he'll sink to when GMEN "ARE READY TO COMPETE." You shouldn't be "comparing" Hubbard vs Soldier but you should be comparing Hubbard AND Fulton vs Soldier AND Omameh. As for Hubbard - you are making a misleading statement. I'm sure it's not intentional. Just like with Soldier he IMPROVEd as the season went on SO DID HUBBARD. So much so that the Browns didn't feel a need to replace him this year. SO we can "excuse" $15m aging LT for his crummy 1st half but if Hubbard has a bad 1st half he's a bust? Well we know that that isn't true, right? Per the link below we know that your statement about Browns looking release was thrown out the window based on his performance around the 2nd half, correct? SO oyur post is a bit misleading, correct? ***We have to realize the Browns are looking to win (no more rebuild), right? SO if your point is still valid that Hubbard was so awful all of last year, why have they kept him? ANd with the attached link stating Hubbard is improving, you want to just ignore it? The Browns didn't trade or draft a RT to replace Hubbard and you just want to ignore it? https://247sports.com/nfl/cleveland-browns/Article/Joe-Thomas-Chris-Hubbard-improving-Browns-right-tackle-126371293/ You asked how would play LG? Fulton could be the LG. He has played LG with KC. And Crosby would be the backup instead of Wheeler. Crosby was mentioned because of potential. Wheeler is a backup and will be nothing more than that. DO you agree? I'm not the one posting a misleading comment about Hubbard. You posted a comment from a former teammate Joe Thomas DURING the season in December. I posted an article with sources from the team during the offseason. Which is more accurate?

Really? SO where's the link that says they want to release him? WHy is he still expected to start? You said he had an awful season. Yet Cleveland NOT getting a replacement for him while they are no longer in rebuild mode -you think justifies your opinion that he sucked all year?

Your other points were wrong in terms of you implied GMEN couldn't have afforded him? That was wrong too, right?

ANd you made a point about no LG yet we know Fulton has played LG before, right?


You've taken everything I posted wrong to a certain degree and now you say they "debated" releasing him? I suppose they could have had a conversation but they KEPT HIM -- so it doesn't support your comment that he sucked all year does it? OTHErWISE WHY DID THEY KEEP HIM WHEN THEY ARE TRYING TO WIN?

In comment 14456343 Big Blue Blogger said:

Quote:

He cleared out dead wood and placed bets on some new guys. That’s what new GMs do. Even Reese did it, and he was a true internal hire. He also won a Super Bowl in year 1 and started out 11-1 in year 2, and we all know what happened after that. Gettleman might emphasize the running game slightly more than some of his peers, but the variance is pretty small. He re-signed Beckham to a huge deal, then moved the resources to Shepard and Tate when the organization decided to move on from OBJ. He also inherited a good receiving TE. The additions of Barkley, Solder, Hernandez and Zeitler bolster the offense as a whole, not just the running game. And the heir to Eli has arrived, just a year later than some folks predicted/preferred. On the other side of the ball, a rebuild was clearly needed. I might have stuck with Apple a bit longer, in the hope that a better locker room environment would help him grow up. Can’t really argue with the move, though; the kid is a mess, and his game may never translate. The line and backfield look better, at least on paper. The linebackers still look terrible. Maybe Bettcher has a plan for getting more from them in redefined roles. A lot seems to be riding on Golden and Carter. If nothing else, the Giants are interesting again, after five years as possibly the League’s dullest team - even with Beckham. Whether they will as interesting on the field remains to be seen, as does almost everything else about Gettleman’s tenurny giants e. Does he have a plan? Sure. So does every GM in the NFL, as Mike Tyson might say... until they get punched in the face.

Gettleman didnt clean out the dead wood. He didn't even tear the team down to its foundation. What gettleman did was remove the founation and that definitely is NOT what most new gm's do. It's a plan based on the premise that he can find beter players than the good one he let go. That's a very egotistical and risky plan. It's what Chip Kelly thought he could do in philly and it failed. Its what Gettleman thought he could do in Carolina and that failed. I doubt it will work here but i would love to be wrong.

I think that DG has set the franchise up for a solid future. If Jones pans out Gettleman's done an amazing job in only 2 years. If not, we are still set up for a solid future, with a ton of cap space and a young roster.

A lot of the antipathy for DG began with the Barkley pick, with a ton of fans expressing certainty that one of Darnold, Rosen or Allen are the second coming. We'll see about that.
I thought after Darnold's first year at USC that he was amazing, and after the second year that he made horrible choices time and time again. Then he did the same for the Jets last year. But he still could become a superstar.

At the same time it shows how hard it is to commit to a QB if you don't have confidence in the guy. But so many guys were certain. How anyone can be that certain I don't know. Same for Jones. It's "we'll see" and hope for the best.

will come next offseason when the Giants have close to 100 million in cap room. If he hands out long term deals hopefully he will focus on younger veterans just as the Giants did in 2005 when they signed Burress, Pierce, and McKenzie to long term deals.

I would target the following players
1 of the following, RT** - Daryl Williams or Jack Conklin
ER - Yannick Ngakoue or Jadaveon Clowney
1 of the following ILB - Myles Jack, Deion Jones, Jaylon Smith, Deon Buchanon
DE - Arik Armstead


I would also like to see the Giants roll the dice on 1 year prove it deal types like DT Vernon Butler, DE Robert Nkemdiche, OT Jason Spriggs.

I put an ** next to RT because if Wheeler or Asafo-Adjei show enough this season to convince the Giants that they could be the long term answer at RT then they should focus on a cheap veteran backup type or a player like Jason Spriggs.

Now most of the targets will likely re-sign with their current teams but whoever is left should be a target of Gettleman's. Due to the lack of options in free agency I would prefer to see the Giants address the WR position early in the draft. An OT, FS, and another ER would be ideal as well.

in the first 9 games last season Chris Hubbard gave up 6 sacks and 19 hurries. Look I wanted the Giants to sign him last offseason but he proved that his last season in Pittsburgh under Munchak was a fluke.

Why did the Browns not replace him? It's simple because they don't have the cap room which to take the hit and go out and find a replacement when their current starter at LT is Greg Robinson.

They traded Zeitler for Vernon to fill one need and they were able to do so because they had 2018 33rd overall pick Austin Corbett to fill his spot. Had they released Hubbard they would have had Kendall Lamm as the starter at RT. The Browns OL depth is very poor right now. They had no choice but to give Hubbard another year just as the Giants did last year with Flowers at RT.

In comment 14456501 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

in the first 9 games last season Chris Hubbard gave up 6 sacks and 19 hurries. Look I wanted the Giants to sign him last offseason but he proved that his last season in Pittsburgh under Munchak was a fluke. Why did the Browns not replace him? It's simple because they don't have the cap room which to take the hit and go out and find a replacement when their current starter at LT is Greg Robinson. They traded Zeitler for Vernon to fill one need and they were able to do so because they had 2018 33rd overall pick Austin Corbett to fill his spot. Had they released Hubbard they would have had Kendall Lamm as the starter at RT. The Browns OL depth is very poor right now. They had no choice but to give Hubbard another year just as the Giants did last year with Flowers at RT.

In the 1st 9 games he was terrible so was Soldier. Yet GMEn are payign A LOT more for him.

You specifically cited NINE games yet on your 1st post you said he sucked all year. WHich is it?

Third-- if he sucked all year - you really think they wouldn't have found a way to get another RT if as you say he sucked all year?

IMO he did NOT suck all year. As the article stated "HE IMPROVED." SO much so they have confidence in him. They would've traded future picks to draft a guy if they think Hubbard really sucked. They are trying to win now and have been LOSERS for so long -- this is a HUGE DEAL for them this year-- they want to win.

They are going into the season with hopes of winning the division. They aren't going into the season of the 2nd most important position on the OLINE as someone who knowingly sucks. That Dec article I posted is probably accurate.

In comment 14456536 giantstock said:

Quote:

In the 1st 9 games he was terrible so was Soldier. Yet GMEn are payign A LOT more for him. You specifically cited NINE games yet on your 1st post you said he sucked all year. WHich is it? Third-- if he sucked all year - you really think they wouldn't have found a way to get another RT if as you say he sucked all year? IMO he did NOT suck all year. As the article stated "HE IMPROVED." SO much so they have confidence in him. They would've traded future picks to draft a guy if they think Hubbard really sucked. They are trying to win now and have been LOSERS for so long -- this is a HUGE DEAL for them this year-- they want to win. They are going into the season with hopes of winning the division. They aren't going into the season of the 2nd most important position on the OLINE as someone who knowingly sucks. That Dec article I posted is probably accurate.

Your opinion might carry some weight if you actually spelled the guys name right. It's Nate SOLDER not Soldier. Solder also has a very solid track record at left tackle.

Chris Hubbard had a grand of 14 career starts when he signed with the Browns. Hubbard started a career high 10 games the year before because Gilbert went on IR for Pitt. Hubbard has never started at LT. Hubbard sucked all year and he also benefitted from having mobile QB's behind him which hides some of his inadequacies.

Once again the Browns invested a lot of money in Hubbard so they had no choice but to give him another year. This is a team that has journeyman Greg Robinson as it's starting LT.

Since when did the browns become the gold standard for good personnel decisions?

during the first half of the season not to mention that Solder has always been a starter while Hubbard was a backup.

gidiefor said:

Quote:

I have a quibble with 1 premise above: Quote: He cleared out dead wood and placed bets on some new guys. That’s what new GMs do. Even Reese did it. The Giants did not have a major roster turnover in 2007... what dead wood did he trim?

As noted, Petitgout was the boldest move, but there were others: Carlos Emmons, Will Demps, Tim Carter, Jim Finn, Chad Morton, Visanthe Shiancoe (a Reese pick from 2003 whom they possibly should have kept), LaVar Arrington, Brandon Short (in his second tour with NYG). The biggest single change was Barber’s retirement. And of course Shockey was rapidly wearing out his welcome too.

In comment 14456561 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

during the first half of the season not to mention that Solder has always been a starter while Hubbard was a backup.

Sure no player in the NFL ever plays injured. ANd we can expect older OL to not be injured very much going forward. Okay.

In comment 14456583 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 14456561 Jay on the Island said: Quote: during the first half of the season not to mention that Solder has always been a starter while Hubbard was a backup. Sure no player in the NFL ever plays injured. ANd we can expect older OL to not be injured very much going forward. Okay.

I love when people completely twist a point to fit their agenda. Obviously my point was that Solder struggled when he was playing hurt but then played better after he recovered. Where did I say that he won't get hurt in the future?

I assumed it was common sense that players play better when they are healthy but apparently I was wrong.

In comment 14456560 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

In comment 14456536 giantstock said: Quote: In the 1st 9 games he was terrible so was Soldier. Yet GMEn are payign A LOT more for him. You specifically cited NINE games yet on your 1st post you said he sucked all year. WHich is it? Third-- if he sucked all year - you really think they wouldn't have found a way to get another RT if as you say he sucked all year? IMO he did NOT suck all year. As the article stated "HE IMPROVED." SO much so they have confidence in him. They would've traded future picks to draft a guy if they think Hubbard really sucked. They are trying to win now and have been LOSERS for so long -- this is a HUGE DEAL for them this year-- they want to win. They are going into the season with hopes of winning the division. They aren't going into the season of the 2nd most important position on the OLINE as someone who knowingly sucks. That Dec article I posted is probably accurate. Your opinion might carry some weight if you actually spelled the guys name right. It's Nate SOLDER not Soldier. Solder also has a very solid track record at left tackle. Chris Hubbard had a grand of 14 career starts when he signed with the Browns. Hubbard started a career high 10 games the year before because Gilbert went on IR for Pitt. Hubbard has never started at LT. Hubbard sucked all year and he also benefitted from having mobile QB's behind him which hides some of his inadequacies. Once again the Browns invested a lot of money in Hubbard so they had no choice but to give him another year. This is a team that has journeyman Greg Robinson as it's starting LT. Since when did the browns become the gold standard for good personnel decisions?

Sure. Spelling matters. Okay. Thanks.

The Giants would have to make a number of moves to get to 100M dollars. If they roll-over everything remaining this year, Overthecap puts them at ~65M for 2020.

There are definitely be players to look at; if you cut Ogletree, Solder, Ellison, and Jenkins you get close to 100M.

Gettleman has done a great job largely getting the roster young and cost controlled. I suspect he will definitely do more of that next year.

I frankly don't see any of those guys as part of a core.

In comment 14456589 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

In comment 14456583 giantstock said: Quote: In comment 14456561 Jay on the Island said: Quote: during the first half of the season not to mention that Solder has always been a starter while Hubbard was a backup. Sure no player in the NFL ever plays injured. ANd we can expect older OL to not be injured very much going forward. Okay. I love when people completely twist a point to fit their agenda. Obviously my point was that Solder struggled when he was playing hurt but then played better after he recovered. Where did I say that he won't get hurt in the future? I assumed it was common sense that players play better when they are healthy but apparently I was wrong.

Sure - You seem to be filled with excuses. Let's not stop at Soldier and let's not count age into the injury equation either, okay?

I guess everyone can use the injury excuse now okay? Why don't you explain to Bill Belchick that his latest SB win didn;t matter much anyways because Gurley was hurt.

Injuries don't count for older players too - okay.

BTW - are you going to complain again about how I spelled "didn't as "didn;t." Please do. That will really help clarify how good Hubbard is.

And while you asked "since when Cleveland be the Golden Standard" -- well since when did you become it? You vs John Dorsey. Hmm I wonder who here has the delusion of grandeur?

So Dorsey's 1ast year Dorsey had his team play .500 football while the guy you like DG has his team at 5-11 in which GMEn beta 4 backup QB's. Yet you are knocking the Browns evaluations? Sure okay-- some of you - your homerism knows no bounds.

In comment 14456613 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 14456589 Jay on the Island said: Quote: In comment 14456583 giantstock said: Quote: In comment 14456561 Jay on the Island said: Quote: during the first half of the season not to mention that Solder has always been a starter while Hubbard was a backup. Sure no player in the NFL ever plays injured. ANd we can expect older OL to not be injured very much going forward. Okay. I love when people completely twist a point to fit their agenda. Obviously my point was that Solder struggled when he was playing hurt but then played better after he recovered. Where did I say that he won't get hurt in the future? I assumed it was common sense that players play better when they are healthy but apparently I was wrong. Sure - You seem to be filled with excuses. Let's not stop at Soldier and let's not count age into the injury equation either, okay? I guess everyone can use the injury excuse now okay? Why don't you explain to Bill Belchick that his latest SB win didn;t matter much anyways because Gurley was hurt. Injuries don't count for older players too - okay. BTW - are you going to complain again about how I spelled "didn't as "didn;t." Please do. That will really help clarify how good Hubbard is. And while you asked "since when Cleveland be the Golden Standard" -- well since when did you become it? You vs John Dorsey. Hmm I wonder who here has the delusion of grandeur? So Dorsey's 1ast year Dorsey had his team play .500 football while the guy you like DG has his team at 5-11 in which GMEn beta 4 backup QB's. Yet you are knocking the Browns evaluations? Sure okay-- some of you - your homerism knows no bounds.

near .500 football

In comment 14456609 christian said:

Quote:

The Giants would have to make a number of moves to get to 100M dollars. If they roll-over everything remaining this year, Overthecap puts them at ~65M for 2020. There are definitely be players to look at; if you cut Ogletree, Solder, Ellison, and Jenkins you get close to 100M. Gettleman has done a great job largely getting the roster young and cost controlled. I suspect he will definitely do more of that next year. I frankly don't see any of those guys as part of a core.

It depends on how Ogletree plays this season as well as Goodson and Connelly. If Goodson and Connelly look like viable starter at ILB then Ogletree will be gone in a year unless he plays well enough to justify his contract.

IMO this is definitely Ellison's last season with the Giants. I think C.J. Conrad will be the 3rd TE this season but he will impress enough to convince the Giants that he should be the #2 TE in 2020.

I am a bit torn on Janoris Jenkins. If he plays like he did in 2016 then he could be back in 2020 since the Giants have plenty of cap room. It will come down to a combination of his performance and the development of Beal, Baker, Love, Haley, and Ballentine. I'd give Jenkins a 50/50 shot of returning in 2020.

Solder will be back in 2020 unless he completely falls off a clip next season. There is a good chance the Giants draft his replacement next year though. 2020 could be his last season in NY.

You didn't like the Tate signing?

In comment 14456613 giantstock said:

Quote:

Sure - You seem to be filled with excuses. Let's not stop at Soldier and let's not count age into the injury equation either, okay? I guess everyone can use the injury excuse now okay? Why don't you explain to Bill Belchick that his latest SB win didn;t matter much anyways because Gurley was hurt. Injuries don't count for older players too - okay. BTW - are you going to complain again about how I spelled "didn't as "didn;t." Please do. That will really help clarify how good Hubbard is. And while you asked "since when Cleveland be the Golden Standard" -- well since when did you become it? You vs John Dorsey. Hmm I wonder who here has the delusion of grandeur? So Dorsey's 1ast year Dorsey had his team play .500 football while the guy you like DG has his team at 5-11 in which GMEn beta 4 backup QB's. Yet you are knocking the Browns evaluations? Sure okay-- some of you - your homerism knows no bounds.

You are a delight. You have gone fully off the reservation. You claim to know so much about Solder, Hubbard and Fulton yet you don't even know how to properly spell our LT's name.

It was confirmed that Solder was playing hurt at the start of last season. How do you tie that into the Patriots, Gurley, or whatever your point was is beyond me. Did I say the Giants are the only team that suffers injuries? No, I didn't.

Where did I claim that I know better? Once again your lack of reading comprehension has you making up all these false talking points. Even the best GM's make poor FA decisions. Look at Belichick bringing in Hayneswroth a few years ago. I guess Dorsey is exempt from that fact.

For the record I wanted Dorsey as GM here. I wasn't thrilled with Gettleman but I decided to wait and see how he performed before I judged him. As I wrote in another thread his tenure year will be remembered by the development of Daniel Jones.

I suggest you research how players actually performed before you criticize our GM for not signing them. Fulton by the way struggled for the Texans last season as well. PFF gave him a below average rating for the season. Perhaps there was a reason Fulton was a 6th round pick and Hubbard was an UDFA?

When did 7-8-1 equal a .500 record. Keep going your on a roll!

despite going 1-31 in two seasons. We saw how bad a coach Hugh Jackson was after the improved immediately after he was fired. Even solid GM's like Dorsey make mistakes.

It's hard to ignore Solder, Ogletree, and Jenkins all cost top 5 or higher cap hits at their respective positions. Especially Jenkins, who injuries not withstanding, has been a bad football player for two years.

Solder will cost more cap space than any LT this season. My feelings on value are well known on him -- it's a bad contract no matter what corner the Giants felt they were in.

Last offseason I posted several times that the Giants should bring in both Hubbard and Fulton as under the radar signings because I thought they could surprise when given a chance to start.

I thought that they would sign for 2-3 million annually max. When I saw them get much more than that I was glad the Giants passed. After seeing how they performed last year I am happy to admit I was wrong.

In comment 14456633 christian said:

Quote:

It's hard to ignore Solder, Ogletree, and Jenkins all cost top 5 or higher cap hits at their respective positions. Especially Jenkins, who injuries not withstanding, has been a bad football player for two years. Solder will cost more cap space than any LT this season. My feelings on value are well known on him -- it's a bad contract no matter what corner the Giants felt they were in.

This is likely Jenkins' last season here. It's hard to justify bringing him back at that salary when they have Baker, Beal, Love, Haley,and Ballentine fighting for playing time.

In comment 14456589 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

In comment 14456583 giantstock said: Quote: In comment 14456561 Jay on the Island said: Quote: during the first half of the season not to mention that Solder has always been a starter while Hubbard was a backup. Sure no player in the NFL ever plays injured. ANd we can expect older OL to not be injured very much going forward. Okay. I love when people completely twist a point to fit their agenda. Obviously my point was that Solder struggled when he was playing hurt but then played better after he recovered. Where did I say that he won't get hurt in the future? I assumed it was common sense that players play better when they are healthy but apparently I was wrong.

I love when people completely twist a point to fit their agenda. Some people just can't face the fact that their team might have made some bad moves. Let's all be nothing but cheerleaders, okay?

Let's IGNORE that Soldier is an older LT and as a result OLDER PLAYERS are more susceptible to getting hurt. But that doesn't matter to the cheerleading homer.

And the fact that you hear often that OLINES need time to adjust - so let's not take that into account for Hubbard - so instead a poster decides to mislead by suggesting he sucked all year. ANd when challenged about that one of his replies implies he knows more than Dorsey. SO says the great BBI "scout." Yet he still hasn't produced the nonsense that he suggested in his post that Hubbard sucked all year.

So as the poster keeps throwing darts hoping some stick - when that doesn't work -- criticize syntax and spelling. Yeah.

SO when we speak of common sense-- ofc the homerism trumps thatin a big way. How dare anyone question DG for getting an older player -- and yet when he gets hurt-- it's not DGs fault!!! God I love the homerism on here from some of you. AN older player gets hurt and it's not the GM's fault he got him. Especially though a massive overpay.

In comment 14456634 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

Last offseason I posted several times that the Giants should bring in both Hubbard and Fulton as under the radar signings because I thought they could surprise when given a chance to start. I thought that they would sign for 2-3 million annually max. When I saw them get much more than that I was glad the Giants passed. After seeing how they performed last year I am happy to admit I was wrong.

I regretfully say that I know that you're wrong now. Unfortunately our team will suffer a bit for it. The 2020 season is the real deal for me. They can rebound due to cap space.

What do you say we quit for today going at each other? You can blast away at me your last post. You can rip me as last word. I think you're way wrong you think I am. Though if we post to others we still might come back at each other.

In comment 14456640 giantstock said:

Quote:

I love when people completely twist a point to fit their agenda. Some people just can't face the fact that their team might have made some bad moves. Let's all be nothing but cheerleaders, okay? Let's IGNORE that Soldier is an older LT and as a result OLDER PLAYERS are more susceptible to getting hurt. But that doesn't matter to the cheerleading homer. And the fact that you hear often that OLINES need time to adjust - so let's not take that into account for Hubbard - so instead a poster decides to mislead by suggesting he sucked all year. ANd when challenged about that one of his replies implies he knows more than Dorsey. SO says the great BBI "scout." Yet he still hasn't produced the nonsense that he suggested in his post that Hubbard sucked all year. So as the poster keeps throwing darts hoping some stick - when that doesn't work -- criticize syntax and spelling. Yeah. SO when we speak of common sense-- ofc the homerism trumps thatin a big way. How dare anyone question DG for getting an older player -- and yet when he gets hurt-- it's not DGs fault!!! God I love the homerism on here from some of you. AN older player gets hurt and it's not the GM's fault he got him. Especially though a massive overpay.

It takes time for offensive lines to gel that doesn't explain why Hubbard was beaten so often. The Browns offensive line had one of the league's best interiors in all of football but they struggled at both tackle spots. So by the point your making shouldn't that also apply to Solder?

You admit that Hubbard sucked for 9 games but then try to suggest that we should ignore that fact despite the fact that he doesn't have a track record of success?

Why aren't you understanding this. You claim you have watched these guys so closely yet you don't even know how to spell a guys name. That clearly proves that you haven't seen this guy enough to learn how to spell his name.

By the way I have blasted Gettleman plenty in the past so this false accusation that you fabricated out of thin air that I am a homer is completely false. I criticized Gettleman for the Stewart and Omamheh signings last season. I also agreed that he overpayed for Solder but I understood the reasoning as we couldn't go into another season with Flowers as our starting LT especially when we needed to rid the locker room of his attitude. I guess that makes me a homer though in your eyes.

He isn't a bad one either. He inherited a terrible roster that included a declining 37 year old QB with no heir in place. He has had less than two years to fix this mess and some have already declared him a disaster despite the fact that much of the roster in improved. After this season we will get a better idea of his plan and whether or not it was the right one.

of 78 posters the following sentiment was expressed:

47 (60.3%) Doing a Good Job
15 (19.2%) Wait and See
5 (6.4%) Mixed
9 (11.5%) Not Doing a Good Job
2 (2.6%) Did not express an opinion

He's improved the offensive line. Defense still needs work. A lot of his fate is now going to be tied to Daniel Jones. He can build everything else great, but you don't win it all without a good QB. I think after next season we'll know.

In comment 14456301 Rick5 said:

Quote:

It's too early to tell. One full season isn't enough time.

Jerry Reese had this team so screwed up that it will take more than one or even 2 seasons to fix it, IMO Gettleman is doing fine...

...

Thanks!

In comment 14456705 Jersey55 said:

Quote:

In comment 14456301 Rick5 said: Quote: It's too early to tell. One full season isn't enough time. Jerry Reese had this team so screwed up that it will take more than one or even 2 seasons to fix it, IMO Gettleman is doing fine...

I still think this team needs one more year. 2020 will be the season where I think they are ready to take that step to become a playoff contender. It's unfair to expect Gettleman to fix that mess with just two offseasons and little cap flexibility.

48 (59.3%) Doing a Good Job
17 (21%) Wait and See
5 (6.2%) Mixed
9 (11.1%) Not Doing a Good Job
2 (2.5%) Did not express an opinion

building it in the image he envisions. HIS team. keeping Eli doesn't really support that idea. but it could be the one major piece that he knows there would be a riot if he cut ties prematurely and he knows he's almost out the door anyways, so just rid the team of the rest of the non-DG type players and Eli will ride on on his own.

that being said, he believe in the trenches. as do I. and he seems to be addressing that, and for that I applaud him. his drafts seem to be fairly decent as well. I love last year's draft and word on this year's draft is predominantly positive.

I'm going to give my support to DG and say I have much more faith in him than I did with JR. especially towards the middle/end of his GM career. we'll see though. but I'd give him a solid B so far the minus or plus will shape itself this season with how we've progressed and what we end up doing with Eli.

moves with some questionable ones rolled in there too. His big free agent signings in each of the past two years (Solder snd Tate) are examples of what not to do imv.

It’s all about the draft decisions on Barkley and Jones versus the roads not taken...

Not really. It's an odd signing given the cap hits, his age and mercurial performances. If they think he's a sound veteran to learn from, then now we've got a handful of them, and we'll have to live with the cap crunch as they help train the puppies, in DG's words. But, he's really not a #1 vertical stretch the field threat meant to replace OBJ.

Gettleman is still perceived and judged by how he was hired in a large part.

If he had come from the Pats or even was Dorsey from outside the organization, I think the take would be drastically different. People would say he's been cleaning out the previous regime's mess and shoring up positions with mid-tier FA's where possible while having solid drafts.

But there is still a fairly large contingent that has conspiratorial thoughts that Gettleman was hired as a yes man. That he was recommended by Accorsi to give Eli a final ride into the sunset. That he was chosen without a real process. And so, they look at him as an extension of Mara, or even Reese and really don't judge him objectively.

If they did, they'd have looked at the Omameah and Stewart signings as mistakes that were not costly and easily moved off from. That Solder and Ogletree were here to have something to build around (and they also wouldn't exaggerate their level of play as terrible when it is average). That missing out on Darnold, Rosen or Allen isn't the end of the world, and may not be a mistake at all.

But strangely, those posters seem to only measure Gettleman on the negative points. When talking about the drafts, they say that Barkley didn't win us any games and his selection alone ruined the draft. They mock the way he addresses the press and talks about there not being a plan as a factual statement. We all wanted the stink and the attitude of the past few years replaced. It happened and people still look at it as a negative.

Gettleman's complete body of professional work is pretty damn impressive, yet most here act like he's a one-year GM with a record of 5-11 who sucks at signing FA's, who makes bad trades and who missed out on the next Elway, Marino and Rodgers.

I continually feel like we are being trolled. Not because of the negativity, but because drums get beaten over and over again with nonsensical takes. Not to mention strings of posts by a guy who uses random capital letters, spells like a 2-year old and who can barely form a fucking sentence that's legible.

There's definitely a considerable lack of intellectual honesty and player/prospect evaluation floating around since the SB draft pick.

In comment 14456680 gidiefor said:

Quote:

of 78 posters the following sentiment was expressed: 47 (60.3%) Doing a Good Job 15 (19.2%) Wait and See 5 (6.4%) Mixed 9 (11.5%) Not Doing a Good Job 2 (2.6%) Did not express an opinion

If these are the options, I'd say mixed.

In comment 14456969 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

Gettleman is still perceived and judged by how he was hired in a large part. If he had come from the Pats or even was Dorsey from outside the organization, I think the take would be drastically different. People would say he's been cleaning out the previous regime's mess and shoring up positions with mid-tier FA's where possible while having solid drafts. But there is still a fairly large contingent that has conspiratorial thoughts that Gettleman was hired as a yes man. That he was recommended by Accorsi to give Eli a final ride into the sunset. That he was chosen without a real process. And so, they look at him as an extension of Mara, or even Reese and really don't judge him objectively. If they did, they'd have looked at the Omameah and Stewart signings as mistakes that were not costly and easily moved off from. That Solder and Ogletree were here to have something to build around (and they also wouldn't exaggerate their level of play as terrible when it is average). That missing out on Darnold, Rosen or Allen isn't the end of the world, and may not be a mistake at all. But strangely, those posters seem to only measure Gettleman on the negative points. When talking about the drafts, they say that Barkley didn't win us any games and his selection alone ruined the draft. They mock the way he addresses the press and talks about there not being a plan as a factual statement. We all wanted the stink and the attitude of the past few years replaced. It happened and people still look at it as a negative. Gettleman's complete body of professional work is pretty damn impressive, yet most here act like he's a one-year GM with a record of 5-11 who sucks at signing FA's, who makes bad trades and who missed out on the next Elway, Marino and Rodgers. I continually feel like we are being trolled. Not because of the negativity, but because drums get beaten over and over again with nonsensical takes. Not to mention strings of posts by a guy who uses random capital letters, spells like a 2-year old and who can barely form a fucking sentence that's legible.

So, you're saying that bw has a fan club?

To really get a sense of how he's doing. Hes made some good moves, some questionable, and some awful - similar to most GMs.

Clearly, I think he has a style of play in mind which is control the line of scrimmage and run the football. Whether that style of play can consistently win in the NFL will be determined in the coming years.

Unfortunately, I think DG's future/legacy will largely be determined by Daniel Jones. If he turns out to be what some of his proponents claim, DG will look great. If he is awful or just a game manager, I think DG will be looked upon very differently, especially if the guy in green turns out to be something special (like it or not, that specter will be held over the franchise).

and to date they haven't been good. No one should expect fans to be content about it thus far.

Say what you want about the state of the team when he was hired, but 3-4 years is when you start looking at progression or lack thereof from a GM's tenure. If we want to bandwagon the idea of 'no players on schalarship', management should be held to the same standard too.

and it was an improved record. SO the slope is positive.

Quote:

But there is still a fairly large contingent that has conspiratorial thoughts that Gettleman was hired as a yes man.

Maybe moreso a contingent that posts fairly often. But nevertheless...what difference does it make? Is this conspiracy contingent "recruiting" more posters faster than you can convince them otherwise?

Gettleman's complete body of professional work will only be considered pretty damn impressive when it starts translating to a better product and more wins on the field. Of course, he should clearly be given time to get there, and it appears as if that is indeed happening...

but I swear that someone has hijacked Jimmy Googs' account

50 (58.1%) Doing a Good Job
19 (22.1%) Wait and See
5 (5.8%) Mixed
9 (10.5%) Not Doing a Good Job
3 (3.5%) Did not express an opinion