I posted about this in a separate thread.
I don't know how many people here follow the Rangers but in the 2017-18 season, the Rangers were playing mediocre hockey but were still in the playoff picture. The year before they were a stone's throw away from making the conference final. They were a few years away from the best record in the NHL and making it in the conference final and a few years away from the final. Many of those players were still there. Hell, they made the playoffs 12 of 13 seasons in a row. Instead of having this nonsense myopic strategy of "the goal is to win games" the Rangers very publicly decided to rebuild. Just a year and a half later, in part due to good drafting, and in part due to good luck (getting the #2 overall pick, some players forcing trades here), the Rangers have the best prospect pool in the league according to most. They are wildly considered to have a great rebuild and are one of the more promising teams for the future.
Why is it acceptable for the Giants to only think about this season when making decisions? Why is that the common thought process here? I understand Shurmur and the players, but why aren't we criticizing Gettleman and Mara for thinking about this season only? Because twice a million years ago we won the Super Bowl as a lower seed we will possibly do it again? That's the thinking of fools. If you worry about ruining Jones if we play him too early that's one thing. Though, I argue that means our O-line isn't where it should be and Jones isn't as mentally tough as we'd hope. But, if your argument is we can make a mediocre attempt at a mediocre playoff spot so Eli's marginal improvement over Jones is reason enough to start him that's assinine to me. That's the definition of short term illogical thinking. The sooner we get Jones in the sooner he'll get acclimated to the game and the more years we'll get out of him.
And I point is, the Rangers could have made the playoffs in 2017-18 but decided to rebuild to improve the team for the future. Mind you starting Jones a year earlier is less drastic but it's better for the future. He learns the ropes sooner and can contribute sooner.
Going to be tough, even though we all feel the needle is now pointing in the right direction. Right now, Dallas and Philly have better personnel 1 to 53. My hope is that -- regardless of our record this season -- the Giants play better, competitive football games!
Quote:
think Gettlemen and Shurmur think this team can get to the playoffs.
And I point is, the Rangers could have made the playoffs in 2017-18 but decided to rebuild to improve the team for the future. Mind you starting Jones a year earlier is less drastic but it's better for the future. He learns the ropes sooner and can contribute sooner.
I don't disagree with the premise but I'd be careful about comparing sports. A football roster turns over far more quickly than a hockey roster. The Rangers needed more time to get it fixed than the Giants should.
Quote:
In comment 14544146 Jon in NYC said:
Quote:
think Gettlemen and Shurmur think this team can get to the playoffs.
And I point is, the Rangers could have made the playoffs in 2017-18 but decided to rebuild to improve the team for the future. Mind you starting Jones a year earlier is less drastic but it's better for the future. He learns the ropes sooner and can contribute sooner.
I don't disagree with the premise but I'd be careful about comparing sports. A football roster turns over far more quickly than a hockey roster. The Rangers needed more time to get it fixed than the Giants should.
That makes sense but I find it interesting how much more rebuild driven Rangers fans were and Giants fans are all about winning now.
I think too much is being made of Jones playing right away or a few games in.
Mahomes, Rodgers, Brady, Brees... all of these guys are considered the best QB's in the game... none of them started Week 1 as rookies. It didn't affect them negatively.
Jones will play this year. If he doesn't, it means Eli is probably on a tear and we're winning a lot of games - in which case, I'm not sure how anyone could be annoyed. But I expect it.
What if NYR didn't get that #2 pick and weren't able to land Kakko? I think things would still seem brighter... but it would be different. He's a huge reason why this rebuild is accelerating. We needed a little bit of luck there and we got it.
There is no reason to not try to win this year, plus football teams turnover 35% per year and this team has done close to 85/90% in two years.
So be competitive to give the fans a reason to show up and root plus keeping the players interested.
I think Sy's points in the game review were valid. But I also think many act like sitting and watching somehow stunts development, when the reality is you learn a shitload you wouldn't while on the field
Now is there a balance based on the QB, team, culture, a vet / legend QB on the roster, production, W-Ls? Yes. Do I believe DJ could handle playing game 1? Likely. Would he gain anything - much you wouldn't catch from the field - from sitting a few games if not even a whole season assuming Eli produces? Definitely
It's a fluid situation. And really not a big deal that Eli is getting the nod, nor is some wait time inherently negative for DJ's development
I think too much is being made of Jones playing right away or a few games in.
Mahomes, Rodgers, Brady, Brees... all of these guys are considered the best QB's in the game... none of them started Week 1 as rookies. It didn't affect them negatively.
Jones will play this year. If he doesn't, it means Eli is probably on a tear and we're winning a lot of games - in which case, I'm not sure how anyone could be annoyed. But I expect it.
If he'll play this year anyway, what's the point if waiting?
I don't think that's what they're thinking, and I think there's actual proof of that: If they were thinking about this season only, they wouldn't have drafted Jones in the first place. They probably would have drafted Josh Allen. They also wouldn't have cluster-drafted DBs, because if they were thinking about this season only, they wouldn't go into the season relying on 4 guys (Baker, Beal, Love, Ballantine) in the secondary who haven't played in the NFL.
Well, nobody has said that. So that's a straw man argument, I think.
[quoteThough, I argue that means our O-line isn't where it should be and Jones isn't as mentally tough as we'd hope. [/quote]
Sorry, I'm lost. What?
Y'know, for all my disagreements with this post, I agree that the goal really should be to win a championship, not necessarily to win an extra game or two this season. However, there are other factors at work:
1) It's a competitive market. The Jets are improving. The Giants have been consistently bad most of the last 10 years, except for one great Super Bowl run and one playoff game in Green Bay. They have to give their fans something to watch, and some hope. They probably feel they need to show some improvement this year, rather than tell the fans "We're bottoming out but watch out next year."
2) Saquon Barkley can't be put in suspended animation for a year or two until the team is good. He's a top running back now. The Giants are right to try to make the most of his career, which is probably going to be 10 years at the most. This is year two.
3) Part of the "culture change" is infusing the whole roster with a winning attitude. That means a willingness to play hard even when things are going badly, not quitting, and always giving your best. You get that out men by showing them that the whole organization is committed to winning. You can't really tell the guys "Well, play hard this year, but we're not really trying to win until next year." If Eli is their best chance to win now, you play Eli.
The flip side of that is that the day the players believe Jones gives them a better chance to win than Eli, it's going to force the organization's hand. Then Jones needs to play.
So like I said, I disagree with a lot of the premises above. But yes, the goal should be rings, not a few extra wins in 2019. For now, starting Eli serves both goals, so I'm good with that. By midseason that may no longer be true.
Quote:
They aren't only thinking about this season. And it's very difficult to equate teams in different sports. I am a massive Rangers fan, but the positions of the teams, cap implications and other intangibles just make it too hard of a comparison.
I think too much is being made of Jones playing right away or a few games in.
Mahomes, Rodgers, Brady, Brees... all of these guys are considered the best QB's in the game... none of them started Week 1 as rookies. It didn't affect them negatively.
Jones will play this year. If he doesn't, it means Eli is probably on a tear and we're winning a lot of games - in which case, I'm not sure how anyone could be annoyed. But I expect it.
If he'll play this year anyway, what's the point if waiting?
The point is to try to win the Super Bowl this year.
It's hard to hear, but some teams don't have a chance, and the season is managed accordingly.
Sometimes that is obvious coming out of camp, some times it's at Thanksgiving.
When/if that time comes that's when Jones should be playing. Not a moment after.
Quote:
In comment 14544160 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
They aren't only thinking about this season. And it's very difficult to equate teams in different sports. I am a massive Rangers fan, but the positions of the teams, cap implications and other intangibles just make it too hard of a comparison.
I think too much is being made of Jones playing right away or a few games in.
Mahomes, Rodgers, Brady, Brees... all of these guys are considered the best QB's in the game... none of them started Week 1 as rookies. It didn't affect them negatively.
Jones will play this year. If he doesn't, it means Eli is probably on a tear and we're winning a lot of games - in which case, I'm not sure how anyone could be annoyed. But I expect it.
If he'll play this year anyway, what's the point if waiting?
The point is to try to win the Super Bowl this year.
I mean they very clearly won't.
Quote:
They aren't only thinking about this season. And it's very difficult to equate teams in different sports. I am a massive Rangers fan, but the positions of the teams, cap implications and other intangibles just make it too hard of a comparison.
I think too much is being made of Jones playing right away or a few games in.
Mahomes, Rodgers, Brady, Brees... all of these guys are considered the best QB's in the game... none of them started Week 1 as rookies. It didn't affect them negatively.
Jones will play this year. If he doesn't, it means Eli is probably on a tear and we're winning a lot of games - in which case, I'm not sure how anyone could be annoyed. But I expect it.
If he'll play this year anyway, what's the point if waiting?
Because the org believes Eli provides a better opportunity to win out of the gates. It's really as simple as that.
Odds are, they're right.
You can believe Jones is the better long-term option and also think that Eli affords the Giants a better chance to win in the early going.
When Daniel gets in there, he's going to take some lumps and he's going to make mistakes. Mistakes that may cost us games. So, we have to be prepared for that.
It doesn't mean Eli can't or won't make mistakes - it's just that the odds of him making experience-related errors are going to be much smaller.
Jones will get his time if Eli isn't getting it done. It's not going to set him back if he isn't the Week 1 starter.
Idk about that. Going by Maras quotes, that's the hope, but at the end of the year they want a team moving in the right direction. Too many new guys and a lot of youth to expect much early on, and growing pains are expected.
What s wrong with trying to win as many games as you can while rebuilding.
The only way his argument is valid if you accept the narrative that starting Eli retards Jones’ developed.
That at the very least is flawed thinking given the number of examples over the years where sitting the young quarterback did nothing of the sort; the latest being Mahomes from 2 seasons ago.
Quote:
Why is it acceptable for the Giants to only think about this season when making decisions? Why is that the common thought process here? I understand Shurmur and the players, but why aren't we criticizing Gettleman and Mara for thinking about this season only?
I don't think that's what they're thinking, and I think there's actual proof of that: If they were thinking about this season only, they wouldn't have drafted Jones in the first place. They probably would have drafted Josh Allen. They also wouldn't have cluster-drafted DBs, because if they were thinking about this season only, they wouldn't go into the season relying on 4 guys (Baker, Beal, Love, Ballantine) in the secondary who haven't played in the NFL.
Quote:
Because twice a million years ago we won the Super Bowl as a lower seed we will possibly do it again? That's the thinking of fools. If you worry about ruining Jones if we play him too early that's one thing.
Well, nobody has said that. So that's a straw man argument, I think.
[quoteThough, I argue that means our O-line isn't where it should be and Jones isn't as mentally tough as we'd hope.
Sorry, I'm lost. What?
Quote:
But, if your argument is we can make a mediocre attempt at a mediocre playoff spot so Eli's marginal improvement over Jones is reason enough to start him that's assinine to me. That's the definition of short term illogical thinking. The sooner we get Jones in the sooner he'll get acclimated to the game and the more years we'll get out of him.
Y'know, for all my disagreements with this post, I agree that the goal really should be to win a championship, not necessarily to win an extra game or two this season. However, there are other factors at work:
1) It's a competitive market. The Jets are improving. The Giants have been consistently bad most of the last 10 years, except for one great Super Bowl run and one playoff game in Green Bay. They have to give their fans something to watch, and some hope. They probably feel they need to show some improvement this year, rather than tell the fans "We're bottoming out but watch out next year."
2) Saquon Barkley can't be put in suspended animation for a year or two until the team is good. He's a top running back now. The Giants are right to try to make the most of his career, which is probably going to be 10 years at the most. This is year two.
3) Part of the "culture change" is infusing the whole roster with a winning attitude. That means a willingness to play hard even when things are going badly, not quitting, and always giving your best. You get that out men by showing them that the whole organization is committed to winning. You can't really tell the guys "Well, play hard this year, but we're not really trying to win until next year." If Eli is their best chance to win now, you play Eli.
The flip side of that is that the day the players believe Jones gives them a better chance to win than Eli, it's going to force the organization's hand. Then Jones needs to play.
So like I said, I disagree with a lot of the premises above. But yes, the goal should be rings, not a few extra wins in 2019. For now, starting Eli serves both goals, so I'm good with that. By midseason that may no longer be true. [/quote]
This is a good debate I'm pleasantly surprised I haven't been met with hostility in this thread yet because this might be an unpopular opinion. But here's my response to your 3 points.
1) I'm not talking about bottoming out. I'm talking specifically about starting Jones, maybe I'm overestimating how giving him as many games as possible will benefit his career sooner. But I just can't fathom rational Giants fans would rather see an 8-8 team led by Eli than a 6-10 team led by Jones. You mentioned hope, Jones gives us hope, not Eli. Eli won't be here past this year.
2) I agree with this, but I can't imagine us being good enough where we're not wasting this year with Barkley anyway.
3) I think committing to winning long term is healthier for the franchise. I get that it sounds like a losing mentality in the short term but as you said yourself taking the "winning culture" argument to its logical conclusion they would have drafted Josh Allen.
The idea is building a perennial championship contender not going 8-8 rather than 6-10. If starting Jones week 1 affords us one extra year of being a championship contender in the future when our roster is not full of holes, I'll gladly sacrifice those 2 wins.
What s wrong with trying to win as many games as you can while rebuilding.
The only way his argument is valid if you accept the narrative that starting Eli retards Jones’ developed.
That at the very least is flawed thinking given the number of examples over the years where sitting the young quarterback did nothing of the sort; the latest being Mahomes from 2 seasons ago.
Again, the Chiefs were competing for division titles under Smith. He had won double digit games 4 straight years. It's really time to start paying attention and quit being a lemming on these examples that don't apply...
As for trying to win now, why can't we do that with Jones?
Why does Eli, who has one winning season in the last six, give us the best chance to win? Magic?
You're thinking of basketball. The QB is a more important position than any position in hockey. A good QB has a bigger difference on a team's record than any position in hockey. We're not talking about Lebron James and Michael Jordan here.
I don't know what "you made up your mind" means. Every opinion related thread starts with a strong opinion. I don't know how I made up my mind any more than any other thread where someone states their opinion.
I don’t know why anyone should be upset at the roster building methodology DG has implemented here since 2018. Virtually everything is in place for sustained success. Now it just has to come together. Big if, but the long game approach is clearly in effect.
People have gone insane with this Eli and Jones talk. Just relax...it will happen when it happens! People just jump ahead or always thinking about shit that hasn’t even happened yet.
First the giants were never gonna move on from Eli. Then they do in fact draft a first round qb and everyone still goes ape shit because OMG he should have gone 17 or 170. Now it’s OMG they have to start Jones now!!
Just exhausting. Nothing has even happened yet. Relax. If Jones is Peyton Manning redux don’t worry we’re gonna be fine sooner than later. So Eli plays a few more games... if he stinks it up JONES will play. Everyone knows this.
People have gone insane with this Eli and Jones talk. Just relax...it will happen when it happens! People just jump ahead or always thinking about shit that hasn’t even happened yet.
It's a reasonable question being weighed by, mostly, reasonable posters.
One could easily argue the insanity part is rolling Ole Eli back out there hunting magic carpets...
There are still some positions that need upgrades. That isn't due to philosophy but rather the fact the talent pool was such that DG and Co. need more time to complete the job.
We'll improve this season but 2020 is likely our re-emergence as a title contender.
Quote:
The Giants are trying to get better. Getting better means winning more games. I don't see any part of DG's plan that sacrifices short term winning for long term success. Having your rookie QB sit a year or part of a year before taking over the reigns is standard operating procedure in the NFL and has been for as long as I've been watching football. That every unit isn't what it should or will be is what any sane person should expect after only two years of a rebuild. As far as that rebuild, I believe DG has added more talent in the last two years than any Giants' GM has in my memory. In short, the OP is almost completely without merit.
The idea is building a perennial championship contender not going 8-8 rather than 6-10. If starting Jones week 1 affords us one extra year of being a championship contender in the future when our roster is not full of holes, I'll gladly sacrifice those 2 wins.
And again, there is nothing the team is doing that runs in opposition to building a perennial championship contender. Starting Jones in week 1 doesn't correlate to affording us one extra year of being a championship contender in the future. That's at worst a false premise and at best a premise you haven't proven to be true. It could actuality be the opposite. Neither you or I know which it is or if it's neither. You should stop pretending you do.
Quote:
What s wrong with trying to win as many games as you can while rebuilding.
The only way his argument is valid if you accept the narrative that starting Eli retards Jones’ developed.
That at the very least is flawed thinking given the number of examples over the years where sitting the young quarterback did nothing of the sort; the latest being Mahomes from 2 seasons ago.
Again, the Chiefs were competing for division titles under Smith. He had won double digit games 4 straight years. It's really time to start paying attention and quit being a lemming on these examples that don't apply...
As for trying to win now, why can't we do that with Jones?
Why does Eli, who has one winning season in the last six, give us the best chance to win? Magic?
I don’t know that Eli does give them the best Chance to win, That wasn’t the pt. The pt was Eli s starting doesn’t naturally translate to Jones’ development being retarded; much like Mahomes sitting behind Smith didn’t inhibit his development.
I m confused by how the caliber of the play of a veteran quarterback is relevant to how sitting impacts the rookie quarterback waiting in the wings
followed directly by this part:
Dale Carnegie couldn't have put it any better.
Quote:
I'm pleasantly surprised I haven't been met with hostility in this thread yet ...
followed directly by this part:
Quote:
It's really time to start paying attention and quit being a lemming...
Dale Carnegie couldn't have put it any better.
Seems you connected two posts here to reflect one poster.
Unfortunately, that's not the case.
I don’t know that Eli does give them the best Chance to win, That wasn’t the pt. The pt was Eli s starting doesn’t naturally translate to Jones’ development being retarded; much like Mahomes sitting behind Smith didn’t inhibit his development.
I m confused by how the caliber of the play of a veteran quarterback is relevant to how sitting impacts the rookie quarterback waiting in the wings
Again, the circumstances for Mahomes likely got in the way of him starting. The Chiefs were a playoff team under Mahomes's predecessor Smith. So why would Reid make that change? The team was performing under Smith.
We haven't performed under Eli - for whatever the excuse du jour is. Thus, if the incumbent isn't getting it done why not make a change to a younger, more athletic prospect?
I know the answer, but I struggle to buy it/them anymore...
Let's be honest here. No one understands the goings on and chicanery of Jints Central than me...
So indeed I know.
Quote:
I think that would be a no...
Let's be honest here. No one understands the goings on and chicanery of Skins Central than me...
So indeed I know.
Agreed.
Magic carpet my ass.
Quote:
In comment 14545216 dep026 said:
Quote:
I think that would be a no...
Let's be honest here. No one understands the goings on and chicanery of Skins Central than me...
So indeed I know.
Agreed.
Them too!
Wise ass...
Magic carpet my ass.
This is an interesting year. Barkley, if used properly, which should be 450+ touches, should be the centerpiece of the offense. And let Eli morph into a game manager. That could result in a relatively competitive team week after week.
The problem with that is Shurmur clearly wants a versatile athletic QB to really optimize his offense. So if Eli has to be the starting QB we sacrifice that upside. Which, as stated, is why I would absolutely roll the dice with Jones...
Magic carpet my ass.
Eli has kept his job while Coughlin Gilbride McAdoo Reese Ross Beckham and countless others have been shown the door as sacrificial lambs. he has been at the heart of the decline of this team since the veteran heroes on defense of the 2007 and 2011 teams retired or moved on. He’s a nice guy, but the Giants would have been better off if he pulled a Luck and called it quits after 46
It’s not even close.
Quote:
Quote:
I'm pleasantly surprised I haven't been met with hostility in this thread yet ...
followed directly by this part:
Quote:
It's really time to start paying attention and quit being a lemming...
Dale Carnegie couldn't have put it any better.
Seems you connected two posts here to reflect one poster.
Unfortunately, that's not the case.
Read again, my friend. He messed up the syntax on the first post so his comment, the one I referenced, got embedded in the post to which he was responding.
If Manning was 32, under contract, and likely to yield a 3rd round pick and a defensive starter, I'd be more in favor of giving him the whole year.
But the comp to KC just isn't that good.