First, I don’t think there are many if any here who wanted a young quarterback the last two seasons more than me.
But what did people see yesterday to prompt the “Eli is done” narrative that I read in the game and post game threads yesterday.
Eli has limitations, we all know that. But so do other quarterbacks throughout the league who are still winning. Does anyone here believe Eli wouldn’t be a winner with a roster like Dallas’?
Seems like there is much resentment directed towards Eli here, which I find surprising on a Giants board.
He might not be the answer here anymore, but to state unequivocally that he s done, when his stats and even his play don’t support that theory is not accurate IMO.
For the record I m ready to move on from Eli, because this team is not ready to win, not because Eli is done.
Quote:
They are not the Dolphins. They are going to approach this season and each game with the respect to their fans, their own employees (the non-QB players being asked to risk injury each week), and the game itself as if they want to win the game and progress in the season. I disagree that it's "ring" or nothing either, but more a realistic shot at making the post-season. They're approach is different than yours; they're not quitters and divers and they won't punt the season before it even begins.
At the point where they concede that they are playing for next year and not this year, they will put Jones in. If Eli goes down with an injury, they will put Jones in. If it looks like Eli is what is holding the team back, then they will put Jones in....And none of that is week #2.
just to be clear - you thought Jones was an awful pick, correct?
Imagine thinking that it would be disrespectful to the fans/employees/team to play the QB that you just drafted #6 overall, after going 31-49 over the last 5 seasons?
Incredible, isn't it? Some people act like this franchise has been a winning franchise these past 7 seasons or something. They literally block it out like it never happened and like we're still not in it. It's hilarious and strange at the same time.
Lets see how warm of a reception the status quo gets in Giants stadium this week
Quote:
They are not the Dolphins. They are going to approach this season and each game with the respect to their fans, their own employees (the non-QB players being asked to risk injury each week), and the game itself as if they want to win the game and progress in the season. I disagree that it's "ring" or nothing either, but more a realistic shot at making the post-season. They're approach is different than yours; they're not quitters and divers and they won't punt the season before it even begins.
At the point where they concede that they are playing for next year and not this year, they will put Jones in. If Eli goes down with an injury, they will put Jones in. If it looks like Eli is what is holding the team back, then they will put Jones in....And none of that is week #2.
just to be clear - you thought Jones was an awful pick, correct?
Imagine thinking that it would be disrespectful to the fans/employees/team to play the QB that you just drafted #6 overall, after going 31-49 over the last 5 seasons?
Jones was not the pick I wanted when Goodell was at the podium. I wanted Allen and I wanted a 2020 QB. But a nanosecond after Goodell said his name, I was a supporter of Jones.
And, your hypothetical doesn't make too much sense. There isn't any draft pick, whether he's #6 over all or #6 round, that is different in the sense that it's disrespectful not to start them merely because they were drafted. Your play the player that will help you win the next game the most.
Quote:
to not do what they think is best for the team to win a game in any given week?
Lets see how warm of a reception the status quo gets in Giants stadium this week
You realize that "status quo" is 100% on the defense, right? Not sure how that is relevant to this topic.
Seems like some sort of weird code of chivalry to me.
If their honest view, given what the last 7 seasons have been as a body of work, is that the player they just used the #6 overall draft pick on is a guy that it would be DISRESPECTFUL to others to put on the football field, I would say the greater disrespect to the fans was drafting that player at #6.
But they don't think that. This is all a ruse. It has nothing whatsoever to do with respect for the fans. And I don't think you think it has anything to do with that, Britt. You have some actual well-reasoned logic behind your opinion. This respect thing is drivel.
Quote:
In comment 14570277 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
to not do what they think is best for the team to win a game in any given week?
Lets see how warm of a reception the status quo gets in Giants stadium this week
You realize that "status quo" is 100% on the defense, right? Not sure how that is relevant to this topic.
The def is terrible, no doubt. I've been saying that all off season.
The O still only managed to put up 10 points when the game was in contention.
Hey, if there are promising young guys on the def side of the ball, put them in as well. I think they should be playing Ballentine over Hamilton as well
And he is sitting on the bench.
He will not get David Carr'd with this line and running back.
We know who Eli is. He has the power to audible. He had protection and a running game against Dallas and looked.
EXACTLY THE SAME AS HE HAS FOR THE LAST 2 YEARS.
It was boring. So boring.
If we lose against Buffalo or ever get 2 game below 500 I will be screaming for Jones. Not because I hate Eli but because Jones just might be the truth. He looked the best of all the rookie QBs in preseason. Arizona isn't worried about Murray.
It would exciting to watch a young player with upside grow. I see nothing negative to playing him with many possible positives.
Manning needs to WIN to continue start IMO
Quote:
In comment 14570277 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
to not do what they think is best for the team to win a game in any given week?
Lets see how warm of a reception the status quo gets in Giants stadium this week
You realize that "status quo" is 100% on the defense, right? Not sure how that is relevant to this topic.
That's absolutely wrong, when the offense couldn't manage more than 10 points. Even a great defense isn't winning with 10 points of support from their offense.
The main problem with this team is the defense, but the offense hasn't exactly been holding up their end of the bargain.
Quote:
In comment 14570287 ron mexico said:
Quote:
In comment 14570277 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
to not do what they think is best for the team to win a game in any given week?
Lets see how warm of a reception the status quo gets in Giants stadium this week
You realize that "status quo" is 100% on the defense, right? Not sure how that is relevant to this topic.
That's absolutely wrong, when the offense couldn't manage more than 10 points. Even a great defense isn't winning with 10 points of support from their offense.
The main problem with this team is the defense, but the offense hasn't exactly been holding up their end of the bargain.
I don't agree with this at all. I think people are so hung up on the Eli question that they've overblown the impact of the offense on Sunday's game. Eli is now the defense's scapegoat.
They did progress down the field and some of those failed scoring opportunities were dictated by the defense's lapses. I'm positive that we would have kicked FG's at least twice instead of going for it on 4th down. And yeah, you can say it's only 6 more points but it's part of a lot of changes dictated by Dallas so easily scoring on every opportunity. In part, and I think to a large part, it changed how we used Saquon and that had a huge impact.
AT 0-2 since 1990 only 12% made the playoffs...That would be time
1-3 15%
2-4 9%
3-5 7%
4-6 7%
5-7 4%
I did not choose the records arbitrarily.
record playoff matrix - ( New Window )
I get that teams should try to win every game, but at a certain point, if one path may result in a significantly higher ceiling for long-term success (not saying it will, just considering the hypothetical that it could) but reduces your chances for winning a handful of games this season, and the other option offers no long-term benefit but probably does maximize your chances of winning each game this season (even if those chances aren't exceptionally high in some instances regardless of which option you choose), you have to at least be willing to choose the long-term benefit, don't you?
Or is the preference simply to lose by less points? Because if we're going to suck out loud either way, I'm fine with sucking even more this year if it means that we're Super Bowl contenders again sooner.
It's fine to play every game to win, but if there's a material difference to the long-term potential for this franchise, I'll be disappointed if that's not even a consideration at all.
IMO, it's more disrespectful to the fans to think that they're not capable of understanding that the future matters too. But considering that John Mara seems to treat the low-IQ cesspool of WFAN like a free focus group that gives him a pulse of the fanbase, it's not surprising that he would generally underestimate the intelligence of his customers.
I think I recently read that since 2006ish that only 10% of the teams who started 0-2 make the playoffs. So I agree, Eli should sit for Jones if we go down to Buffalo.
Unfortunately I think Eli is in the saddle until we are officially, mathematically eliminated. And that will be precious time lost...
Quote:
In comment 14570251 Bill L said:
Quote:
If it looks like Eli is what is holding the team back, then they will put Jones in....And none of that is week #2.
This has been true for 3 years now.
They do not concur with your assessment.
They’re 38-58 the last 7 years, are we assuming they’re right?
Quote:
of trotting him out there after starting 0-2. DJ isn't getting ruined behind this line and he looks ready. Although ill start pressing the panic button if he fumbles again in his next action. Needs to clean that up, really strange considering he wasn't a big tumbler in college.
I think I recently read that since 2006ish that only 10% of the teams who started 0-2 make the playoffs. So I agree, Eli should sit for Jones if we go down to Buffalo.
Unfortunately I think Eli is in the saddle until we are officially, mathematically eliminated. And that will be precious time lost...
I'd like to get a better feel for "precious". Is there a detonator somewhere?
Quote:
He is not going to get David Carr’ed
I think you nailed it - this is the underlying fear with those who want the transition process to be more methodical and measured. We don't want another David Carr on our hands. And I get that to a degree. Plus, sprinkled in between, there is this desire to see Eli finish out on his terms and/or that he still has the good to produce wins.
But it's a risk I'm willing to take because the NFL's trend - I know some want more granularity in the data - is that rookie QBs are starting right away (more than ever), or very soon into their rookie year. And most, > 50%, are showing green arrows. Just look at what I compiled last night above. There are a lot of success stories brewing in the NFL with QBs who started early. It's clear as day.
So I am ALL in on Jones starting right away. And I'm a guy who probably is the most skeptical about him. But I see huge value in finding out as soon as possible if he is indeed the boom or the bust. If he's the boom, then we get great ROI off his first contract. If he's the bust, then we re-group and start looking for another solution quicker...
It's a fundamental truth of Giants fans - they have an indelible memory for that one time that a worst case scenario played out, even if it was elsewhere in the NFL.
"We can't have Peppers returning punts because Jason Sehorn!"
"We can't take a RB from Penn State because Blair Thomas!"
"We can't draft a QB from Duke because Dave Brown!"
So it should come as no surprise that the same fanbase has a new rallying cry:
"We can't play Jones as a rookie because David Carr!"
Quote:
of trotting him out there after starting 0-2. DJ isn't getting ruined behind this line and he looks ready. Although ill start pressing the panic button if he fumbles again in his next action. Needs to clean that up, really strange considering he wasn't a big tumbler in college.
I think I recently read that since 2006ish that only 10% of the teams who started 0-2 make the playoffs. So I agree, Eli should sit for Jones if we go down to Buffalo.
Unfortunately I think Eli is in the saddle until we are officially, mathematically eliminated. And that will be precious time lost...
Quote:
In comment 14570314 Zeke's Alibi said:
Quote:
of trotting him out there after starting 0-2. DJ isn't getting ruined behind this line and he looks ready. Although ill start pressing the panic button if he fumbles again in his next action. Needs to clean that up, really strange considering he wasn't a big tumbler in college.
I think I recently read that since 2006ish that only 10% of the teams who started 0-2 make the playoffs. So I agree, Eli should sit for Jones if we go down to Buffalo.
Unfortunately I think Eli is in the saddle until we are officially, mathematically eliminated. And that will be precious time lost...
I'd like to get a better feel for "precious". Is there a detonator somewhere?
Funny thing about "precious" is that it has multiple meanings. Like, for example, I might use it like this, "it's starting to feel like the basis of your position in this argument is not wanting to say goodbye to your precious Eli, rather than any particular concern in either direction about what's in the best interest of the team's long-term potential."
I wonder if that record is a part of the thinking process if they lose this week.
Quote:
It's going to be something if he retires from here with a sub .500 record. I mean, if the Giants lose this weekend, he has a .500 career record. I don't know why people want to see that happen.
I wonder if that record is a part of the thinking process if they lose this week.
If any Eli-specific record good/bad/otherwise is on the mind of any NYG decision-makers, then this organization has lost its way even more than it's been given credit for.
Quote:
In comment 14570329 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 14570314 Zeke's Alibi said:
Quote:
of trotting him out there after starting 0-2. DJ isn't getting ruined behind this line and he looks ready. Although ill start pressing the panic button if he fumbles again in his next action. Needs to clean that up, really strange considering he wasn't a big tumbler in college.
I think I recently read that since 2006ish that only 10% of the teams who started 0-2 make the playoffs. So I agree, Eli should sit for Jones if we go down to Buffalo.
Unfortunately I think Eli is in the saddle until we are officially, mathematically eliminated. And that will be precious time lost...
I'd like to get a better feel for "precious". Is there a detonator somewhere?
Funny thing about "precious" is that it has multiple meanings. Like, for example, I might use it like this, "it's starting to feel like the basis of your position in this argument is not wanting to say goodbye to your precious Eli, rather than any particular concern in either direction about what's in the best interest of the team's long-term potential."
Actually, that would be the same meaning.
I actually don't have that strong a feeling for Eli per se, but since yours (and others) antipathy is so , so extreme, it must seem that way to you. As I said, I think when the time comes for them to concede the season, then it will be time and, even more so, there will *always* be enough time (hence, my raising an eyebrow at bw's use of "precious"), to get Jones fully developed. No need to take a dive at the beginning of the season.
Quote:
In comment 14570334 Bill L said:
Quote:
In comment 14570329 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 14570314 Zeke's Alibi said:
Quote:
of trotting him out there after starting 0-2. DJ isn't getting ruined behind this line and he looks ready. Although ill start pressing the panic button if he fumbles again in his next action. Needs to clean that up, really strange considering he wasn't a big tumbler in college.
I think I recently read that since 2006ish that only 10% of the teams who started 0-2 make the playoffs. So I agree, Eli should sit for Jones if we go down to Buffalo.
Unfortunately I think Eli is in the saddle until we are officially, mathematically eliminated. And that will be precious time lost...
I'd like to get a better feel for "precious". Is there a detonator somewhere?
Funny thing about "precious" is that it has multiple meanings. Like, for example, I might use it like this, "it's starting to feel like the basis of your position in this argument is not wanting to say goodbye to your precious Eli, rather than any particular concern in either direction about what's in the best interest of the team's long-term potential."
Actually, that would be the same meaning.
I actually don't have that strong a feeling for Eli per se, but since yours (and others) antipathy is so , so extreme, it must seem that way to you. As I said, I think when the time comes for them to concede the season, then it will be time and, even more so, there will *always* be enough time (hence, my raising an eyebrow at bw's use of "precious"), to get Jones fully developed. No need to take a dive at the beginning of the season.
I was waiting for you to point out (correctly) that the meaning was the same.
As for the rest, if you think you don't have a strong feeling but somehow think I harbor any sort of antipathy, I suggest you rethink your position (and possibly your EQ in general). My hope is that the franchise, despite a recent history of poor decisions and half-measures, sets forward on a course that prioritizes the future and the long-term best interests of the roster. Unlike you, it seems, I think this season is likely to be yet another mediocre campaign, with yet another record below .500 and yet another high draft pick.
With that in mind, I don't quite give a rat's ass about who gives us the best chance to win games this season in what I consider to be a largely meaningless season in terms of W/L record. I care about what gives us the best chance to win our next Super Bowl. I'm quite confident that Eli will not be the QB whenever it is that we hoist our next Lombardi Trophy, and as such, I would prefer to begin the maturation process with Jones that will hopefully accelerate the timeline toward that next championship.
As to your suggestion that "there will *always* be enough time, that seems like a weird statement. If something takes X amount of time, then it takes X amount of time. Starting it tomorrow instead of today means you complete it a day later, too. But of course, if you're emotionally invested in whatever motivates you to procrastinate, maybe you'd actually prefer to complete it later. Just don't pretend that that's some sort of impartial take.
Now back to your regularly scheduled charade that your position in this debate isn't ENTIRELY about prolonging the Eli Manning era.
But since this is his last year witht he team, and I never expected anything like 500 or above. To me he is entirely inconsequential.
My only concern is the long term and what will get us to the point of that next Lombardi. Full Stop.
You have no skin in the game. The people that are paid to win games and are on and off the hot seat on a weekly basis do care who gives them the best chance. And it's not just coaches. Coaches and players lose jobs. It's a results based business and maybe Shurmur isn't as confident in keeping his job if he loses the next ten games in a row testing the rookie. Yeah, maybe it makes Daniel Jones get a little more experience, but all that losing certainly tightens the noose around Shurmur's neck, and can have effects on players on the roster as well.
It's fun to think big picture as a fan, but being wrong or right doesn't cost us anything.
Quote:
With that in mind, I don't quite give a rat's ass about who gives us the best chance to win games this season in what I consider to be a largely meaningless season in terms of W/L record.
You have no skin in the game. The people that are paid to win games and are on and off the hot seat on a weekly basis do care who gives them the best chance. And it's not just coaches. Coaches and players lose jobs. It's a results based business and maybe Shurmur isn't as confident in keeping his job if he loses the next ten games in a row testing the rookie. Yeah, maybe it makes Daniel Jones get a little more experience, but all that losing certainly tightens the noose around Shurmur's neck, and can have effects on players on the roster as well.
It's fun to think big picture as a fan, but being wrong or right doesn't cost us anything.
Do you really think that 4-12 with Jones as the QB gets Shurmur's seat hotter than 8-8 with Eli?
(cast aside the suggestion that there's probably far less than a 4 game differential between the choices)
I have to imagine that both Shurmur and Gettleman are here until there's at least an indicative sample of Jones as starting QB unless there's some level of off-field disfunction that becomes untenable.
bw and I don't agree on much, but even he and I agree (and I think most of you actually do to but are unwilling to concede it) that Jones won't see the field until we are mathematically eliminated or completely noncompetitive.
And I don’t think Many players would complain either. We saw how shep and Saquan stood up for him to Baker and how impressed Tate was with his accuracy.
bw and I don't agree on much, but even he and I agree (and I think most of you actually do to but are unwilling to concede it) that Jones won't see the field until we are mathematically eliminated or completely noncompetitive.
I simply don't see how playing Jones can be dismissed out of hand as a tank-job. I'm not saying it's an odds-on bet, but there is a chance this offense gets BETTER. Let's face it, Eli may not be a "problem" per se, but the offensive scoring output hasn't been adequate (even if the defense is THE problem). Maybe it even changes some of the energy around the team.
I do agree that Jones probably will not see the field as the starting QB until mathematically eliminated, or close to it, because I think management is still operating sub-optimally. (the standard little impasse that you and I have sometimes had in these discussions between 'should'/opinions and 'will'/predictions).
And keep in mind, all of what I'm saying is predicated on a terrible start over 3-4 games, as in 0-3, 1-3, etc. Even just 2-2 and I give it 2-3 more games no complaints, and re-assess from there (assuming Eli does not actually become a problem with his play).
But I'm going to keep pounding the cyber table here and say that Jones looks to have more dimensions to his game than Eli - athletically it's not even really close - and that expands Shurmur's playbook options. So if you believe most of that theory, than I think it's safe to extrapolate that out to mean that we have more chances to win. Or to at least be a wash between Jones and Eli.
If Jones was truly Eli 2.0 physically - good arm but very immobile - than I could sort of buy the strategy to start Eli (to a degree). But the only similarities are the cheesy mannerisms, the Cutcliffe connection, and they are right-handed.
So in the garage sits a potentially better model of Eli. And the old car with FM/AM and manual windows rolls back onto the field...
Quote:
There is too much invested, and it's just not in their DNA. They're not going to do it.
bw and I don't agree on much, but even he and I agree (and I think most of you actually do to but are unwilling to concede it) that Jones won't see the field until we are mathematically eliminated or completely noncompetitive.
I simply don't see how playing Jones can be dismissed out of hand as a tank-job. I'm not saying it's an odds-on bet, but there is a chance this offense gets BETTER. Let's face it, Eli may not be a "problem" per se, but the offensive scoring output hasn't been adequate (even if the defense is THE problem). Maybe it even changes some of the energy around the team.
I do agree that Jones probably will not see the field as the starting QB until mathematically eliminated, or close to it, because I think management is still operating sub-optimally. (the standard little impasse that you and I have sometimes had in these discussions between 'should'/opinions and 'will'/predictions).
And keep in mind, all of what I'm saying is predicated on a terrible start over 3-4 games, as in 0-3, 1-3, etc. Even just 2-2 and I give it 2-3 more games no complaints, and re-assess from there (assuming Eli does not actually become a problem with his play).
And I think they will. If this thing goes south early, then the needle will move closer towards putting Jones in.
As I said earlier, it's fluid.
bw and I don't agree on much, but even he and I agree (and I think most of you actually do to but are unwilling to concede it) that Jones won't see the field until we are mathematically eliminated or completely noncompetitive.
On this I agree with you as well. Mara will insist that Eli get every chance to turn this thing around, and will not allow Jones to start until there is either literally or virtually no chance for them to make the playoffs.
But I disagree with you about the resining - it's not because he believes Eli gives them the best chance to win, it's because he considers Eli as something akin to a son. (And I do think it's Mara calling the shots here.) What Shurmur thinks is best for the team I really couldn't say.
Quote:
bw and I don't agree on much, but even he and I agree (and I think most of you actually do to but are unwilling to concede it) that Jones won't see the field until we are mathematically eliminated or completely noncompetitive.
On this I agree with you as well. Mara will insist that Eli get every chance to turn this thing around, and will not allow Jones to start until there is either literally or virtually no chance for them to make the playoffs.
But I disagree with you about the resining - it's not because he believes Eli gives them the best chance to win, it's because he considers Eli as something akin to a son. (And I do think it's Mara calling the shots here.) What Shurmur thinks is best for the team I really couldn't say.
Careful -- many here are insistent that Eli being the QB right now is all Shurmur and nobody else. Mara has nothing to do with it.
We heard rumors that the org didn't want OBJ around to be a bad influence on a rookie QB.
I wonder if the real concern was they didn't want OBJ in the locker room that had both Eli and a promising rookie.
Quote:
With that in mind, I don't quite give a rat's ass about who gives us the best chance to win games this season in what I consider to be a largely meaningless season in terms of W/L record.
You have no skin in the game. The people that are paid to win games and are on and off the hot seat on a weekly basis do care who gives them the best chance. And it's not just coaches. Coaches and players lose jobs. It's a results based business and maybe Shurmur isn't as confident in keeping his job if he loses the next ten games in a row testing the rookie. Yeah, maybe it makes Daniel Jones get a little more experience, but all that losing certainly tightens the noose around Shurmur's neck, and can have effects on players on the roster as well.
It's fun to think big picture as a fan, but being wrong or right doesn't cost us anything.
That's a VERY fair point, and you're right - their motivations are much more real in that sense.
That said, there's also something to be said for being realistic and managing expectations to that end. What I mean by that is, if this team sucks this year totally independent of whichever QB is playing, going 2-14 with an established (even if aging) franchise QB is going to look a lot worse for Shurmur than if he racks up that record with a rookie QB taking his lumps. At least if this year's record can be thrown away internally in the name of building toward the future, that might buy Shurmur some leeway that going balls out and failing won't.
I don't know how Mara and Tisch will see it, and can't pretend to, but I don't think it's just a matter of a win is a win is a win when you're in a transitional phase of a rebuild. And even as I say that, I don't know if Mara and Tisch are even aware that they are in the middle of a rebuild right now whether they like it or not.
Eli might be better, sad to say the margin isn’t much at this point. Dinking and dunking all game knowing your defense is giving up 30+ points isn’t a recipe for winning.
bw and I don't agree on much, but even he and I agree (and I think most of you actually do to but are unwilling to concede it) that Jones won't see the field until we are mathematically eliminated or completely noncompetitive.
This also presumes that Eli does, in fact, give them a better chance to win a meaningful amount more games this season. To the extent that Jones is simply a better fit for Shurmur's offense from a physical standpoint, I don't know how much more Eli's experience and mental edge makes up for the physical gap. It's definitely some amount, but I don't know how much in the aggregate. Is it one win? Two? More? Are there games that Eli would win that Jones would lose but also some games that Jones might win that Eli might lose?
I think it's pretty close, although with the OL finally resembling an actual NFL line, it's probably more tilted toward Eli than it would have been the past couple of years. I think with the line as bad as it was in '17 and '18, Jones's athleticism would have presented a very interesting option. But that's just conjecture anyway.
We heard rumors that the org didn't want OBJ around to be a bad influence on a rookie QB.
I wonder if the real concern was they didn't want OBJ in the locker room that had both Eli and a promising rookie.
Hard to refute that since they did trade OBJ, but keep in mind that the most vocal source of that speculation went out in a wild meltdown that called most of his asshat info into question.
We're about 3-5 years too late on the rebuild to justify him starting today.
Eli might be better, sad to say the margin isn’t much at this point. Dinking and dunking all game knowing your defense is giving up 30+ points isn’t a recipe for winning.
They won’t make it there with Manning. Jones will have been inserted before we got to 6-10.
Quote:
and this is entering tin foil hat territory but...
We heard rumors that the org didn't want OBJ around to be a bad influence on a rookie QB.
I wonder if the real concern was they didn't want OBJ in the locker room that had both Eli and a promising rookie.
Hard to refute that since they did trade OBJ, but keep in mind that the most vocal source of that speculation went out in a wild meltdown that called most of his asshat info into question.
true true
its not a completely fleshed out theory. I need a way to work Sasquatch in