And realize that Pay Shurmur thinks this is a playoff team as of today. And in order to make the playoffs... he feels Eli is the best route.
Players don’t play for 2020. They are playing for 2019.
Of course. And Shurmur's immediate motivations (job security) are different than Gettleman's.
But that doesn't make it right.
Doesn’t make it wrong either. The point is get to the dance. And Shurmur is going to do what he thinks is best to get them there.
To me there is no difference is Jones starts 4, 6, or even 8 games. Every season is a new animal. It has been proven you can sit the whole year or play 1 game and be fine.
It's been shown that it can happen, but history shows it's not remotely likely.
It's proven that people win the lottery but I wouldn't invest my retirement fund in lottery tickets.
And there are examples of it happening when starting day 1. But no two situations are the same. If this team stinks like many are proclaiming, why play him? Won’t bad habits formed? This isn’t Prescott coming in with an all world offense to run either.
Again.... if the goal is to make the playoffs... the better QB plays. Period.
And I said this before. If you’re going young, then cut Bethea. Trade jackrabbit and ogletree as well. Right?
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
That answer can not be determined. How much better did Rosen gst? And he’s still not the starter in Miami.
And there are examples of it happening when starting day 1. But no two situations are the same. If this team stinks like many are proclaiming, why play him? Won’t bad habits formed? This isn’t Prescott coming in with an all world offense to run either.
Again.... if the goal is to make the playoffs... the better QB plays. Period.
And I said this before. If you’re going young, then cut Bethea. Trade jackrabbit and ogletree as well. Right?
If it's likely to happen, then the opinion should be to start him day one.
If you think he is worthy of the 6th pick and he will be the guy he is going to be from the get go, let's get it going.
I don't think you actually believe that though, you are just looking for reasons to keep playing Eli.
If you think Eli still has it and we can win with him fine Â
I have been as big of Jones fan as anyone on this site.
I want the best player to play, and right now it’s Eli. If he gives us the best chance to make the playoffs then I want him to be the QB. It’s really simple.
But maybe I think you want to start Jones “cause you no longer support Eli.” Fun to make stupid claims, right?
The Giants have botched this whole situation from jump Â
If they wanted to draft Jones they never should have brought Eli back. And don't tell me some crap like "oh they couldn't know Jones would be there at 6". EVERYONE knew Jones would be there at 6. Because best case scenario is where they are now, which is not a great situation. Where everyone (except dep) knows Jones should be starting but can't because Eli is still here.
And you think Eli wants this? To know if he starts 0-3 (insert whatever bad record you want here) that he may not start the rest of the season? That doesn't sound fun to me. And he's already said he wants to keep playing. You think he wants to be a backup this year when things go south? And they will go south, this is not a playoff team. How does that help him for his next contract?
The best thing they could do for Eli is to trade him. Forget draft pick compensation in return, it's the best they could do by both Eli and Jones.
I have been as big of Jones fan as anyone on this site.
I want the best player to play, and right now it’s Eli. If he gives us the best chance to make the playoffs then I want him to be the QB. It’s really simple.
But maybe I think you want to start Jones “cause you no longer support Eli.” Fun to make stupid claims, right?
You realize you're robbing Peter to pay Paul, right? If your opinion is correct, you're benefitting the Giants this year in a year where we most likely won't make the playoffs and almost definitely won't win a Super Bowl, at the expense of a year in the future because Jones, unless he has some Patrick Mahomes in him will lose a year of development. And in that year of development, we might have a much better and more experienced team than this year. There's just no substitute for playing, no matter how much film he watches.
I have been as big of Jones fan as anyone on this site.
I want the best player to play, and right now it’s Eli. If he gives us the best chance to make the playoffs then I want him to be the QB. It’s really simple.
But maybe I think you want to start Jones “cause you no longer support Eli.” Fun to make stupid claims, right?
You realize you're robbing Peter to pay Paul, right? If your opinion is correct, you're benefitting the Giants this year in a year where we most likely won't make the playoffs and almost definitely won't win a Super Bowl, at the expense of a year in the future because Jones, unless he has some Patrick Mahomes in him will lose a year of development. And in that year of development, we might have a much better and more experienced team than this year. There's just no substitute for playing, no matter how much film he watches.
I should say in that year that we lose we might have a better team than this year. In fact, we most likely will.
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
Again, we debated this earlier this week. Some here feel there is no difference if he had 10 games or not.
I don’t tend to agree the experience is valuable but that’s the question. Add in fan optimism for a 2019 season and/or inability to let go of Eli and next you know we have a 500 post thread arguing nonsensical points of view.
I don’t tend to agree. The experience is valuable. Â
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
The opportunity costs are huge. The sooner we play Jones the sooner we can discern if he's a boom or a bust. If he's a boom, then we likely have more financial resources to to build around Jones. If he's a bust, we can begin looking for other solutions. I'm perplexed more people don't see that more clearly and want to accelerate the process.
The more Eli plays the more time we essentially waste getting to that inflection point. Because at the end of the day, despite the NFL being as unpredictable as ever, the odds are still very much stacked against us that we can compete for big prizes in 2019.
I actually think Jones is potentially better equipped to help this team win more than Eli. Shurmur's playbook is a helluva lot more geared to exploit Jones's athleticism than Eli's lack thereof...
And 1-7 last year. The team has a lot of young players and new free agents/trade acquisitions. I expect another slow start at which point Jones will start because the offense is stuck in the mud
How come I knew there would be this thread today Â
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
The opportunity costs are huge. The sooner we play Jones the sooner we can discern if he's a boom or a bust. If he's a boom, then we likely have more financial resources to to build around Jones. If he's a bust, we can begin looking for other solutions. I'm perplexed more people don't see that more clearly and want to accelerate the process.
The more Eli plays the more time we essentially waste getting to that inflection point. Because at the end of the day, despite the NFL being as unpredictable as ever, the odds are still very much stacked against us that we can compete for big prizes in 2019.
I actually think Jones is potentially better equipped to help this team win more than Eli. Shurmur's playbook is a helluva lot more geared to exploit Jones's athleticism than Eli's lack thereof...
.
While I am not necessarily disagreeing with you,
when you hear Mara talks like he does recently...
that doesn't help the scenario you would like to create.
With that said, at some point this year, I would presume Jones will be starting, since I am expecting another losing season.
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
The opportunity costs are huge. The sooner we play Jones the sooner we can discern if he's a boom or a bust. If he's a boom, then we likely have more financial resources to to build around Jones. If he's a bust, we can begin looking for other solutions. I'm perplexed more people don't see that more clearly and want to accelerate the process.
The more Eli plays the more time we essentially waste getting to that inflection point. Because at the end of the day, despite the NFL being as unpredictable as ever, the odds are still very much stacked against us that we can compete for big prizes in 2019.
I actually think Jones is potentially better equipped to help this team win more than Eli. Shurmur's playbook is a helluva lot more geared to exploit Jones's athleticism than Eli's lack thereof...
Do you really think there are legitimate odds that Jones really busts, though? In a way where we'd know after ~10 starts as a rookie that we need to seek an alternative?
I can see struggles - but I can't imagine him being that bad that we'd be able to draw that conclusion so soon. I'd be stunned if Jones played significant snaps this year and was literally so bad that we reverse course and decide he's not a viable option going forward.
Anything can happen, but that would really shock me.
I understand the opportunity cost argument here; but I actually think those arguments were more sound regarding Barkley since the shelf-life of a running back can be markedly shorter than that of a QB.
We have time with Jones.
I look at it this way...
There's only one scenario in my mind where Jones doesn't see action this year, and it's the unlikely scenario where the Giants eclipse the midway point of the year and are legitimately in the mix and are winning football games and Eli has a lot to do with it.
Again - this is unlikely and I would be surprised.
But, if the Giants are 5-3 after 8 games and Eli is playing some really good ball, I don't see the major harm in continuing to allow him to play. The object is to win, isn't it?
Now, what I expect to happen.... is an uneven start to the year. I think the Giants will be up and down most of the season.
The spot where I could see the QB change happening is after Week 6 - when we play the Patriots on the road on TNF. That's going to be an extremely, extremely tough game to win coming off the Vikings and just 4 days to prepare.
So, if through 6 games, we're 2-4 or something like that... you've got 10 days to get Daniel ready to go against Arizona at home on October 20 - which I think would be a good spot for him to take the reins.
As long as they don't stick with Eli through poor play/performance longer than they need to, I don't think there's going to be much of a difference in Jones' career trajectory whether he sees action in 10 games this year, or 6.
The way NYG handled Eli's rookie year was totally fine, and didn't have any negative impact on Eli. Eli was firmly entrenched as the starter going into 2005 - and I believe that will be the case with Jones going into 2020. Eli did quite alright in his first season despite not getting a full slate in 2004.
We will have time here. I think NYG could very feasibly produce a championship caliber roster before Jones' rookie deal is up.
If Gettleman handles this right, we should be expecting playoffs as soon as next year.
RE: RE: So tell me again, if Jones starts 6-8 games Â
But I'm not as convinced as you are that they will handle it in the sensible manner they did in 04
My nightmare scenario is hearing about how good of a week of practice they had as they flounder under 500 but keep playing Eli as no one has run away with the NFCE.
I'm willing to let it play out though, not like I have another option
I just think the cries for Jones will be too loud to ignore if NYG aren't performing and winning games with Eli.
It was one thing when the backups were Geno Smith, Davis Webb, or Kyle Lauletta - but now, we invested a 6th overall pick in a QB. That's a guy that is expected to not only play, but be the future of the franchise.
The hook might not be as quick as I'd like to see in the event we're struggling... but I do think it'll be way too difficult for Shurmur to keep Jones on the sidelines if the Giants get off to a bad start.
If they keep sending Eli out there far longer than they should, I will be right there with you guys and will be aggravated.
Everyone on this board will be calling for Jones and the entire stadium will be chanting for Jones the very first time bad Eli shows up for an entire game. I'm sad. It will happen as sure as the sun will shine again tomorrow. It will be ugly. Jones has played too well, it is inevitable.
The truth is, the Giants are not talented enough to win this year Â
In fact, it's unlikely they'll finish above .500 with Manning and probably with Jones. If this is the case, it makes little sense to play Manning. Jones' arm and mobility are superior to Manning. Manning has an edge knowledge-wise. But since the Giants aren't going anywhere this year, not much point in playing Manning. Play Jones and let him develop. Things would be different if Jones were Lauletta who has physical limitations.
In fact, it's unlikely they'll finish above .500 with Manning and probably with Jones. If this is the case, it makes little sense to play Manning. Jones' arm and mobility are superior to Manning. Manning has an edge knowledge-wise. But since the Giants aren't going anywhere this year, not much point in playing Manning. Play Jones and let him develop. Things would be different if Jones were Lauletta who has physical limitations.
I don't think Jones necessarily has a superior arm to Manning.
Mobility, yes.
But - don't discount the comfort level and the ability to read the field, go through progressions, diagnose blitzes, etc.
Eli is going to be far more prepared to handle stuff like that in the early going.
As long as the Giants handle this in a way where Jones gets to play should Eli and the offense/team struggle in the early going, it's not a bad move to let Eli take the reins out of the gates.
The goal is to win games, and the Giants are going to give the ball to the guy they believe gives them the best chance.
Love what I have seen from Jones, but it'll be a lot harder in Dallas once he's got guys twisting and stunting inside and blitzes are coming from all different angles. Eli will handle these reads better and will pick them up faster.
From an ability standpoint, I tend to agree there's probably not THAT much Eli does at this point that Daniel cannot. But, don't discount the cerebral aspect of the game and the fact that Eli has seen it all after a decade and a half.
In what will probably be a close game - the more we can minimize mistakes, the better off we probably are.
RE: The truth is, the Giants are not talented enough to win this year Â
In fact, it's unlikely they'll finish above .500 with Manning and probably with Jones. If this is the case, it makes little sense to play Manning. Jones' arm and mobility are superior to Manning. Manning has an edge knowledge-wise. But since the Giants aren't going anywhere this year, not much point in playing Manning. Play Jones and let him develop. Things would be different if Jones were Lauletta who has physical limitations.
DG and the Giants org have kept mentioning how they go 6-2 or even 7-1 2nd half last year if the D could make just one stop late in games. This team despite the collective youths learning curve on Defense should be markedly better than that team.
10-6 or even better with some health is not out of the question.
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
The opportunity costs are huge. The sooner we play Jones the sooner we can discern if he's a boom or a bust. If he's a boom, then we likely have more financial resources to to build around Jones. If he's a bust, we can begin looking for other solutions. I'm perplexed more people don't see that more clearly and want to accelerate the process.
The more Eli plays the more time we essentially waste getting to that inflection point. Because at the end of the day, despite the NFL being as unpredictable as ever, the odds are still very much stacked against us that we can compete for big prizes in 2019.
I actually think Jones is potentially better equipped to help this team win more than Eli. Shurmur's playbook is a helluva lot more geared to exploit Jones's athleticism than Eli's lack thereof...
Do you really think there are legitimate odds that Jones really busts, though? In a way where we'd know after ~10 starts as a rookie that we need to seek an alternative?
I can see struggles - but I can't imagine him being that bad that we'd be able to draw that conclusion so soon. I'd be stunned if Jones played significant snaps this year and was literally so bad that we reverse course and decide he's not a viable option going forward.
Anything can happen, but that would really shock me.
I understand the opportunity cost argument here; but I actually think those arguments were more sound regarding Barkley since the shelf-life of a running back can be markedly shorter than that of a QB.
We have time with Jones.
I look at it this way...
There's only one scenario in my mind where Jones doesn't see action this year, and it's the unlikely scenario where the Giants eclipse the midway point of the year and are legitimately in the mix and are winning football games and Eli has a lot to do with it.
Again - this is unlikely and I would be surprised.
But, if the Giants are 5-3 after 8 games and Eli is playing some really good ball, I don't see the major harm in continuing to allow him to play. The object is to win, isn't it?
Now, what I expect to happen.... is an uneven start to the year. I think the Giants will be up and down most of the season.
The spot where I could see the QB change happening is after Week 6 - when we play the Patriots on the road on TNF. That's going to be an extremely, extremely tough game to win coming off the Vikings and just 4 days to prepare.
So, if through 6 games, we're 2-4 or something like that... you've got 10 days to get Daniel ready to go against Arizona at home on October 20 - which I think would be a good spot for him to take the reins.
As long as they don't stick with Eli through poor play/performance longer than they need to, I don't think there's going to be much of a difference in Jones' career trajectory whether he sees action in 10 games this year, or 6.
The way NYG handled Eli's rookie year was totally fine, and didn't have any negative impact on Eli. Eli was firmly entrenched as the starter going into 2005 - and I believe that will be the case with Jones going into 2020. Eli did quite alright in his first season despite not getting a full slate in 2004.
We will have time here. I think NYG could very feasibly produce a championship caliber roster before Jones' rookie deal is up.
If Gettleman handles this right, we should be expecting playoffs as soon as next year.
Seems like the vast majority of people would be surprised at 5-3 at the halfway point. So why not just start Jones from the start?
RE: First of all I agree that the bust scenario is far fetched Â
But I'm not as convinced as you are that they will handle it in the sensible manner they did in 04
My nightmare scenario is hearing about how good of a week of practice they had as they flounder under 500 but keep playing Eli as no one has run away with the NFCE.
I'm willing to let it play out though, not like I have another option
Wouldn't be surprised honestly. Kurt Warner doesn't have shit on Eli as far as accomplishments for this franchise. One was a stop gap signed for a season, one was a 15 year starter with 2 Super Bowl rings and 2 Super Bowl game winning drives under his belt. Can't compare the situations.
Because they probably feel Eli still presents the best opportunity to win early on. I don't really disagree with it, either.
Going into a very loud AT&T Stadium for Week 1 and dealing with a defense that is no longer holding anything back and facing starters for 4 quarters is a different animal - and one Eli is almost certainly better-equipped to handle right now. He's opened in Dallas like 5 different times in his career now. He knows what to expect.
I really believe Eli is going to perform better than people are expecting him to. It has been a while since he's had both a capable offensive line - and he's never had an elite RB like Saquon up until last year.
Just my take... but I think Eli is tired of hearing that he's finished. We're going to get everything he's got in the tank.
Playing Jones isn't solely about Jones -- it's also about assessing the components needed to surround Jones with and with what he works well.
Quarterback is an outsized position -- it's who you build around, what type of weapons you acquire, what types of safety blankets are needed, and what type of players you avoid.
If the Giants come out of this year with out 8 games of Jones or a playoff birth, it's a disaster.
CBS Sports just put out an article for Colts trade options Â
Like most high investments in QBs, I say the boom/bust rate is 50% on Jones. I think that's basically been the historical trend, right? I wouldn't begin to suggest my crystal ball is better than anyone else's.
I'm stunned you don't see a difference between playing 6 games or 10. That's another 24 quarters of live football. That's the most important piece to Jones's development - experience. The more he's sees in terms of D schemes, game speed, etc, the better.
The object is to win - yes. And I'm okay taking the risk to do that with Jones.
Playing Jones isn't solely about Jones -- it's also about assessing the components needed to surround Jones with and with what he works well.
Quarterback is an outsized position -- it's who you build around, what type of weapons you acquire, what types of safety blankets are needed, and what type of players you avoid.
If the Giants come out of this year with out 8 games of Jones or a playoff birth, it's a disaster.
I agree with the ultimate point you arrive at - if Jones doesn't play half the season or more, and we aren't a playoff team - that's probably worst-case scenario.
But - I also don't think there's a whole lot we need to figure out in terms of what we put around him. The RB is in place - we all believe Barkley has generational, all-world ability and will be a best friend for whoever we put out there.
We need to emphasize two areas next offseason to really get this offense to where it needs to be -
1. OL (Long-term answer @ RT, depth, perhaps Solder's eventual replacement(
2. Top flight WR
I think without Jones even playing, those things are evident.
A big time, two-way TE would be a luxury - I'd love to add that as well. But I expect us to do it by committee for now - with Engram being the big pass catching threat, and the other guys being relied on more in traditional roles that emphasize blocking.
We're close - I think we just need another year and some experience for Daniel and if Gettleman can swing another strong draft and FA period where we'll have money to spend, this should be a team that really pushes for a playoff spot in 2020.
Like most high investments in QBs, I say the boom/bust rate is 50% on Jones. I think that's basically been the historical trend, right? I wouldn't begin to suggest my crystal ball is better than anyone else's.
I'm stunned you don't see a difference between playing 6 games or 10. That's another 24 quarters of live football. That's the most important piece to Jones's development - experience. The more he's sees in terms of D schemes, game speed, etc, the better.
The object is to win - yes. And I'm okay taking the risk to do that with Jones.
There are a lot of options between boom and bust.
I’d cay the chances he is a bust ie doesn’t get to play out his rookie deal are minuscule
Like most high investments in QBs, I say the boom/bust rate is 50% on Jones. I think that's basically been the historical trend, right? I wouldn't begin to suggest my crystal ball is better than anyone else's.
I'm stunned you don't see a difference between playing 6 games or 10. That's another 24 quarters of live football. That's the most important piece to Jones's development - experience. The more he's sees in terms of D schemes, game speed, etc, the better.
The object is to win - yes. And I'm okay taking the risk to do that with Jones.
I really don't believe the ~4 game difference is going to swing him in one way or another. The furthest I'd go there is to say that more experience and PT are almost certainly not going to do any harm. So, sure - the more he gets, the better. But to me, him getting 8 games or 12 games isn't going to swing the pendulum much at all.
Mahomes only got 1 start as a rookie. It was fairly nondescript. He was league MVP and threw 50 TD passes in year 2. How much better than that was he going to be even if he had 4-5 more starts in 2017? It was a historic year for a 23 year old kid as it was. I don't think he could have possibly done more than he did.
I expect Jones to get significantly more action than Mahomes did.
Rodgers only attempted 16 garbage time passes as a rookie. Brees started 0 games as a rookie. Brady threw 3 passes as a rookie.
Two of the above guys are 40+ years old now. They're still going and the Pats and Saints are going to be two of the best teams in the NFL.
You have to be careful with the QB - there's no one-size-fits-all proposition for these guys. If Jones turns out to be the real deal, it's not going to matter. He'll be here for years. Just like Eli has been.
If he isn't, it won't be because of 3-4 starts he didn't get as a rookie.
I just don't see any way we'd be able to determine that Jones is a bust this year. He'd have to be horrendous... and after what we've seen of him so far, no matter how simplistic the looks he's seeing are - I'd really be surprised by that.
I could see him struggling and being "eh" - but to play so poorly that we're convinced he was a bad pick this year, that would just really stun me.
The only reason to go with Eli is if you believe Jones will greatly benefit as his understudy which of course is a 20 million dollar investment. Granted, I genuinely believe this team will be competitive this year and we may be in for a very interesting season with Eli. My problem is I’d rather go with Jones now since I think the FA haul next year is going to have this team at the top of the NFC east and I want jones to be ready.
Quote:
In comment 14543920 dep026 said:
Quote:
And realize that Pay Shurmur thinks this is a playoff team as of today. And in order to make the playoffs... he feels Eli is the best route.
Players don’t play for 2020. They are playing for 2019.
Of course. And Shurmur's immediate motivations (job security) are different than Gettleman's.
But that doesn't make it right.
Doesn’t make it wrong either. The point is get to the dance. And Shurmur is going to do what he thinks is best to get them there.
To me there is no difference is Jones starts 4, 6, or even 8 games. Every season is a new animal. It has been proven you can sit the whole year or play 1 game and be fine.
It's been shown that it can happen, but history shows it's not remotely likely.
It's proven that people win the lottery but I wouldn't invest my retirement fund in lottery tickets.
And there are examples of it happening when starting day 1. But no two situations are the same. If this team stinks like many are proclaiming, why play him? Won’t bad habits formed? This isn’t Prescott coming in with an all world offense to run either.
Again.... if the goal is to make the playoffs... the better QB plays. Period.
And I said this before. If you’re going young, then cut Bethea. Trade jackrabbit and ogletree as well. Right?
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
That answer can not be determined. How much better did Rosen gst? And he’s still not the starter in Miami.
Will people still want Jones to start? Even with Eli playing well?
And there are examples of it happening when starting day 1. But no two situations are the same. If this team stinks like many are proclaiming, why play him? Won’t bad habits formed? This isn’t Prescott coming in with an all world offense to run either.
Again.... if the goal is to make the playoffs... the better QB plays. Period.
And I said this before. If you’re going young, then cut Bethea. Trade jackrabbit and ogletree as well. Right?
If it's likely to happen, then the opinion should be to start him day one.
If you think he is worthy of the 6th pick and he will be the guy he is going to be from the get go, let's get it going.
I don't think you actually believe that though, you are just looking for reasons to keep playing Eli.
If you think Jones won't benefit from playing time, that is a non sensical opinion in my view.
I want the best player to play, and right now it’s Eli. If he gives us the best chance to make the playoffs then I want him to be the QB. It’s really simple.
But maybe I think you want to start Jones “cause you no longer support Eli.” Fun to make stupid claims, right?
And you think Eli wants this? To know if he starts 0-3 (insert whatever bad record you want here) that he may not start the rest of the season? That doesn't sound fun to me. And he's already said he wants to keep playing. You think he wants to be a backup this year when things go south? And they will go south, this is not a playoff team. How does that help him for his next contract?
The best thing they could do for Eli is to trade him. Forget draft pick compensation in return, it's the best they could do by both Eli and Jones.
I want the best player to play, and right now it’s Eli. If he gives us the best chance to make the playoffs then I want him to be the QB. It’s really simple.
But maybe I think you want to start Jones “cause you no longer support Eli.” Fun to make stupid claims, right?
You realize you're robbing Peter to pay Paul, right? If your opinion is correct, you're benefitting the Giants this year in a year where we most likely won't make the playoffs and almost definitely won't win a Super Bowl, at the expense of a year in the future because Jones, unless he has some Patrick Mahomes in him will lose a year of development. And in that year of development, we might have a much better and more experienced team than this year. There's just no substitute for playing, no matter how much film he watches.
Quote:
I have been as big of Jones fan as anyone on this site.
I want the best player to play, and right now it’s Eli. If he gives us the best chance to make the playoffs then I want him to be the QB. It’s really simple.
But maybe I think you want to start Jones “cause you no longer support Eli.” Fun to make stupid claims, right?
You realize you're robbing Peter to pay Paul, right? If your opinion is correct, you're benefitting the Giants this year in a year where we most likely won't make the playoffs and almost definitely won't win a Super Bowl, at the expense of a year in the future because Jones, unless he has some Patrick Mahomes in him will lose a year of development. And in that year of development, we might have a much better and more experienced team than this year. There's just no substitute for playing, no matter how much film he watches.
I should say in that year that we lose we might have a better team than this year. In fact, we most likely will.
And I wonder what the players would think of playing a lesssr player at the most important position cause they are projecting for 2020 and beyond.
I am sure that would go over really well in the lockeroom.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
Again, we debated this earlier this week. Some here feel there is no difference if he had 10 games or not.
I don’t tend to agree the experience is valuable but that’s the question. Add in fan optimism for a 2019 season and/or inability to let go of Eli and next you know we have a 500 post thread arguing nonsensical points of view.
And I wonder what the players would think of playing a lesssr player at the most important position cause they are projecting for 2020 and beyond.
I am sure that would go over really well in the lockeroom.
Sign me up for Jones playing 6 to 8 games.
This of course is the second best option behind making the playoffs.
Quote:
The difference of growth is from playing 6-8 games than a whole season.
And I wonder what the players would think of playing a lesssr player at the most important position cause they are projecting for 2020 and beyond.
I am sure that would go over really well in the lockeroom.
Sign me up for Jones playing 6 to 8 games.
This of course is the second best option behind making the playoffs.
Then why are you disagreeing with me? It’s been the point the whole time. Haha
And go..
And go..
You aren’t bright, are you?
You start Eli. If we are winning and in the playoff hunt, he stays in. If he struggles or the team does... then throw Jones in.
You would be the 1 fan who would complain if Eli had a big year and we made the playoffs.
And go..... away.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
The opportunity costs are huge. The sooner we play Jones the sooner we can discern if he's a boom or a bust. If he's a boom, then we likely have more financial resources to to build around Jones. If he's a bust, we can begin looking for other solutions. I'm perplexed more people don't see that more clearly and want to accelerate the process.
The more Eli plays the more time we essentially waste getting to that inflection point. Because at the end of the day, despite the NFL being as unpredictable as ever, the odds are still very much stacked against us that we can compete for big prizes in 2019.
I actually think Jones is potentially better equipped to help this team win more than Eli. Shurmur's playbook is a helluva lot more geared to exploit Jones's athleticism than Eli's lack thereof...
Bw doing his best troll job again.
And I wonder what the players would think of playing a lesssr player at the most important position cause they are projecting for 2020 and beyond.
I am sure that would go over really well in the lockeroom.
It's Gettleman and Mara's job to think of the health and future of the franchise, not the players'.
Quote:
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
The opportunity costs are huge. The sooner we play Jones the sooner we can discern if he's a boom or a bust. If he's a boom, then we likely have more financial resources to to build around Jones. If he's a bust, we can begin looking for other solutions. I'm perplexed more people don't see that more clearly and want to accelerate the process.
The more Eli plays the more time we essentially waste getting to that inflection point. Because at the end of the day, despite the NFL being as unpredictable as ever, the odds are still very much stacked against us that we can compete for big prizes in 2019.
I actually think Jones is potentially better equipped to help this team win more than Eli. Shurmur's playbook is a helluva lot more geared to exploit Jones's athleticism than Eli's lack thereof...
While I am not necessarily disagreeing with you,
when you hear Mara talks like he does recently...
that doesn't help the scenario you would like to create.
With that said, at some point this year, I would presume Jones will be starting, since I am expecting another losing season.
Quote:
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
The opportunity costs are huge. The sooner we play Jones the sooner we can discern if he's a boom or a bust. If he's a boom, then we likely have more financial resources to to build around Jones. If he's a bust, we can begin looking for other solutions. I'm perplexed more people don't see that more clearly and want to accelerate the process.
The more Eli plays the more time we essentially waste getting to that inflection point. Because at the end of the day, despite the NFL being as unpredictable as ever, the odds are still very much stacked against us that we can compete for big prizes in 2019.
I actually think Jones is potentially better equipped to help this team win more than Eli. Shurmur's playbook is a helluva lot more geared to exploit Jones's athleticism than Eli's lack thereof...
Do you really think there are legitimate odds that Jones really busts, though? In a way where we'd know after ~10 starts as a rookie that we need to seek an alternative?
I can see struggles - but I can't imagine him being that bad that we'd be able to draw that conclusion so soon. I'd be stunned if Jones played significant snaps this year and was literally so bad that we reverse course and decide he's not a viable option going forward.
Anything can happen, but that would really shock me.
I understand the opportunity cost argument here; but I actually think those arguments were more sound regarding Barkley since the shelf-life of a running back can be markedly shorter than that of a QB.
We have time with Jones.
I look at it this way...
There's only one scenario in my mind where Jones doesn't see action this year, and it's the unlikely scenario where the Giants eclipse the midway point of the year and are legitimately in the mix and are winning football games and Eli has a lot to do with it.
Again - this is unlikely and I would be surprised.
But, if the Giants are 5-3 after 8 games and Eli is playing some really good ball, I don't see the major harm in continuing to allow him to play. The object is to win, isn't it?
Now, what I expect to happen.... is an uneven start to the year. I think the Giants will be up and down most of the season.
The spot where I could see the QB change happening is after Week 6 - when we play the Patriots on the road on TNF. That's going to be an extremely, extremely tough game to win coming off the Vikings and just 4 days to prepare.
So, if through 6 games, we're 2-4 or something like that... you've got 10 days to get Daniel ready to go against Arizona at home on October 20 - which I think would be a good spot for him to take the reins.
As long as they don't stick with Eli through poor play/performance longer than they need to, I don't think there's going to be much of a difference in Jones' career trajectory whether he sees action in 10 games this year, or 6.
The way NYG handled Eli's rookie year was totally fine, and didn't have any negative impact on Eli. Eli was firmly entrenched as the starter going into 2005 - and I believe that will be the case with Jones going into 2020. Eli did quite alright in his first season despite not getting a full slate in 2004.
We will have time here. I think NYG could very feasibly produce a championship caliber roster before Jones' rookie deal is up.
If Gettleman handles this right, we should be expecting playoffs as soon as next year.
Quote:
Then whats the point of having Eli again. They aren't resigning him after this year?
And go..
You aren’t bright, are you?
You start Eli. If we are winning and in the playoff hunt, he stays in. If he struggles or the team does... then throw Jones in.
You would be the 1 fan who would complain if Eli had a big year and we made the playoffs.
And go..... away.
So all i got from your answer is insults..intelligent!!
But you can still go away.
My nightmare scenario is hearing about how good of a week of practice they had as they flounder under 500 but keep playing Eli as no one has run away with the NFCE.
I'm willing to let it play out though, not like I have another option
But you can still go away.
😂🤣
It was one thing when the backups were Geno Smith, Davis Webb, or Kyle Lauletta - but now, we invested a 6th overall pick in a QB. That's a guy that is expected to not only play, but be the future of the franchise.
The hook might not be as quick as I'd like to see in the event we're struggling... but I do think it'll be way too difficult for Shurmur to keep Jones on the sidelines if the Giants get off to a bad start.
If they keep sending Eli out there far longer than they should, I will be right there with you guys and will be aggravated.
I don't think Jones necessarily has a superior arm to Manning.
Mobility, yes.
But - don't discount the comfort level and the ability to read the field, go through progressions, diagnose blitzes, etc.
Eli is going to be far more prepared to handle stuff like that in the early going.
As long as the Giants handle this in a way where Jones gets to play should Eli and the offense/team struggle in the early going, it's not a bad move to let Eli take the reins out of the gates.
The goal is to win games, and the Giants are going to give the ball to the guy they believe gives them the best chance.
Love what I have seen from Jones, but it'll be a lot harder in Dallas once he's got guys twisting and stunting inside and blitzes are coming from all different angles. Eli will handle these reads better and will pick them up faster.
From an ability standpoint, I tend to agree there's probably not THAT much Eli does at this point that Daniel cannot. But, don't discount the cerebral aspect of the game and the fact that Eli has seen it all after a decade and a half.
In what will probably be a close game - the more we can minimize mistakes, the better off we probably are.
DG and the Giants org have kept mentioning how they go 6-2 or even 7-1 2nd half last year if the D could make just one stop late in games. This team despite the collective youths learning curve on Defense should be markedly better than that team.
10-6 or even better with some health is not out of the question.
Quote:
In comment 14543949 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
Except there is a REAL opportunity cost here to not playing Daniel Jones if he is ready to play. Again, the longer you hold off on the inevitable, the more you are postponing the inevitable growing pains.
In other words, how much better off would the 2020 New York Giants be if Jones actually had 10+ regular-season games already under his belt?
The opportunity costs are huge. The sooner we play Jones the sooner we can discern if he's a boom or a bust. If he's a boom, then we likely have more financial resources to to build around Jones. If he's a bust, we can begin looking for other solutions. I'm perplexed more people don't see that more clearly and want to accelerate the process.
The more Eli plays the more time we essentially waste getting to that inflection point. Because at the end of the day, despite the NFL being as unpredictable as ever, the odds are still very much stacked against us that we can compete for big prizes in 2019.
I actually think Jones is potentially better equipped to help this team win more than Eli. Shurmur's playbook is a helluva lot more geared to exploit Jones's athleticism than Eli's lack thereof...
Do you really think there are legitimate odds that Jones really busts, though? In a way where we'd know after ~10 starts as a rookie that we need to seek an alternative?
I can see struggles - but I can't imagine him being that bad that we'd be able to draw that conclusion so soon. I'd be stunned if Jones played significant snaps this year and was literally so bad that we reverse course and decide he's not a viable option going forward.
Anything can happen, but that would really shock me.
I understand the opportunity cost argument here; but I actually think those arguments were more sound regarding Barkley since the shelf-life of a running back can be markedly shorter than that of a QB.
We have time with Jones.
I look at it this way...
There's only one scenario in my mind where Jones doesn't see action this year, and it's the unlikely scenario where the Giants eclipse the midway point of the year and are legitimately in the mix and are winning football games and Eli has a lot to do with it.
Again - this is unlikely and I would be surprised.
But, if the Giants are 5-3 after 8 games and Eli is playing some really good ball, I don't see the major harm in continuing to allow him to play. The object is to win, isn't it?
Now, what I expect to happen.... is an uneven start to the year. I think the Giants will be up and down most of the season.
The spot where I could see the QB change happening is after Week 6 - when we play the Patriots on the road on TNF. That's going to be an extremely, extremely tough game to win coming off the Vikings and just 4 days to prepare.
So, if through 6 games, we're 2-4 or something like that... you've got 10 days to get Daniel ready to go against Arizona at home on October 20 - which I think would be a good spot for him to take the reins.
As long as they don't stick with Eli through poor play/performance longer than they need to, I don't think there's going to be much of a difference in Jones' career trajectory whether he sees action in 10 games this year, or 6.
The way NYG handled Eli's rookie year was totally fine, and didn't have any negative impact on Eli. Eli was firmly entrenched as the starter going into 2005 - and I believe that will be the case with Jones going into 2020. Eli did quite alright in his first season despite not getting a full slate in 2004.
We will have time here. I think NYG could very feasibly produce a championship caliber roster before Jones' rookie deal is up.
If Gettleman handles this right, we should be expecting playoffs as soon as next year.
Seems like the vast majority of people would be surprised at 5-3 at the halfway point. So why not just start Jones from the start?
My nightmare scenario is hearing about how good of a week of practice they had as they flounder under 500 but keep playing Eli as no one has run away with the NFCE.
I'm willing to let it play out though, not like I have another option
Wouldn't be surprised honestly. Kurt Warner doesn't have shit on Eli as far as accomplishments for this franchise. One was a stop gap signed for a season, one was a 15 year starter with 2 Super Bowl rings and 2 Super Bowl game winning drives under his belt. Can't compare the situations.
Going into a very loud AT&T Stadium for Week 1 and dealing with a defense that is no longer holding anything back and facing starters for 4 quarters is a different animal - and one Eli is almost certainly better-equipped to handle right now. He's opened in Dallas like 5 different times in his career now. He knows what to expect.
I really believe Eli is going to perform better than people are expecting him to. It has been a while since he's had both a capable offensive line - and he's never had an elite RB like Saquon up until last year.
Just my take... but I think Eli is tired of hearing that he's finished. We're going to get everything he's got in the tank.
Jacobs and Bradshaw were a great duo.
But - Barkley is just a totally different animal.
Quarterback is an outsized position -- it's who you build around, what type of weapons you acquire, what types of safety blankets are needed, and what type of players you avoid.
If the Giants come out of this year with out 8 games of Jones or a playoff birth, it's a disaster.
Didn’t know the Colts have two second rounders in the 2020 draft. That would be a win-win-win for everyone.
I'm stunned you don't see a difference between playing 6 games or 10. That's another 24 quarters of live football. That's the most important piece to Jones's development - experience. The more he's sees in terms of D schemes, game speed, etc, the better.
The object is to win - yes. And I'm okay taking the risk to do that with Jones.
Quarterback is an outsized position -- it's who you build around, what type of weapons you acquire, what types of safety blankets are needed, and what type of players you avoid.
If the Giants come out of this year with out 8 games of Jones or a playoff birth, it's a disaster.
I agree with the ultimate point you arrive at - if Jones doesn't play half the season or more, and we aren't a playoff team - that's probably worst-case scenario.
But - I also don't think there's a whole lot we need to figure out in terms of what we put around him. The RB is in place - we all believe Barkley has generational, all-world ability and will be a best friend for whoever we put out there.
We need to emphasize two areas next offseason to really get this offense to where it needs to be -
1. OL (Long-term answer @ RT, depth, perhaps Solder's eventual replacement(
2. Top flight WR
I think without Jones even playing, those things are evident.
A big time, two-way TE would be a luxury - I'd love to add that as well. But I expect us to do it by committee for now - with Engram being the big pass catching threat, and the other guys being relied on more in traditional roles that emphasize blocking.
We're close - I think we just need another year and some experience for Daniel and if Gettleman can swing another strong draft and FA period where we'll have money to spend, this should be a team that really pushes for a playoff spot in 2020.
I'm stunned you don't see a difference between playing 6 games or 10. That's another 24 quarters of live football. That's the most important piece to Jones's development - experience. The more he's sees in terms of D schemes, game speed, etc, the better.
The object is to win - yes. And I'm okay taking the risk to do that with Jones.
There are a lot of options between boom and bust.
I’d cay the chances he is a bust ie doesn’t get to play out his rookie deal are minuscule
- A new RT and Center
- 2 new WRs
- 2nd TE
- 3rd down back
Health permitting the locks I see are Solder (eck), Zeitler, Hernandez, Barkley, Engram, Shepard - every other position is open for an upgrade to me.
And I especially would expect the WRs and TEs to be good fits for Jones.
I'm stunned you don't see a difference between playing 6 games or 10. That's another 24 quarters of live football. That's the most important piece to Jones's development - experience. The more he's sees in terms of D schemes, game speed, etc, the better.
The object is to win - yes. And I'm okay taking the risk to do that with Jones.
I really don't believe the ~4 game difference is going to swing him in one way or another. The furthest I'd go there is to say that more experience and PT are almost certainly not going to do any harm. So, sure - the more he gets, the better. But to me, him getting 8 games or 12 games isn't going to swing the pendulum much at all.
Mahomes only got 1 start as a rookie. It was fairly nondescript. He was league MVP and threw 50 TD passes in year 2. How much better than that was he going to be even if he had 4-5 more starts in 2017? It was a historic year for a 23 year old kid as it was. I don't think he could have possibly done more than he did.
I expect Jones to get significantly more action than Mahomes did.
Rodgers only attempted 16 garbage time passes as a rookie. Brees started 0 games as a rookie. Brady threw 3 passes as a rookie.
Two of the above guys are 40+ years old now. They're still going and the Pats and Saints are going to be two of the best teams in the NFL.
You have to be careful with the QB - there's no one-size-fits-all proposition for these guys. If Jones turns out to be the real deal, it's not going to matter. He'll be here for years. Just like Eli has been.
If he isn't, it won't be because of 3-4 starts he didn't get as a rookie.
I just don't see any way we'd be able to determine that Jones is a bust this year. He'd have to be horrendous... and after what we've seen of him so far, no matter how simplistic the looks he's seeing are - I'd really be surprised by that.
I could see him struggling and being "eh" - but to play so poorly that we're convinced he was a bad pick this year, that would just really stun me.