Cam Newton, a one year starter in College in an extremely simple system threw for over 400 yards in his first two NFL starts and won rookie of the year.
Dak Prescott won 13 games as a rookie 4th round pick. Wentz started all 16 games as a rookie and started 3-0 and would have won MVP year two if he didn't shred his knee. Andrew Luck took a 2 win team without Peyton Manning to the playoffs as a rookie. Deshaun Watson entered week 1 after halftime of his rookie year and was playing out of his mind until he got hurt. Baker Mayfield came in last year at half time of week three and broke Payton Manning's rookie TD pass record.
Brees, Brady and Rodgers are all outdated examples. Again, I am fine with Eli getting one more shot, but given what we have seen of Jones so far in the NFL, and recent history of what rookie QBs can do in this league, it is very possible that he actually gives the Giants a better chance of winning this year than Eli.
RE: I can't figure out what positive there is from sitting Â
and watching. You can learn but you can also learn better by playing. Unless you're so worried about our OL ruining Jones's confidence. But then what the hell have we been doing the last 2 seasons. This isn't an Alex Smith situation where the team is really good and Smith might be better than a rookie Mahomes.
The old school thought is it's a luxury to sit a QB for a season or two until bringing him in. What Aaron Rodgers got to experience as a 3 year backup IMO has helped make him a star QB in this league. If Garoppolo becomes a star QB in this league, then a lot of that will be attributed to his time backing up Brady for 3 1/2 seasons, and hell maybe even 13 games on IR last year.
You can't replace game experience, but you can increase the floor of a QB's performance once he starts and hopefully reduce the learning curve dramatically. You're also reducing the possibility of the QB struggling as much which can affect their confidence long term.
I think it helps more than hurts in nearly every circumstance. In an extreme case, you get a guy like Alex Smith who absolutely needed to sit and eventually would become a good QB.
If you're going to start a QB early he has to be either a top top prospect like Luck/Peyton Manning, have an offense built around him like RG3, or be put on a pitch count like Russell Wilson.
Even a late season switch like Warner to Eli in 2004 isn't a bad idea because by then the rookie/backup can come in and play loose and still take advantage of the few extra months sitting and game planning real games.
I know this isn't going to happen. And I know the Rafflee is going to take a ton of shit for posting this.
But there is a certain logic to this as far as all parties are concerned.
Eric I completely agree. If the Colts wanted Manning, Eli accepted the trade, and the Giants pulled that trigger for a few draft picks?
Everyone wins.
Outside of Eli having a great year and the Giants winning the Super Bowl? The Eli-to-the-Colts scenario is the least uncomfortable Eli exit strategy for all.
We can all debate about how many 2019 games would Â
be most beneficial but its clearly at least a couple of starts. Ideally you would want some successes (wins) peppered in there for confidence as well but that is subject to a variety of factors.
Enough of time where Jones shows command on the field, handles some adversity and can build up some confidence in himself and the coaches.
Making 2020 a season to go make something happen...
Quote:
We're officially in the middle of a QB controversy.
Agree 100%. Jones is ahead of schedule, we've barely seen Eli in the preseason (improved though he is said to be), and nobody thinks this team has a chance of doing much this season. Everybody's itching to see Danny Dimes. If the Giants beat Dallas 38-35 and Eli throws 4 TDs and no picks, that will quiet things down. If Dallas beats the Giants 28-13, it's going to be ON.
RE: We can all debate about how many 2019 games would Â
be most beneficial but its clearly at least a couple of starts. Ideally you would want some successes (wins) peppered in there for confidence as well but that is subject to a variety of factors.
Enough of time where Jones shows command on the field, handles some adversity and can build up some confidence in himself and the coaches.
Making 2020 a season to go make something happen...
I agree with this - it's hard to pinpoint a number of games. It's not like we're privy to data that pinpoints the perfect spot because it doesn't exist and varies for each player. I think we all feel like Jones can and should play several games this year, and it will bode well for him going into 2020 to have that experience.
I don't think it necessarily makes a huge difference how many games it is - as long as it's more than a couple.
Like I've said a few times - there's only one way I am okay with Jones not getting a good deal of starts this year and it's if Eli is playing really well and has the team in a playoff position.
If not, Jones has to get starts this year.
I think we just need to let it play out since it's impossible to map out from here and there are so many external factors that will play a role.
RE: You can just as easily make the argument the other way. Â
Cam Newton, a one year starter in College in an extremely simple system threw for over 400 yards in his first two NFL starts and won rookie of the year.
Dak Prescott won 13 games as a rookie 4th round pick. Wentz started all 16 games as a rookie and started 3-0 and would have won MVP year two if he didn't shred his knee. Andrew Luck took a 2 win team without Peyton Manning to the playoffs as a rookie. Deshaun Watson entered week 1 after halftime of his rookie year and was playing out of his mind until he got hurt. Baker Mayfield came in last year at half time of week three and broke Payton Manning's rookie TD pass record.
Brees, Brady and Rodgers are all outdated examples. Again, I am fine with Eli getting one more shot, but given what we have seen of Jones so far in the NFL, and recent history of what rookie QBs can do in this league, it is very possible that he actually gives the Giants a better chance of winning this year than Eli.
The lost part on some of the comparables with QBs who sat is the number of years in the system.
Rodgers was in his 4th camp, Rivers was in his 3rd, Young was in his 8th.
Those guys didn't really hit the ground running. Now if the Giants plan to sit Jones 2-8 years, maybe some burn in year one isn't so important. But if they plan on continuing a re-build and give him the reigns next year, it's wise to get him on the field.
RE: You can just as easily make the argument the other way. Â
Cam Newton, a one year starter in College in an extremely simple system threw for over 400 yards in his first two NFL starts and won rookie of the year.
Dak Prescott won 13 games as a rookie 4th round pick. Wentz started all 16 games as a rookie and started 3-0 and would have won MVP year two if he didn't shred his knee. Andrew Luck took a 2 win team without Peyton Manning to the playoffs as a rookie. Deshaun Watson entered week 1 after halftime of his rookie year and was playing out of his mind until he got hurt. Baker Mayfield came in last year at half time of week three and broke Payton Manning's rookie TD pass record.
Brees, Brady and Rodgers are all outdated examples. Again, I am fine with Eli getting one more shot, but given what we have seen of Jones so far in the NFL, and recent history of what rookie QBs can do in this league, it is very possible that he actually gives the Giants a better chance of winning this year than Eli.
Is Mahomes an outdated example?
There's also Goff... he started 7 games as a rookie and lost all of them. He was bad. He completed under 55% of his passes. He threw just 5 TD's. 7 picks.
Do we know that him taking those lumps better prepared him for his sophomore year where he was significantly better? It's possible. It's also possible that he just wasn't ready and played before he really had a good feel for things.
It's hard to look at past examples and extrapolate anything significant from it because every QB is just a different animal. Some guys are really good right away... like Wilson or Watson...but QB's like Goff weren't.
So much of it depends on the team around the QB, his background, etc.
Dallas had the luxury of placing Prescott into a situation where he was primed to succeed. Great OL, top flight running game. The onus wasn't on him to carry the offense.
Mark Sanchez also was able to enter a really favorable situation for the Jets and have success in 2009 and 2010 because of how good their defense and run game was. If you only need your rookie QB to manage, it makes life a lot easier.
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.
I totally agree that Eli has the cerebral edge, and no doubt by a wide margin. But when playing against a team with superior talent, cerebral is not enough to win the game. Whereas playing against a sophisticated defense is a superb learning opportunity for a young quarterback. Regardless of who plays week 1, it will be a "must see" game.
RE: RE: You can just as easily make the argument the other way. Â
Do we know that him taking those lumps better prepared him for his sophomore year where he was significantly better? It's possible. It's also possible that he just wasn't ready and played before he really had a good feel for things.
It's hard to look at past examples and extrapolate anything significant from it because every QB is just a different animal. Some guys are really good right away... like Wilson or Watson...but QB's like Goff weren't.
I don't disagree with you. As my previous subject stated, I was just saying you could just as easily make the argument the other way. We have no idea if Jones will play well when the real bullets fly like the guys I mentioned or struggle like Goff or other guys have.
To your other point, yes I do believe that Goff's struggles as a rookie helped him tremendously heading into his second year.
I have no problem with them easing Jones into this and starting Eli, but I do think the leash should be short. If Jones looked like a deer in the headlights in preseason I would be all for holding out, but he has looked tremendous and he certainly looks like he is capable of starting and playing well, just as many other recent rookie QBs have.
I am just saying that there is a strong assumption here that the team's only chance of winning this season is with Eli, and I am not convinced that is the case. Maybe he would struggle like Goff, but maybe he will play just as well as some of those guys I mentioned. We won't know until we see it.
We are closer to agreement than disagreement, really.
I feel similarly in that I am fine with Eli starting - I just don't want the leash to be so long that we don't make a change until we're mathematically out of it. The only way I want Eli playing beyond the halfway point is if we're humming along and really winning games.
As long as they handle it the right way, it won't bother me. If we just keep sending Eli out there to lose game after game out of loyalty or sentimentality, I will certainly have an issue with that and will be the first guy to say I don't like the approach.
We are closer to agreement than disagreement, really.
I feel similarly in that I am fine with Eli starting - I just don't want the leash to be so long that we don't make a change until we're mathematically out of it. The only way I want Eli playing beyond the halfway point is if we're humming along and really winning games.
There has got be some concern in everybody's mind that the transition is done in train-wreck fashion. Hopefully they learned from prior mistakes.
Yes, that's fair - but I think in 2017, the uproar occurred for different reasons. Because it was Geno Smith taking his place, and breaking an iron man streak for a guy who had no future here. I think that just bugged a lot of people and it seemed like the Giants officially had no direction at all.
Now... for the first time ever, there's a top 10 draft pick sitting behind him who has been really impressive and opened a lot of eyes this preseason.
So, I think there will be a lot less resistance this time around if Eli isn't playing well. I certainly won't be stunned if the fan base is calling for Jones before the decision is even made. I do think Eli is primed to have a strong year... but if he doesn't, the transition is probably going to be more 'welcomed' (if there's even a good word for it) - and understood.
The first attempt at this seemed totally haphazard and directionless. I think it'll be quite a bit more logical this time. Or at least I hope so.
Excuse my earlier math. I meant 16 quarters of extra football.
The Mahomes example is just doesn't apply because the Chiefs were a 12 win team in 2016. They were going to be in the hunt. Smith had led them to double digit wins four years in a row. And so he earned the right to continue starting.
Aside from 2016, we have been perennial losers with Eli at the helm. Yet, the excuses keep getting compounded and Eli keeps getting ushered out there. Basically there is no statute of limitations on the last SB win. If Eli was being consistently productive and leading us to Ws I could be more patient. But NONE of that exists.
Not only are we in a QB controversy, we can't help ourselves to keep challenging the definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over and over again...etc...
Excuse my earlier math. I meant 16 quarters of extra football.
The Mahomes example is just doesn't apply because the Chiefs were a 12 win team in 2016. They were going to be in the hunt. Smith had led them to double digit wins four years in a row. And so he earned the right to continue starting.
Aside from 2016, we have been perennial losers with Eli at the helm. Yet, the excuses keep getting compounded and Eli keeps getting ushered out there. Basically there is no statute of limitations on the last SB win. If Eli was being consistently productive and leading us to Ws I could be more patient. But NONE of that exists.
Not only are we in a QB controversy, we can't help ourselves to keep challenging the definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over and over again...etc...
amen on the last point. The Eli excuse train is at end of the line. Im sure his apologists will invent another whipping boy or three to deflect blame (or play the same tired tune of pointing the finger at the legacy of Reese and Ross drafting (curiously omitting Coughlin who was a major stakeholder in talent evaluation and selection))
I respect and appreciate Manning's willingness to eat it the last 2 years as the Giants stumbled their way into finding a replacement.
Let's face it, he's been a crash test dummy as a whole line of people made mistakes since 2017: Coughlin, Reese, McAdoo, Gettleman, and Shurmur.
And he'll likely be called on to do it again before it's coat weather -- this time it will be his ego and not his body. I don't like watching it, and I am as critical as anyone of him.
He's got a rookie who so clearly belongs in the NFL, a team that's improving but not proven, and a coach and GM whose continued employment in the NFL is tied to the rookie not to him.
It's going to be a bummer hearing the boos, seeing the media turn, and Manning eventually holding the clipboard on his way out.
If the Giants don't start at least 2-2 it's time for Jones to play Â
If they can't win 2 games out of Buffalo, Tampa and Washington with 2 of them being home games it's time to start the Jones era. Whatever that will be. But it won't surprise me if the GM and HC will want to wait using Eli as a fall guy to try and save their jobs which knowing the Mara's are not in any jeopardy at all no matter what happens in 2019.
Got the feeling that Gettleman could only trade Eli with Mara's blessing.
It makes most sense when a starting QB goes down injured and is out for the season and the organisation is not confident in their backup.
As it stands, Indianapolis would be be delivering a big kick in the teeth to Brissett and if I were him, I would be furious if they brought in Manning. Not going to happen, especially when you consider the difference in the two players's salaries.
Excuse my earlier math. I meant 16 quarters of extra football.
The Mahomes example is just doesn't apply because the Chiefs were a 12 win team in 2016. They were going to be in the hunt. Smith had led them to double digit wins four years in a row. And so he earned the right to continue starting.
Aside from 2016, we have been perennial losers with Eli at the helm. Yet, the excuses keep getting compounded and Eli keeps getting ushered out there. Basically there is no statute of limitations on the last SB win. If Eli was being consistently productive and leading us to Ws I could be more patient. But NONE of that exists.
Not only are we in a QB controversy, we can't help ourselves to keep challenging the definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over and over again...etc...
You have to be able to separate the player from the team. Eli himself was pretty damn good in 2015. He was less of a catalyst in 2016 - but the team won 11 games and he was very sharp @ Lambeau. Us losing that game had nothing to do with him - he showed up that night. Beckham failed him and the defense really failed him.
2017 was a disaster for so many reasons. The RB group was garbage. Beckham missed most of the year. The offensive line was in shambles. The defense was awful. The coach lost the team.
How does one look at a year like that and deduce that the QB was the problem? Eli was set up to fail with a WCO coach who was clueless and didn't understand his QB's strengths. He's a pocket passer that was given zero pass protection, no running game, and had no WR's to throw to before we even hit the midway point.
2017 was quite literally an impossible scenario for him.
Last year, he actually played quite well at many different junctures. He had one of his best statistical years. But again - the offensive line was poor/average at best for most of the year and only started to gel more near the end. But again - the 2018 Giants defense was bad. The offense was league average. Not great, also not bad at all.
The idea here is to actually allow him to play football with a roster that sets him up to succeed and do the things he does well. We have an elite RB now. We have what should be at least a decent offensive line now where he won't have pass rushers breathing down his neck before he even gets off his first read.
It would be "insanity" if the Giants kept neglecting to fix the offensive line and kept setting Eli up to fail with rosters that he simply can't win with.
The FO believes he can win with this one. I still think we're an offseason away from having a good enough roster to compete for the division and playoffs - but I'd be willing to bet that Eli is quite a bit better than many people think he'll be.
If he's not, we're now prepared for that. We don't have to bellyache over punting on the 2018 QB class anymore. The QB is here, and he will play when his time comes.
It's simply unprovable that Jones is going to be negatively impacted if he plays in 8 games rather than 12 or whatever ~4-5 game difference you want to create. I really don't think it matters much at all - it's a point being belabored with no real data to support it.
It's simply unprovable that Jones is going to be negatively impacted if he plays in 8 games rather than 12 or whatever ~4-5 game difference you want to create. I really don't think it matters much at all - it's a point being belabored with no real data to support it.
And you can take it a step further. There's no significant difference in year 1-2 QB's whether they start day 1, play half the games, play a couple of games or play no games and then start year 2.
That's the point I made last week until it got twisted to make it sound like no QB learns from experience. Year 1 and year 2 experience for QB's has no statistical advantage as to when they play, even if many want to say that if Jones doesn't get game experience it will retard his development. There's absolutely no data to back that up.
mirrored my thoughts on this exactly in another thread about when to play DJ. Daniel Jones should start when Daniel Jones is ready. Not a minute before he is ready, but also not a minute after either. He is the future, we have DJ for a limited time under a cost contained salary structure (basically four years) and he is our future. As soon as he is ready to handle it and we hold him back to play Eli, we are hurting the future of the franchise. It is the unfortunate truth of football these days, the rookie contract for a productive QB is so valuable that you want to get the ball moving in that direction so when year 2 runs around, DJ can help team while not learning all the ropes. People say look at the Chiefs--Mahomes came in and they almost won the Super Bowl, I get that. I also saw that the Eagles started Wentz year one and were on a tear before he got injured in year 2. So, it works both ways
With respect to trading Eli. I would obviously not want it to end like that--I love Eli, but if DJ is ready now and some team wants to compensate us for Eli (and Eli is willing to go along with it), we would have to be pretty stupid not to do it if it was good compensation. On the other hand, if DJ is not ready, then it is not even worth discussing.
Fatman you think after Mahomes threw for 50 tds literally last year Â
this sentiment would have died. I guess now that he has experience we are going to see 70 tds this year.
Although I am starting to come around on the fact that DJ may be that exceedingly less rare QB that comes in as a rookie and plays well. There may be an argument that he can give us Eli level play.
It's simply unprovable that Jones is going to be negatively impacted if he plays in 8 games rather than 12 or whatever ~4-5 game difference you want to create. I really don't think it matters much at all - it's a point being belabored with no real data to support it.
And you can take it a step further. There's no significant difference in year 1-2 QB's whether they start day 1, play half the games, play a couple of games or play no games and then start year 2.
That's the point I made last week until it got twisted to make it sound like no QB learns from experience. Year 1 and year 2 experience for QB's has no statistical advantage as to when they play, even if many want to say that if Jones doesn't get game experience it will retard his development. There's absolutely no data to back that up.
Yep, and the "advantageous rookie QB contract" argument also does not apply this year - we're paying Eli still.
It will apply when we are no longer paying Eli.
Look, as soon as we kept Eli on the books @ 23M this year, he was going to be the starter. If the Giants didn't intend on playing Eli and trying to win games with him, they wouldn't be paying him.
As long as NYG don't continue to send Eli out there long after it becomes evident he's not the answer; what we're doing here isn't a big deal.
Either Eli wins games and the Giants are competitive this season, or Eli takes a seat and Daniel gets the bulk of the starts.
So many of the people here didn't even want Daniel Jones at all.... not 6th, not 17th... they didn't want him.
Now, it's a tremendous issue if he doesn't play as soon as humanly possible.
this sentiment would have died. I guess now that he has experience we are going to see 70 tds this year.
Although I am starting to come around on the fact that DJ may be that exceedingly less rare QB that comes in as a rookie and plays well. There may be an argument that he can give us Eli level play.
When you step back and look at the entirety of a playing career, there's very little that points directly to experience having a huge part. While learning the difference in the speed from the college game to the pro game has to happen, it doesn't take years to master that.
If experience was such a crucial part of the game, you'd expect to see linear growth out of most players, yet the stats show otherwise. Statistically speaking, a starter in year 1-2 of a career has as much of a chance to regress in years 3-4 as they do to improve. And that continues throughout the career. WR's should hit their strides in years 4-6 if they gain the experience of route running and body positioning, but that isn't the case. Rookie RB's are as likely to have the same production in year 1 vs. years 3 or 5.
The idea that Jones will have his development stunted by not playing early is really borne out of one main argument - Eli needs to be replaced. It would be that much more productive if people would just come out and say it.
'didn't even want Daniel Jones at all...Now, it's a tremendous issue' Â
That's funny and ironic because it's true. Nice post.
Eli should start the season. Why? Because this team has a chance to flip the script on recent years and make the playoffs. It's a slim chance but it's there. The only way that happens is if we get off to a fast start. Eli gives this team the best chance to do that.
If and when that slim chance evaporates we'll all be ready to move on and give DJ the reins for what will hopefully be a long and successful career.
As far as the Indy scenario or any other Eli trade before this season plays out forget it. BBI can have as many 300+ post threads about it as it likes, it just isn't happening.
RE: RE: Fatman you think after Mahomes threw for 50 tds literally last year Â
The idea that Jones will have his development stunted by not playing early is really borne out of one main argument - Eli needs to be replaced. It would be that much more productive if people would just come out and say it.
Which is so ironic because it's that crowd that accuses everybody else of making excuses.
RE: RE: RE: Fatman you think after Mahomes threw for 50 tds literally last year Â
The idea that Jones will have his development stunted by not playing early is really borne out of one main argument - Eli needs to be replaced. It would be that much more productive if people would just come out and say it.
Which is so ironic because it's that crowd that accuses everybody else of making excuses.
if FMIC reads through this thread (which was actually a great conversation with you not around to fire bomb it), you will see that is not the case
I'm pretty confident a Jones led team for 16 games this year would win more games than a Manning team. I don't have any problems stating that. I'd guess Manning's ceiling is 7 wins and Jone's is 9.
All things equal if game experience doesn't expedite growth, and the only risk is "ruining" Jones, I don't think that applies to the Giants. They have an extraordinary RB, a veteran offensive line, a solid if not spectacular group of WRs, a speedy and versatile starting TE, and reliable blocking TE.
Gettleman has done a fine job fielding a supporting cast that doesn't mirror the typical situation a rookie QB walks into.
I'd say Jones fresher arm, better legs, and nice touch in the short to intermediate game is to his advantage.
Now imagine if the Giants would have acquired a much cheaper vet (another disproven boogie man from the offseason) to be the insurance if Jones hadn't have been ready.
(a month before preseason started) didn't even want Jones within a 100 mile radius of East Rutherford, now not only want him on the team, but want him to start NOW.
Guys, it's coming, relax. Whether it's later this season or 2020 Week 1, it's coming. Jones' career won't be damaged if he doesn't start until Week 1 2020. Relax.
...having an Iron Man QB is NOT par for the course.
Teams NEED 2 quality QB's.
Lauletta is completely unproven. So is Jones for that matter - yeah, looks LIGHTS OUT in preseason. It's preseason.
Like Phil Simms, Eli Manning is completely disrespected by his own fans, and like Phil Simms, he will be worshipped only when he is gone.
I've posted this before -- in addition to the on-the-field factors -- I also would like Manning spared the indignity and circus of being replaced mid season.
I wanted Manning to be spared the physical beating and ridicule of lining up behind a ridiculously bad line last year and getting beat like bag.
We have different definitions of "worship" maybe -- I'd rather respect and appreciate the guy on the way out, and not piss on his legacy.
I think Manning has accomplished plenty enough as a Giant, has been a fabulous representative of the franchise, and made a literal fortune.
Jay Glazer
@JayGlazer
Jay Gruden names Case Keenum starter, waiting for McCoy to heal, they’d like to redshirt Haskins for the year and not rush him
Haskins always needed a year to work on things away from live bullets. His feet are still a disgrace to the art of quarterbacking. He gets away with it because of his insane arm, but it definitely isn't sustainable in the NFL. Their offensive line is also a mess right now. I can't believe they are actually making the smart move here, but I give it till week 8 when they are 2-5 and Danny Boy wants to see his new toy.
Lets rephrase this to match the earlier discussion on this thread... Â
The idea that Giants will have their development stunted by not playing Jones early is really borne out of one main argument - Eli needs to be replaced.
why would we wait to play him? If he is not ready, I get that. But if he DJ is ready, what is the upside to starting Eli at this point? It is not about getting rid of Eli, it is about embracing the future that the Giants have selected to go. Why delay it?
Why would anyone offer the Giants anything, they have zero leverage. Not sure Eli would be better than Brissett in their system anytime soon. I think Brissett has significant upside. I do think Manning is headed for a good year with the Giants. I don't see trade value though. None.
I'm not sold because I think Brissett is going to be good.
But a case can be made to go for an Eli type. The Colts have multitude of high round picks. Can you imagine if they called and offered a 2nd or 3rd for Eli?
Not saying he should start. I think Eli should be given the chance to win.
I say Jones is ready because of the way he handled this situation in this market, with the circus surrounding the draft and the criticisms he has faced. He has ice water in his veins. He has showed, ZERO FEAR. Stage is not to big for him.
All of the QBs drafted have talent. They are the best in the entire world. Even if they could handle it in college, most of them, when they get to the pros, cannot handle the pressure. They just crumble. Jones is a fucking rock. Think about what would have happened should he have had a shitty preseason?
Under the microscope of every decision he makes in game being scrutinized, ever throw in practice, Jones has continued to exceed expectations. We got a good one, everyone who keeps saying put on the brakes. I'm saying get real excited. He can handle intense pressure and scrutiny, he throws with accuracy, touch and anticipation.
Dak Prescott won 13 games as a rookie 4th round pick. Wentz started all 16 games as a rookie and started 3-0 and would have won MVP year two if he didn't shred his knee. Andrew Luck took a 2 win team without Peyton Manning to the playoffs as a rookie. Deshaun Watson entered week 1 after halftime of his rookie year and was playing out of his mind until he got hurt. Baker Mayfield came in last year at half time of week three and broke Payton Manning's rookie TD pass record.
Brees, Brady and Rodgers are all outdated examples. Again, I am fine with Eli getting one more shot, but given what we have seen of Jones so far in the NFL, and recent history of what rookie QBs can do in this league, it is very possible that he actually gives the Giants a better chance of winning this year than Eli.
The old school thought is it's a luxury to sit a QB for a season or two until bringing him in. What Aaron Rodgers got to experience as a 3 year backup IMO has helped make him a star QB in this league. If Garoppolo becomes a star QB in this league, then a lot of that will be attributed to his time backing up Brady for 3 1/2 seasons, and hell maybe even 13 games on IR last year.
You can't replace game experience, but you can increase the floor of a QB's performance once he starts and hopefully reduce the learning curve dramatically. You're also reducing the possibility of the QB struggling as much which can affect their confidence long term.
I think it helps more than hurts in nearly every circumstance. In an extreme case, you get a guy like Alex Smith who absolutely needed to sit and eventually would become a good QB.
If you're going to start a QB early he has to be either a top top prospect like Luck/Peyton Manning, have an offense built around him like RG3, or be put on a pitch count like Russell Wilson.
Even a late season switch like Warner to Eli in 2004 isn't a bad idea because by then the rookie/backup can come in and play loose and still take advantage of the few extra months sitting and game planning real games.
But there is a certain logic to this as far as all parties are concerned.
Eric I completely agree. If the Colts wanted Manning, Eli accepted the trade, and the Giants pulled that trigger for a few draft picks?
Everyone wins.
Outside of Eli having a great year and the Giants winning the Super Bowl? The Eli-to-the-Colts scenario is the least uncomfortable Eli exit strategy for all.
Enough of time where Jones shows command on the field, handles some adversity and can build up some confidence in himself and the coaches.
Making 2020 a season to go make something happen...
Quote:
We're officially in the middle of a QB controversy.
Enough of time where Jones shows command on the field, handles some adversity and can build up some confidence in himself and the coaches.
Making 2020 a season to go make something happen...
I agree with this - it's hard to pinpoint a number of games. It's not like we're privy to data that pinpoints the perfect spot because it doesn't exist and varies for each player. I think we all feel like Jones can and should play several games this year, and it will bode well for him going into 2020 to have that experience.
I don't think it necessarily makes a huge difference how many games it is - as long as it's more than a couple.
Like I've said a few times - there's only one way I am okay with Jones not getting a good deal of starts this year and it's if Eli is playing really well and has the team in a playoff position.
If not, Jones has to get starts this year.
I think we just need to let it play out since it's impossible to map out from here and there are so many external factors that will play a role.
Dak Prescott won 13 games as a rookie 4th round pick. Wentz started all 16 games as a rookie and started 3-0 and would have won MVP year two if he didn't shred his knee. Andrew Luck took a 2 win team without Peyton Manning to the playoffs as a rookie. Deshaun Watson entered week 1 after halftime of his rookie year and was playing out of his mind until he got hurt. Baker Mayfield came in last year at half time of week three and broke Payton Manning's rookie TD pass record.
Brees, Brady and Rodgers are all outdated examples. Again, I am fine with Eli getting one more shot, but given what we have seen of Jones so far in the NFL, and recent history of what rookie QBs can do in this league, it is very possible that he actually gives the Giants a better chance of winning this year than Eli.
Cam — limited ceiling, always hurt
Wentz — always hurt
Luck — always hurt, retired
Dak — mediocre QB
If your examples are what we can hope for from Jones, the Giants are in trouble.
Rodgers was in his 4th camp, Rivers was in his 3rd, Young was in his 8th.
Those guys didn't really hit the ground running. Now if the Giants plan to sit Jones 2-8 years, maybe some burn in year one isn't so important. But if they plan on continuing a re-build and give him the reigns next year, it's wise to get him on the field.
Dak Prescott won 13 games as a rookie 4th round pick. Wentz started all 16 games as a rookie and started 3-0 and would have won MVP year two if he didn't shred his knee. Andrew Luck took a 2 win team without Peyton Manning to the playoffs as a rookie. Deshaun Watson entered week 1 after halftime of his rookie year and was playing out of his mind until he got hurt. Baker Mayfield came in last year at half time of week three and broke Payton Manning's rookie TD pass record.
Brees, Brady and Rodgers are all outdated examples. Again, I am fine with Eli getting one more shot, but given what we have seen of Jones so far in the NFL, and recent history of what rookie QBs can do in this league, it is very possible that he actually gives the Giants a better chance of winning this year than Eli.
Is Mahomes an outdated example?
There's also Goff... he started 7 games as a rookie and lost all of them. He was bad. He completed under 55% of his passes. He threw just 5 TD's. 7 picks.
Do we know that him taking those lumps better prepared him for his sophomore year where he was significantly better? It's possible. It's also possible that he just wasn't ready and played before he really had a good feel for things.
It's hard to look at past examples and extrapolate anything significant from it because every QB is just a different animal. Some guys are really good right away... like Wilson or Watson...but QB's like Goff weren't.
So much of it depends on the team around the QB, his background, etc.
Dallas had the luxury of placing Prescott into a situation where he was primed to succeed. Great OL, top flight running game. The onus wasn't on him to carry the offense.
Mark Sanchez also was able to enter a really favorable situation for the Jets and have success in 2009 and 2010 because of how good their defense and run game was. If you only need your rookie QB to manage, it makes life a lot easier.
If he does, it's foolish to keep him on the sidelines. He's the future and arguably the present for this team.
As a fan I'll accept Manning as the QB so long as the team appears to be seriously competing for a playoff spot.
But if the Giants are mathematically in it at 1-7 like last year, that would be a lame excuse.
Quote:
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.
I totally agree that Eli has the cerebral edge, and no doubt by a wide margin. But when playing against a team with superior talent, cerebral is not enough to win the game. Whereas playing against a sophisticated defense is a superb learning opportunity for a young quarterback. Regardless of who plays week 1, it will be a "must see" game.
Quote:
Do we know that him taking those lumps better prepared him for his sophomore year where he was significantly better? It's possible. It's also possible that he just wasn't ready and played before he really had a good feel for things.
It's hard to look at past examples and extrapolate anything significant from it because every QB is just a different animal. Some guys are really good right away... like Wilson or Watson...but QB's like Goff weren't.
I don't disagree with you. As my previous subject stated, I was just saying you could just as easily make the argument the other way. We have no idea if Jones will play well when the real bullets fly like the guys I mentioned or struggle like Goff or other guys have.
To your other point, yes I do believe that Goff's struggles as a rookie helped him tremendously heading into his second year.
I have no problem with them easing Jones into this and starting Eli, but I do think the leash should be short. If Jones looked like a deer in the headlights in preseason I would be all for holding out, but he has looked tremendous and he certainly looks like he is capable of starting and playing well, just as many other recent rookie QBs have.
I am just saying that there is a strong assumption here that the team's only chance of winning this season is with Eli, and I am not convinced that is the case. Maybe he would struggle like Goff, but maybe he will play just as well as some of those guys I mentioned. We won't know until we see it.
I feel similarly in that I am fine with Eli starting - I just don't want the leash to be so long that we don't make a change until we're mathematically out of it. The only way I want Eli playing beyond the halfway point is if we're humming along and really winning games.
As long as they handle it the right way, it won't bother me. If we just keep sending Eli out there to lose game after game out of loyalty or sentimentality, I will certainly have an issue with that and will be the first guy to say I don't like the approach.
I feel similarly in that I am fine with Eli starting - I just don't want the leash to be so long that we don't make a change until we're mathematically out of it. The only way I want Eli playing beyond the halfway point is if we're humming along and really winning games.
There has got be some concern in everybody's mind that the transition is done in train-wreck fashion. Hopefully they learned from prior mistakes.
we shall see...
Now... for the first time ever, there's a top 10 draft pick sitting behind him who has been really impressive and opened a lot of eyes this preseason.
So, I think there will be a lot less resistance this time around if Eli isn't playing well. I certainly won't be stunned if the fan base is calling for Jones before the decision is even made. I do think Eli is primed to have a strong year... but if he doesn't, the transition is probably going to be more 'welcomed' (if there's even a good word for it) - and understood.
The first attempt at this seemed totally haphazard and directionless. I think it'll be quite a bit more logical this time. Or at least I hope so.
The Mahomes example is just doesn't apply because the Chiefs were a 12 win team in 2016. They were going to be in the hunt. Smith had led them to double digit wins four years in a row. And so he earned the right to continue starting.
Aside from 2016, we have been perennial losers with Eli at the helm. Yet, the excuses keep getting compounded and Eli keeps getting ushered out there. Basically there is no statute of limitations on the last SB win. If Eli was being consistently productive and leading us to Ws I could be more patient. But NONE of that exists.
Not only are we in a QB controversy, we can't help ourselves to keep challenging the definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over and over again...etc...
The Mahomes example is just doesn't apply because the Chiefs were a 12 win team in 2016. They were going to be in the hunt. Smith had led them to double digit wins four years in a row. And so he earned the right to continue starting.
Aside from 2016, we have been perennial losers with Eli at the helm. Yet, the excuses keep getting compounded and Eli keeps getting ushered out there. Basically there is no statute of limitations on the last SB win. If Eli was being consistently productive and leading us to Ws I could be more patient. But NONE of that exists.
Not only are we in a QB controversy, we can't help ourselves to keep challenging the definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over and over again...etc...
Let's face it, he's been a crash test dummy as a whole line of people made mistakes since 2017: Coughlin, Reese, McAdoo, Gettleman, and Shurmur.
And he'll likely be called on to do it again before it's coat weather -- this time it will be his ego and not his body. I don't like watching it, and I am as critical as anyone of him.
He's got a rookie who so clearly belongs in the NFL, a team that's improving but not proven, and a coach and GM whose continued employment in the NFL is tied to the rookie not to him.
It's going to be a bummer hearing the boos, seeing the media turn, and Manning eventually holding the clipboard on his way out.
It makes most sense when a starting QB goes down injured and is out for the season and the organisation is not confident in their backup.
As it stands, Indianapolis would be be delivering a big kick in the teeth to Brissett and if I were him, I would be furious if they brought in Manning. Not going to happen, especially when you consider the difference in the two players's salaries.
Gettleman can only trade eli with Eli's blessing...
The Mahomes example is just doesn't apply because the Chiefs were a 12 win team in 2016. They were going to be in the hunt. Smith had led them to double digit wins four years in a row. And so he earned the right to continue starting.
Aside from 2016, we have been perennial losers with Eli at the helm. Yet, the excuses keep getting compounded and Eli keeps getting ushered out there. Basically there is no statute of limitations on the last SB win. If Eli was being consistently productive and leading us to Ws I could be more patient. But NONE of that exists.
Not only are we in a QB controversy, we can't help ourselves to keep challenging the definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over and over again...etc...
You have to be able to separate the player from the team. Eli himself was pretty damn good in 2015. He was less of a catalyst in 2016 - but the team won 11 games and he was very sharp @ Lambeau. Us losing that game had nothing to do with him - he showed up that night. Beckham failed him and the defense really failed him.
2017 was a disaster for so many reasons. The RB group was garbage. Beckham missed most of the year. The offensive line was in shambles. The defense was awful. The coach lost the team.
How does one look at a year like that and deduce that the QB was the problem? Eli was set up to fail with a WCO coach who was clueless and didn't understand his QB's strengths. He's a pocket passer that was given zero pass protection, no running game, and had no WR's to throw to before we even hit the midway point.
2017 was quite literally an impossible scenario for him.
Last year, he actually played quite well at many different junctures. He had one of his best statistical years. But again - the offensive line was poor/average at best for most of the year and only started to gel more near the end. But again - the 2018 Giants defense was bad. The offense was league average. Not great, also not bad at all.
The idea here is to actually allow him to play football with a roster that sets him up to succeed and do the things he does well. We have an elite RB now. We have what should be at least a decent offensive line now where he won't have pass rushers breathing down his neck before he even gets off his first read.
It would be "insanity" if the Giants kept neglecting to fix the offensive line and kept setting Eli up to fail with rosters that he simply can't win with.
The FO believes he can win with this one. I still think we're an offseason away from having a good enough roster to compete for the division and playoffs - but I'd be willing to bet that Eli is quite a bit better than many people think he'll be.
If he's not, we're now prepared for that. We don't have to bellyache over punting on the 2018 QB class anymore. The QB is here, and he will play when his time comes.
It's simply unprovable that Jones is going to be negatively impacted if he plays in 8 games rather than 12 or whatever ~4-5 game difference you want to create. I really don't think it matters much at all - it's a point being belabored with no real data to support it.
And you can take it a step further. There's no significant difference in year 1-2 QB's whether they start day 1, play half the games, play a couple of games or play no games and then start year 2.
That's the point I made last week until it got twisted to make it sound like no QB learns from experience. Year 1 and year 2 experience for QB's has no statistical advantage as to when they play, even if many want to say that if Jones doesn't get game experience it will retard his development. There's absolutely no data to back that up.
With respect to trading Eli. I would obviously not want it to end like that--I love Eli, but if DJ is ready now and some team wants to compensate us for Eli (and Eli is willing to go along with it), we would have to be pretty stupid not to do it if it was good compensation. On the other hand, if DJ is not ready, then it is not even worth discussing.
Although I am starting to come around on the fact that DJ may be that exceedingly less rare QB that comes in as a rookie and plays well. There may be an argument that he can give us Eli level play.
Quote:
It's simply unprovable that Jones is going to be negatively impacted if he plays in 8 games rather than 12 or whatever ~4-5 game difference you want to create. I really don't think it matters much at all - it's a point being belabored with no real data to support it.
And you can take it a step further. There's no significant difference in year 1-2 QB's whether they start day 1, play half the games, play a couple of games or play no games and then start year 2.
That's the point I made last week until it got twisted to make it sound like no QB learns from experience. Year 1 and year 2 experience for QB's has no statistical advantage as to when they play, even if many want to say that if Jones doesn't get game experience it will retard his development. There's absolutely no data to back that up.
Yep, and the "advantageous rookie QB contract" argument also does not apply this year - we're paying Eli still.
It will apply when we are no longer paying Eli.
Look, as soon as we kept Eli on the books @ 23M this year, he was going to be the starter. If the Giants didn't intend on playing Eli and trying to win games with him, they wouldn't be paying him.
As long as NYG don't continue to send Eli out there long after it becomes evident he's not the answer; what we're doing here isn't a big deal.
Either Eli wins games and the Giants are competitive this season, or Eli takes a seat and Daniel gets the bulk of the starts.
So many of the people here didn't even want Daniel Jones at all.... not 6th, not 17th... they didn't want him.
Now, it's a tremendous issue if he doesn't play as soon as humanly possible.
Although I am starting to come around on the fact that DJ may be that exceedingly less rare QB that comes in as a rookie and plays well. There may be an argument that he can give us Eli level play.
When you step back and look at the entirety of a playing career, there's very little that points directly to experience having a huge part. While learning the difference in the speed from the college game to the pro game has to happen, it doesn't take years to master that.
If experience was such a crucial part of the game, you'd expect to see linear growth out of most players, yet the stats show otherwise. Statistically speaking, a starter in year 1-2 of a career has as much of a chance to regress in years 3-4 as they do to improve. And that continues throughout the career. WR's should hit their strides in years 4-6 if they gain the experience of route running and body positioning, but that isn't the case. Rookie RB's are as likely to have the same production in year 1 vs. years 3 or 5.
The idea that Jones will have his development stunted by not playing early is really borne out of one main argument - Eli needs to be replaced. It would be that much more productive if people would just come out and say it.
Eli should start the season. Why? Because this team has a chance to flip the script on recent years and make the playoffs. It's a slim chance but it's there. The only way that happens is if we get off to a fast start. Eli gives this team the best chance to do that.
If and when that slim chance evaporates we'll all be ready to move on and give DJ the reins for what will hopefully be a long and successful career.
As far as the Indy scenario or any other Eli trade before this season plays out forget it. BBI can have as many 300+ post threads about it as it likes, it just isn't happening.
The idea that Jones will have his development stunted by not playing early is really borne out of one main argument - Eli needs to be replaced. It would be that much more productive if people would just come out and say it.
Which is so ironic because it's that crowd that accuses everybody else of making excuses.
Quote:
The idea that Jones will have his development stunted by not playing early is really borne out of one main argument - Eli needs to be replaced. It would be that much more productive if people would just come out and say it.
Which is so ironic because it's that crowd that accuses everybody else of making excuses.
if FMIC reads through this thread (which was actually a great conversation with you not around to fire bomb it), you will see that is not the case
All things equal if game experience doesn't expedite growth, and the only risk is "ruining" Jones, I don't think that applies to the Giants. They have an extraordinary RB, a veteran offensive line, a solid if not spectacular group of WRs, a speedy and versatile starting TE, and reliable blocking TE.
Gettleman has done a fine job fielding a supporting cast that doesn't mirror the typical situation a rookie QB walks into.
I'd say Jones fresher arm, better legs, and nice touch in the short to intermediate game is to his advantage.
Now imagine if the Giants would have acquired a much cheaper vet (another disproven boogie man from the offseason) to be the insurance if Jones hadn't have been ready.
@JayGlazer
Jay Gruden names Case Keenum starter, waiting for McCoy to heal, they’d like to redshirt Haskins for the year and not rush him
Guys, it's coming, relax. Whether it's later this season or 2020 Week 1, it's coming. Jones' career won't be damaged if he doesn't start until Week 1 2020. Relax.
Not you
Teams NEED 2 quality QB's.
Lauletta is completely unproven. So is Jones for that matter - yeah, looks LIGHTS OUT in preseason. It's preseason.
Like Phil Simms, Eli Manning is completely disrespected by his own fans, and like Phil Simms, he will be worshipped only when he is gone.
Teams NEED 2 quality QB's.
Lauletta is completely unproven. So is Jones for that matter - yeah, looks LIGHTS OUT in preseason. It's preseason.
Like Phil Simms, Eli Manning is completely disrespected by his own fans, and like Phil Simms, he will be worshipped only when he is gone.
I've posted this before -- in addition to the on-the-field factors -- I also would like Manning spared the indignity and circus of being replaced mid season.
I wanted Manning to be spared the physical beating and ridicule of lining up behind a ridiculously bad line last year and getting beat like bag.
We have different definitions of "worship" maybe -- I'd rather respect and appreciate the guy on the way out, and not piss on his legacy.
I think Manning has accomplished plenty enough as a Giant, has been a fabulous representative of the franchise, and made a literal fortune.
Quote:
Jay Glazer
@JayGlazer
Jay Gruden names Case Keenum starter, waiting for McCoy to heal, they’d like to redshirt Haskins for the year and not rush him
Haskins always needed a year to work on things away from live bullets. His feet are still a disgrace to the art of quarterbacking. He gets away with it because of his insane arm, but it definitely isn't sustainable in the NFL. Their offensive line is also a mess right now. I can't believe they are actually making the smart move here, but I give it till week 8 when they are 2-5 and Danny Boy wants to see his new toy.
I'm not sold because I think Brissett is going to be good.
But a case can be made to go for an Eli type. The Colts have multitude of high round picks. Can you imagine if they called and offered a 2nd or 3rd for Eli?
We'd have to take that in a NY minute - right?
I say Jones is ready because of the way he handled this situation in this market, with the circus surrounding the draft and the criticisms he has faced. He has ice water in his veins. He has showed, ZERO FEAR. Stage is not to big for him.
All of the QBs drafted have talent. They are the best in the entire world. Even if they could handle it in college, most of them, when they get to the pros, cannot handle the pressure. They just crumble. Jones is a fucking rock. Think about what would have happened should he have had a shitty preseason?
Under the microscope of every decision he makes in game being scrutinized, ever throw in practice, Jones has continued to exceed expectations. We got a good one, everyone who keeps saying put on the brakes. I'm saying get real excited. He can handle intense pressure and scrutiny, he throws with accuracy, touch and anticipation.
I'm hoping Indy makes a request for Eli and we find out Mara nixed it. And it was a 2nd rounder.
This place would be on tilt... ;)