He did his part. When the OL and the WR and the DL and the LB and the DB do theirs the 3,000 yards will matter. They're getting closer. It's only one year so far.
That's ridiculous dude. This notion the Giants have been a tragic, talent bereft team all of Manning's career is getting comical.
The 2005-2011 era was extremely talented.
If the Giants had hit on the 3 lineman they picked in the 1st or 2nd round between 2013-2015, this era of Giants football would look very different.
By 2016 the Giants were a stacked team all over the field outside of o-line.
The Giants have suffered from mismanagement, bizarre injuries, spells of shitty coaching, and some huge misses in the draft. But all told, have had some really talented, underachieving teams too.
RE: A team that lacks talent for nearly 15 years Â
That's ridiculous dude. This notion the Giants have been a tragic, talent bereft team all of Manning's career is getting comical.
The 2005-2011 era was extremely talented.
If the Giants had hit on the 3 lineman they picked in the 1st or 2nd round between 2013-2015, this era of Giants football would look very different.
By 2016 the Giants were a stacked team all over the field outside of o-line.
The Giants have suffered from mismanagement, bizarre injuries, spells of shitty coaching, and some huge misses in the draft. But all told, have had some really talented, underachieving teams too.
I still cannot believe the 2017 team. That's the worst year-over-year performance I've ever seen from a sports team.
And it's not like that team was full of guys who don't belong in the league. Of the opening day starters all but Jonathan Casillas is still on an NFL roster.
RE: RE: RE: A team that lacks talent for nearly 15 years Â
That's ridiculous dude. This notion the Giants have been a tragic, talent bereft team all of Manning's career is getting comical.
The 2005-2011 era was extremely talented.
If the Giants had hit on the 3 lineman they picked in the 1st or 2nd round between 2013-2015, this era of Giants football would look very different.
By 2016 the Giants were a stacked team all over the field outside of o-line.
The Giants have suffered from mismanagement, bizarre injuries, spells of shitty coaching, and some huge misses in the draft. But all told, have had some really talented, underachieving teams too.
Spot on
+2.
Barkley clearly has a good head on his shoulders. Even if he is friends with Baker Mayfield
RE: A team that lacks talent for nearly 15 years Â
C'mon dep, WTF is that "nearly 15 years"? Oh I suppose Eli won SB 46 dragging the sad sack of a team behind him, is that your point?
Eli was in fact a beast in 2011, but he had Nicks, Cruz, and Manningham, IMO the best WR trio in the league, and a darn good defense once they got healthy.
Ph Bradshaw and Jacobs, fire and earth, helped a lot too. That was overall a very talented team aside from a poor OL.
That's ridiculous dude. This notion the Giants have been a tragic, talent bereft team all of Manning's career is getting comical.
The 2005-2011 era was extremely talented.
If the Giants had hit on the 3 lineman they picked in the 1st or 2nd round between 2013-2015, this era of Giants football would look very different.
By 2016 the Giants were a stacked team all over the field outside of o-line.
The Giants have suffered from mismanagement, bizarre injuries, spells of shitty coaching, and some huge misses in the draft. But all told, have had some really talented, underachieving teams too.
Spot on
+2.
Barkley clearly has a good head on his shoulders. Even if he is friends with Baker Mayfield
I still cannot believe the 2017 team. That's the worst year-over-year performance I've ever seen from a sports team.
And it's not like that team was full of guys who don't belong in the league. Of the opening day starters all but Jonathan Casillas is still on an NFL roster.
And many here scoffed at the Eagles hiring Pederson and were quite delighted McAdoo didn’t sign with them..Lol
don't have a material impact on the outcome of games like other positions.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
Marshawn Lynch. Adrian Peterson. Elliot. Depends on the RB. And as usual you let pretend your opinion is fact.
Personally IMO WR is the most plug in and play position in the NFL. As Belechick has actually proven. But he’s not the great football mind that you are. Is he
RE: He wants to win badly. Just like we do as fans. Â
I still cannot believe the 2017 team. That's the worst year-over-year performance I've ever seen from a sports team.
And it's not like that team was full of guys who don't belong in the league. Of the opening day starters all but Jonathan Casillas is still on an NFL roster.
don't have a material impact on the outcome of games like other positions.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
based on what? More and more bulllshit.
This argument is one of the dumbest I’ve seen that keeps getting regurgitated by the “I wanted a QB, damn it!” crowd. Barkley is literally the only rookie in the history of the NFL that is deemed a failure because he didn’t single handily carry his team to the playoffs. Because those guys wanted a QB. We can go through a laundry list of elite players at every single position bw listed that played in lousy teams. Beckham put up great stats, the team still sucked. I guess WRs are useless so I’m not sure why that position is on his list. Chubb had a phenomenal rookie season for the Broncos, they still sucked. What, a DL couldn’t carry his team all by himself? There are a billion OL and DBs who are/were considered elite that played on losing teams. There are a billion great QBs that couldn’t carry lousy teams to the playoffs.
Yet somehow, someway, Barkley not leading this team to a championship in year one is proof that the position is not important and he was a bad pick. It’s a freakin team game. You need great players. And great coaching. And great management. Barkley is a great player. We need to add more and work on the other two things...
don't have a material impact on the outcome of games like other positions.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
Marshawn Lynch. Adrian Peterson. Elliot. Depends on the RB. And as usual you let pretend your opinion is fact.
Personally IMO WR is the most plug in and play position in the NFL. As Belechick has actually proven. But he’s not the great football mind that you are. Is he
Many got their heads up their ass and haven't noticed the Patriots roster and play selection. Formulated the win the SB template with Lagerette Blount and drafted Michel in round 1 and foolishly didn't listen to bbiers who said someone just as good is available in the 7th.
People have been trying to copy the patriots for 19 years Â
picks. They made Devin McCourtney the highest paid FS in the league once upon a time. A position that doesn't usually get the big bucks. Michel is ripe for one of the guys they resign if he can stay healthy. That guy can ball.
don't have a material impact on the outcome of games like other positions.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
based on what? More and more bulllshit.
It's actually not. There is an abundant supply from the college ranks seemingly every year. And quality RBs throughout the league on other team's rosters. It's become the most commoditized position in the game. Like shopping at the grocery store for soda. So with 53 roster spots to fill it just doesn't make economical sense to build a roster around a position that is fungible. Teams have demonstrated over the last two decades - Pats, Giants, Eagles, Colts, Denver, Pittsburgh, Green Bay, etc - that you can win a SB without a high profile, high salaried RB. I've never doubted Barkley's talents, I just doubt his position.
Look, I detest the NFL's cap system. It's merely a way for the owners to cap their direct cost and essentially guarantee thick margins. And it's now punitive if you draft well.
Dallas, for example, has drafted brilliantly the last five years. One of the best right now at evaluating talent. But they are eventually going to lose these home grown players, players Jones could actually afford, because of this idiotic system. So other teams will benefit from Dallas' good work.
If I had my druthers, the league would abolish the cap, and let teams spend as much or as little as the want. Cap the rosters at 65 and let the free market really decide the price for players.
I really no longer care to debate the value of the RB position. To me, Barkley’s largest impact will be aiding in the development of Jones. If the giants are returning to any sort of consistent contender status, Jones will be the guy to take them there. Barkley can be that selfless safety valve that few young highly drafted qbs have in their first couple of seasons.
To me, Barkley’s largest impact will be aiding in the development of Jones.
Indeed. A rookie QB's best friend is a running game. And SB looks to be the ideal player to break in Jones because he can bail Jones out in the passing game as well. That's is why I'd start Jones from game one. SB would touch the ball 500+X this year.
It's the best formula to quickly find out if Jones has the goods or not.
Well when you really try to consider what a great back Â
like Barkley can do for your team's W/L record, I think you might consider looking at what he did already for PSU's W/L record. He's damn near a unique talent. PSU went through what 5 seasons straight without double digit wins before SB arrived on campusin 2015, and again SB's freshman year (for the 2nd year in a row) posted a record of 7-6.
The next two years with Barkley spearheading their offense they posted 11-3 and 11-2 records, and his sophomore year damn near went 12-2 by just losing to USC in a game their defense stunk and gave up lead after lead, IIRC. They were within a inch or so of qualifying for the FBS top 4 playoff for the national championship, and that was not a strong team aside from SB - how many PSU players were drafted in 2016 or 2017? Those PSU teams were nowhere near the Clemsons, Bamas, and Oklahomas of the world of CFB. After Barkley left for the NFL - and they had a very good RB replace him who became a 3rd round NFL draft pick - they dropped back to single digit Ws at 9-4.
Barkley ultimately may have a similar effect on the Giants. Why not?
RE: Well when you really try to consider what a great back Â
like Barkley can do for your team's W/L record, I think you might consider looking at what he did already for PSU's W/L record. He's damn near a unique talent. PSU went through what 5 seasons straight without double digit wins before SB arrived on campusin 2015, and again SB's freshman year (for the 2nd year in a row) posted a record of 7-6.
The next two years with Barkley spearheading their offense they posted 11-3 and 11-2 records, and his sophomore year damn near went 12-2 by just losing to USC in a game their defense stunk and gave up lead after lead, IIRC. They were within a inch or so of qualifying for the FBS top 4 playoff for the national championship, and that was not a strong team aside from SB - how many PSU players were drafted in 2016 or 2017? Those PSU teams were nowhere near the Clemsons, Bamas, and Oklahomas of the world of CFB. After Barkley left for the NFL - and they had a very good RB replace him who became a 3rd round NFL draft pick - they dropped back to single digit Ws at 9-4.
Barkley ultimately may have a similar effect on the Giants. Why not?
Exactly. I'm amazed that everyone completely misses the point about Barkley. True, RB's are relatively fungible in today's NFL. But right now, at this moment in time Barkley is the perfect fit for the Giants. He is a running and receiving threat. With a revamped OL that mitigates a lot of the loss of OBJ because of the extra split second a defense now needs to figure out the possibilities of Barkley, Tate, Shepard, Engram and possibly Slayton (we'll wait to see if Slayton is boom or bust).
We already know that Eli when given an extra second and not running for his life can find the open player. With a decent OL Barkley opens up more options than just in the running game. He opens up the options in general. That, my friends, is not fungible.
don't have a material impact on the outcome of games like other positions.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
based on what? More and more bulllshit.
This argument is one of the dumbest I’ve seen that keeps getting regurgitated by the “I wanted a QB, damn it!” crowd. Barkley is literally the only rookie in the history of the NFL that is deemed a failure because he didn’t single handily carry his team to the playoffs. Because those guys wanted a QB. We can go through a laundry list of elite players at every single position bw listed that played in lousy teams. Beckham put up great stats, the team still sucked. I guess WRs are useless so I’m not sure why that position is on his list. Chubb had a phenomenal rookie season for the Broncos, they still sucked. What, a DL couldn’t carry his team all by himself? There are a billion OL and DBs who are/were considered elite that played on losing teams. There are a billion great QBs that couldn’t carry lousy teams to the playoffs.
Yet somehow, someway, Barkley not leading this team to a championship in year one is proof that the position is not important and he was a bad pick. It’s a freakin team game. You need great players. And great coaching. And great management. Barkley is a great player. We need to add more and work on the other two things...
My God -- your post is such distorted bullshit. Holy crap.
RE: RE: Well when you really try to consider what a great back Â
like Barkley can do for your team's W/L record, I think you might consider looking at what he did already for PSU's W/L record. He's damn near a unique talent. PSU went through what 5 seasons straight without double digit wins before SB arrived on campusin 2015, and again SB's freshman year (for the 2nd year in a row) posted a record of 7-6.
The next two years with Barkley spearheading their offense they posted 11-3 and 11-2 records, and his sophomore year damn near went 12-2 by just losing to USC in a game their defense stunk and gave up lead after lead, IIRC. They were within a inch or so of qualifying for the FBS top 4 playoff for the national championship, and that was not a strong team aside from SB - how many PSU players were drafted in 2016 or 2017? Those PSU teams were nowhere near the Clemsons, Bamas, and Oklahomas of the world of CFB. After Barkley left for the NFL - and they had a very good RB replace him who became a 3rd round NFL draft pick - they dropped back to single digit Ws at 9-4.
Barkley ultimately may have a similar effect on the Giants. Why not?
Exactly. I'm amazed that everyone completely misses the point about Barkley. True, RB's are relatively fungible in today's NFL. But right now, at this moment in time Barkley is the perfect fit for the Giants. He is a running and receiving threat. With a revamped OL that mitigates a lot of the loss of OBJ because of the extra split second a defense now needs to figure out the possibilities of Barkley, Tate, Shepard, Engram and possibly Slayton (we'll wait to see if Slayton is boom or bust).
We already know that Eli when given an extra second and not running for his life can find the open player. With a decent OL Barkley opens up more options than just in the running game. He opens up the options in general. That, my friends, is not fungible.
Part of the problem you are missing is -- what if you think the OL still isn't very good? And to further that-- what if you think like SY (who would've passed on Jones), like David Te (who thinks Jones was an awful pick), or like Greg Cossell (and I'm sure others) who thought Jones was the 4th best QB - so in summary think that possibly Jones isn't very good?
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
If you have those "concerns" - how much of an impact can one player have in the future getting you to that elite level? You seem more rational than some of the nutjobs on here that have declared some type of war on anyone that has "concerns" over management and the team.
Barkley is an incredible talent. The most exciting player I've seen since LT. If the points you make of OL and Qb and WR are all true -- we win - and SB will be a beast. We'll be comparing him to some of the greatest RB's ever. But if we lose - there will be appreciation for SB but can you deny that you wouldn't be disappointed?
Bottomline is -- I don't think some on here understand that it is okay to have concerns. Also- I don't think people want to accept the fact that QB is the most important position on the football field. Thus when you bypass on a highly regarded QB and you are projected to stink there are and always will be questions if the GM made the right move UNTIL THEY START TO WIN. SO we drafted a QB now. If he is as good as DG suggests - then we're gonna win a lot more than likely. But let's not pretend that the GMEN, projected to be a 6-10 team this year, that we shouldn't have concerns. I'm supposed to with a BBI poster's "gut feeling" for example on Jones vs SY saying he'd pass on him, Davis Te hating him, and Greg Cossell believing he was the 4th best QB?
on your own 15-yard line. If Saquon is coming out of the huddle, you have a LOT more to worry about than if it's some other run-of-the-mill back. He can run inside, outside, over you or past you, and he can line up anywhere outside the tackles and be a threat to cut back inside or catch a screen pass or a shovel pass, or run a reverse, or even run a route across the middle.
He is truly a monster Swiss-army-knife threat, and he makes us a much better team, if we use him right.
RE: Imagine you're an opposing MLB defending the Giants Â
on your own 15-yard line. If Saquon is coming out of the huddle, you have a LOT more to worry about than if it's some other run-of-the-mill back. He can run inside, outside, over you or past you, and he can line up anywhere outside the tackles and be a threat to cut back inside or catch a screen pass or a shovel pass, or run a reverse, or even run a route across the middle.
He is truly a monster Swiss-army-knife threat, and he makes us a much better team, if we use him right.
We used him as “right” as possible. Unfortunately, we gave up leads late because of our D
Part of the problem you are missing is -- what if you think the OL still isn't very good? And to further that-- what if you think... in summary think that possibly Jones isn't very good?
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
My response to all those concerns is that PSU wasn't "very good" at those positions either. They were a .500 team before Barkley, and he brought them.to FBS championship consideration.
Imagine thinking the Giants haven't had any talent in 15 years. Â
The OLine we had from 2005-2011, Michael Strahan, Justin Tuck, Osi, Pierce, Kiwi, Nicks, Cruz, Shockey, Beckham, Tiki, Jacobs, Bradshaw, Manningham. All scrubs.
Which only reinforces the fact that football is a team game, and why I couldn't care less about an individual player's stats if the team isn't winning.
Part of the problem you are missing is -- what if you think the OL still isn't very good? And to further that-- what if you think... in summary think that possibly Jones isn't very good?
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
My response to all those concerns is that PSU wasn't "very good" at those positions either. They were a .500 team before Barkley, and he brought them.to FBS championship consideration.
My response to this is that college football is nothing like the pros, especially conferences other than the SEC and Clemson.
Part of the problem you are missing is -- what if you think the OL still isn't very good? And to further that-- what if you think... in summary think that possibly Jones isn't very good?
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
My response to all those concerns is that PSU wasn't "very good" at those positions either. They were a .500 team before Barkley, and he brought them.to FBS championship consideration.
Uh, the PSU program was in a tailspin because of the Sandusky disaster that broke in 2011. The football program was on life support. On the verge of the death penalty.
Barkley didn't save or restore it. Billy O'Brien did; and then James Franklin expanded where O'Brien left off.
Part of the problem you are missing is -- what if you think the OL still isn't very good? And to further that-- what if you think... in summary think that possibly Jones isn't very good?
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
My response to all those concerns is that PSU wasn't "very good" at those positions either. They were a .500 team before Barkley, and he brought them.to FBS championship consideration.
Uh, the PSU program was in a tailspin because of the Sandusky disaster that broke in 2011. The football program was on life support. On the verge of the death penalty.
Barkley didn't save or restore it. Billy O'Brien did; and then James Franklin expanded where O'Brien left off.
Joe Moorhead did far more than that buffoon Franklin.
I'm not a huge Franklin guy either - not fond of his Xs and Os - but he's been a very good recruiter and has had PSU consistently around or inside the top ten in recruiting rankings.
I'm not a huge Franklin guy either - not fond of his Xs and Os - but he's been a very good recruiter and has had PSU consistently around or inside the top ten in recruiting rankings.
I suppose. But he seems like a clown to me.
He only had success b/c of the O Moorhead gave him - of which Barkley was an integral part. And D. Jones fits that type of offense much better than Eli - that’s the blueprint of an O the Giants should follow with Jones. And the sooner the better.
Rahne did a good job last year as the PSU OC. They averaged over 45ppg. Most in a long time. So I think Rahne will keep them moving forward on the Xs and Os.
McSorley will be very difficult to replace. He was THE heart and soul of that team for three years. Not Barkley, as suggested above.
I never liked the Franklin hire. But have been very pleased with his ability to get talent.
I think you missed the point...
Thinking the point of the quote went over your head, bud.
Quote:
while we go 5-11...is that better?
I think you missed the point...
He’s still pissed we didn’t take Darnold or possibly Rosen
FROM Barkley
Quote:
In comment 14502318 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
while we go 5-11...is that better?
I think you missed the point...
He’s still pissed we didn’t take Darnold or possibly Rosen
Not at all. Why the shot?
Quote:
In comment 14502324 ZogZerg said:
Quote:
In comment 14502318 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
while we go 5-11...is that better?
I think you missed the point...
He’s still pissed we didn’t take Darnold or possibly Rosen
Not at all. Why the shot?
Sorry, I thought you were part of the Darnold (Rosen crowd) for Prez crowd. 😎 My bad
Quote:
In comment 14502327 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
In comment 14502324 ZogZerg said:
Quote:
In comment 14502318 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
while we go 5-11...is that better?
I think you missed the point...
He’s still pissed we didn’t take Darnold or possibly Rosen
Not at all. Why the shot?
Sorry, I thought you were part of the Darnold (Rosen crowd) for Prez crowd. 😎 My bad
No worries BB
Although the stigmas really need to fade on here because small minorities of posters that just happen to post a lot don’t follow the same thinking
lol
We're now up to 15 years?
That's ridiculous dude. This notion the Giants have been a tragic, talent bereft team all of Manning's career is getting comical.
The 2005-2011 era was extremely talented.
If the Giants had hit on the 3 lineman they picked in the 1st or 2nd round between 2013-2015, this era of Giants football would look very different.
By 2016 the Giants were a stacked team all over the field outside of o-line.
The Giants have suffered from mismanagement, bizarre injuries, spells of shitty coaching, and some huge misses in the draft. But all told, have had some really talented, underachieving teams too.
Quote:
Didn’t fuck up by drafting a talented player.
We're now up to 15 years?
That's ridiculous dude. This notion the Giants have been a tragic, talent bereft team all of Manning's career is getting comical.
The 2005-2011 era was extremely talented.
If the Giants had hit on the 3 lineman they picked in the 1st or 2nd round between 2013-2015, this era of Giants football would look very different.
By 2016 the Giants were a stacked team all over the field outside of o-line.
The Giants have suffered from mismanagement, bizarre injuries, spells of shitty coaching, and some huge misses in the draft. But all told, have had some really talented, underachieving teams too.
Spot on
And it's not like that team was full of guys who don't belong in the league. Of the opening day starters all but Jonathan Casillas is still on an NFL roster.
Quote:
In comment 14502335 dep026 said:
Quote:
Didn’t fuck up by drafting a talented player.
We're now up to 15 years?
That's ridiculous dude. This notion the Giants have been a tragic, talent bereft team all of Manning's career is getting comical.
The 2005-2011 era was extremely talented.
If the Giants had hit on the 3 lineman they picked in the 1st or 2nd round between 2013-2015, this era of Giants football would look very different.
By 2016 the Giants were a stacked team all over the field outside of o-line.
The Giants have suffered from mismanagement, bizarre injuries, spells of shitty coaching, and some huge misses in the draft. But all told, have had some really talented, underachieving teams too.
Spot on
Barkley clearly has a good head on his shoulders. Even if he is friends with Baker Mayfield
C'mon dep, WTF is that "nearly 15 years"? Oh I suppose Eli won SB 46 dragging the sad sack of a team behind him, is that your point?
Eli was in fact a beast in 2011, but he had Nicks, Cruz, and Manningham, IMO the best WR trio in the league, and a darn good defense once they got healthy.
Ph Bradshaw and Jacobs, fire and earth, helped a lot too. That was overall a very talented team aside from a poor OL.
Quote:
In comment 14502370 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 14502335 dep026 said:
Quote:
Didn’t fuck up by drafting a talented player.
We're now up to 15 years?
That's ridiculous dude. This notion the Giants have been a tragic, talent bereft team all of Manning's career is getting comical.
The 2005-2011 era was extremely talented.
If the Giants had hit on the 3 lineman they picked in the 1st or 2nd round between 2013-2015, this era of Giants football would look very different.
By 2016 the Giants were a stacked team all over the field outside of o-line.
The Giants have suffered from mismanagement, bizarre injuries, spells of shitty coaching, and some huge misses in the draft. But all told, have had some really talented, underachieving teams too.
Spot on
+2.
Barkley clearly has a good head on his shoulders. Even if he is friends with Baker Mayfield
😂
And it's not like that team was full of guys who don't belong in the league. Of the opening day starters all but Jonathan Casillas is still on an NFL roster.
And many here scoffed at the Eagles hiring Pederson and were quite delighted McAdoo didn’t sign with them..Lol
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
Yes, that’s exactly what it is: more support..Smh
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
Marshawn Lynch. Adrian Peterson. Elliot. Depends on the RB. And as usual you let pretend your opinion is fact.
Personally IMO WR is the most plug in and play position in the NFL. As Belechick has actually proven. But he’s not the great football mind that you are. Is he
He’s been here one fucking year.
Sports coverage blows.
Most dumb ass fans and talkies can’t process this.
PS — 15 years is a bit of a stretch. Dial it down to about 5-6.
And it's not like that team was full of guys who don't belong in the league. Of the opening day starters all but Jonathan Casillas is still on an NFL roster.
Mcadoo.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
based on what? More and more bulllshit.
Quote:
don't have a material impact on the outcome of games like other positions.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
based on what? More and more bulllshit.
This argument is one of the dumbest I’ve seen that keeps getting regurgitated by the “I wanted a QB, damn it!” crowd. Barkley is literally the only rookie in the history of the NFL that is deemed a failure because he didn’t single handily carry his team to the playoffs. Because those guys wanted a QB. We can go through a laundry list of elite players at every single position bw listed that played in lousy teams. Beckham put up great stats, the team still sucked. I guess WRs are useless so I’m not sure why that position is on his list. Chubb had a phenomenal rookie season for the Broncos, they still sucked. What, a DL couldn’t carry his team all by himself? There are a billion OL and DBs who are/were considered elite that played on losing teams. There are a billion great QBs that couldn’t carry lousy teams to the playoffs.
Yet somehow, someway, Barkley not leading this team to a championship in year one is proof that the position is not important and he was a bad pick. It’s a freakin team game. You need great players. And great coaching. And great management. Barkley is a great player. We need to add more and work on the other two things...
Quote:
don't have a material impact on the outcome of games like other positions.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
Marshawn Lynch. Adrian Peterson. Elliot. Depends on the RB. And as usual you let pretend your opinion is fact.
Personally IMO WR is the most plug in and play position in the NFL. As Belechick has actually proven. But he’s not the great football mind that you are. Is he
Many got their heads up their ass and haven't noticed the Patriots roster and play selection. Formulated the win the SB template with Lagerette Blount and drafted Michel in round 1 and foolishly didn't listen to bbiers who said someone just as good is available in the 7th.
Quote:
don't have a material impact on the outcome of games like other positions.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
based on what? More and more bulllshit.
It's actually not. There is an abundant supply from the college ranks seemingly every year. And quality RBs throughout the league on other team's rosters. It's become the most commoditized position in the game. Like shopping at the grocery store for soda. So with 53 roster spots to fill it just doesn't make economical sense to build a roster around a position that is fungible. Teams have demonstrated over the last two decades - Pats, Giants, Eagles, Colts, Denver, Pittsburgh, Green Bay, etc - that you can win a SB without a high profile, high salaried RB. I've never doubted Barkley's talents, I just doubt his position.
Look, I detest the NFL's cap system. It's merely a way for the owners to cap their direct cost and essentially guarantee thick margins. And it's now punitive if you draft well.
Dallas, for example, has drafted brilliantly the last five years. One of the best right now at evaluating talent. But they are eventually going to lose these home grown players, players Jones could actually afford, because of this idiotic system. So other teams will benefit from Dallas' good work.
If I had my druthers, the league would abolish the cap, and let teams spend as much or as little as the want. Cap the rosters at 65 and let the free market really decide the price for players.
Indeed. A rookie QB's best friend is a running game. And SB looks to be the ideal player to break in Jones because he can bail Jones out in the passing game as well. That's is why I'd start Jones from game one. SB would touch the ball 500+X this year.
It's the best formula to quickly find out if Jones has the goods or not.
The next two years with Barkley spearheading their offense they posted 11-3 and 11-2 records, and his sophomore year damn near went 12-2 by just losing to USC in a game their defense stunk and gave up lead after lead, IIRC. They were within a inch or so of qualifying for the FBS top 4 playoff for the national championship, and that was not a strong team aside from SB - how many PSU players were drafted in 2016 or 2017? Those PSU teams were nowhere near the Clemsons, Bamas, and Oklahomas of the world of CFB. After Barkley left for the NFL - and they had a very good RB replace him who became a 3rd round NFL draft pick - they dropped back to single digit Ws at 9-4.
Barkley ultimately may have a similar effect on the Giants. Why not?
The next two years with Barkley spearheading their offense they posted 11-3 and 11-2 records, and his sophomore year damn near went 12-2 by just losing to USC in a game their defense stunk and gave up lead after lead, IIRC. They were within a inch or so of qualifying for the FBS top 4 playoff for the national championship, and that was not a strong team aside from SB - how many PSU players were drafted in 2016 or 2017? Those PSU teams were nowhere near the Clemsons, Bamas, and Oklahomas of the world of CFB. After Barkley left for the NFL - and they had a very good RB replace him who became a 3rd round NFL draft pick - they dropped back to single digit Ws at 9-4.
Barkley ultimately may have a similar effect on the Giants. Why not?
Exactly. I'm amazed that everyone completely misses the point about Barkley. True, RB's are relatively fungible in today's NFL. But right now, at this moment in time Barkley is the perfect fit for the Giants. He is a running and receiving threat. With a revamped OL that mitigates a lot of the loss of OBJ because of the extra split second a defense now needs to figure out the possibilities of Barkley, Tate, Shepard, Engram and possibly Slayton (we'll wait to see if Slayton is boom or bust).
We already know that Eli when given an extra second and not running for his life can find the open player. With a decent OL Barkley opens up more options than just in the running game. He opens up the options in general. That, my friends, is not fungible.
Quote:
In comment 14502524 bw in dc said:
Quote:
don't have a material impact on the outcome of games like other positions.
It's simply an inferior position to QB, OL, WR, DL, DBs.
based on what? More and more bulllshit.
This argument is one of the dumbest I’ve seen that keeps getting regurgitated by the “I wanted a QB, damn it!” crowd. Barkley is literally the only rookie in the history of the NFL that is deemed a failure because he didn’t single handily carry his team to the playoffs. Because those guys wanted a QB. We can go through a laundry list of elite players at every single position bw listed that played in lousy teams. Beckham put up great stats, the team still sucked. I guess WRs are useless so I’m not sure why that position is on his list. Chubb had a phenomenal rookie season for the Broncos, they still sucked. What, a DL couldn’t carry his team all by himself? There are a billion OL and DBs who are/were considered elite that played on losing teams. There are a billion great QBs that couldn’t carry lousy teams to the playoffs.
Yet somehow, someway, Barkley not leading this team to a championship in year one is proof that the position is not important and he was a bad pick. It’s a freakin team game. You need great players. And great coaching. And great management. Barkley is a great player. We need to add more and work on the other two things...
My God -- your post is such distorted bullshit. Holy crap.
Quote:
like Barkley can do for your team's W/L record, I think you might consider looking at what he did already for PSU's W/L record. He's damn near a unique talent. PSU went through what 5 seasons straight without double digit wins before SB arrived on campusin 2015, and again SB's freshman year (for the 2nd year in a row) posted a record of 7-6.
The next two years with Barkley spearheading their offense they posted 11-3 and 11-2 records, and his sophomore year damn near went 12-2 by just losing to USC in a game their defense stunk and gave up lead after lead, IIRC. They were within a inch or so of qualifying for the FBS top 4 playoff for the national championship, and that was not a strong team aside from SB - how many PSU players were drafted in 2016 or 2017? Those PSU teams were nowhere near the Clemsons, Bamas, and Oklahomas of the world of CFB. After Barkley left for the NFL - and they had a very good RB replace him who became a 3rd round NFL draft pick - they dropped back to single digit Ws at 9-4.
Barkley ultimately may have a similar effect on the Giants. Why not?
Exactly. I'm amazed that everyone completely misses the point about Barkley. True, RB's are relatively fungible in today's NFL. But right now, at this moment in time Barkley is the perfect fit for the Giants. He is a running and receiving threat. With a revamped OL that mitigates a lot of the loss of OBJ because of the extra split second a defense now needs to figure out the possibilities of Barkley, Tate, Shepard, Engram and possibly Slayton (we'll wait to see if Slayton is boom or bust).
We already know that Eli when given an extra second and not running for his life can find the open player. With a decent OL Barkley opens up more options than just in the running game. He opens up the options in general. That, my friends, is not fungible.
Part of the problem you are missing is -- what if you think the OL still isn't very good? And to further that-- what if you think like SY (who would've passed on Jones), like David Te (who thinks Jones was an awful pick), or like Greg Cossell (and I'm sure others) who thought Jones was the 4th best QB - so in summary think that possibly Jones isn't very good?
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
If you have those "concerns" - how much of an impact can one player have in the future getting you to that elite level? You seem more rational than some of the nutjobs on here that have declared some type of war on anyone that has "concerns" over management and the team.
Barkley is an incredible talent. The most exciting player I've seen since LT. If the points you make of OL and Qb and WR are all true -- we win - and SB will be a beast. We'll be comparing him to some of the greatest RB's ever. But if we lose - there will be appreciation for SB but can you deny that you wouldn't be disappointed?
Bottomline is -- I don't think some on here understand that it is okay to have concerns. Also- I don't think people want to accept the fact that QB is the most important position on the football field. Thus when you bypass on a highly regarded QB and you are projected to stink there are and always will be questions if the GM made the right move UNTIL THEY START TO WIN. SO we drafted a QB now. If he is as good as DG suggests - then we're gonna win a lot more than likely. But let's not pretend that the GMEN, projected to be a 6-10 team this year, that we shouldn't have concerns. I'm supposed to with a BBI poster's "gut feeling" for example on Jones vs SY saying he'd pass on him, Davis Te hating him, and Greg Cossell believing he was the 4th best QB?
Quote:
while we go 5-11...is that better?
Thinking the point of the quote went over your head, bud.
yeah...there is a lot of that around here
He is truly a monster Swiss-army-knife threat, and he makes us a much better team, if we use him right.
He is truly a monster Swiss-army-knife threat, and he makes us a much better team, if we use him right.
We used him as “right” as possible. Unfortunately, we gave up leads late because of our D
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
My response to all those concerns is that PSU wasn't "very good" at those positions either. They were a .500 team before Barkley, and he brought them.to FBS championship consideration.
Quote:
Part of the problem you are missing is -- what if you think the OL still isn't very good? And to further that-- what if you think... in summary think that possibly Jones isn't very good?
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
My response to all those concerns is that PSU wasn't "very good" at those positions either. They were a .500 team before Barkley, and he brought them.to FBS championship consideration.
My response to this is that college football is nothing like the pros, especially conferences other than the SEC and Clemson.
Quote:
Part of the problem you are missing is -- what if you think the OL still isn't very good? And to further that-- what if you think... in summary think that possibly Jones isn't very good?
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
My response to all those concerns is that PSU wasn't "very good" at those positions either. They were a .500 team before Barkley, and he brought them.to FBS championship consideration.
Uh, the PSU program was in a tailspin because of the Sandusky disaster that broke in 2011. The football program was on life support. On the verge of the death penalty.
Barkley didn't save or restore it. Billy O'Brien did; and then James Franklin expanded where O'Brien left off.
Quote:
Quote:
Part of the problem you are missing is -- what if you think the OL still isn't very good? And to further that-- what if you think... in summary think that possibly Jones isn't very good?
And what if you don't think the receiving core is very good?
My response to all those concerns is that PSU wasn't "very good" at those positions either. They were a .500 team before Barkley, and he brought them.to FBS championship consideration.
Uh, the PSU program was in a tailspin because of the Sandusky disaster that broke in 2011. The football program was on life support. On the verge of the death penalty.
Barkley didn't save or restore it. Billy O'Brien did; and then James Franklin expanded where O'Brien left off.
Joe Moorhead did far more than that buffoon Franklin.
I suppose. But he seems like a clown to me.
He only had success b/c of the O Moorhead gave him - of which Barkley was an integral part. And D. Jones fits that type of offense much better than Eli - that’s the blueprint of an O the Giants should follow with Jones. And the sooner the better.
McSorley will be very difficult to replace. He was THE heart and soul of that team for three years. Not Barkley, as suggested above.
I never liked the Franklin hire. But have been very pleased with his ability to get talent.