wasted football seasons. In each season besides 2016, we were for all intent and purposes out of it by Halloween to mid November. This season is shaping up to the be the same way and after a while it just gets really frustrating. It is one thing to not make the playoffs, it is quite another to be non competitive basically for mid-November and December.
2013- 2-6 by Halloween
2014--3-5 by Nov 3 (that went all the way to 3-8)
2015-- 4-4 on November 1 (in fairness we really tanked in December that year)
2016-comeptitve (but very boring to watch--although I would take that over the other crap).
2017-1-7 by November 5
2018--2-7 by November 12
2019-2-3 most likely going to be 2-4 and its hard to see how we win without Shepard, Engram, and Barkley
I remember Wellington Mara used to say that a successful season is that the team was still in it for the last home game. By that barometer we have been an utter failure for 6 of 7 years.
Sorry just needed to rant because the ineptitude is becoming so frustrating.
Quote:
In comment 14619129 Dnew15 said:
Quote:
Who out there do you think the Giants should be targeting that is the significantly better than Shurmur?...
Putting all the blame on Shurmer right now seems a bit harsh.
I guarantee you that there are coordinators and college coaches out there who will be impressing the league in the 2020s. I don’t have the knowledge to spot those men but it damn well is Gettleman’s job and he needs to identify them.
No one is blaming Shurmur for everything. That’s a straw man. He is not incompetent and, in fact, I feel for him because he’s worked very hard to get to this spot in his career and in both HC jobs has been dealt an absolute crap hand. But there are problems after problems after problems on game day. In the end, does anyone believe he will lead the Giants to their next trophy?
There are people blaming a lot on Shurmur. It's not a straw man at all. It's amazing seeing the posts on this board last week to this week. Not much should have changed, but one loss later everyone goes from talking about playoffs to saying Gettleman and Shurmur aren't fit for their jobs. It truly is amazing.
You have a QB-guru type of head coach with a rookie QB who is developing. I think some patience is warranted to allow Shurmur to do his thing for a couple of years. I want to see what Shurmur does with Jones through the 2022 season. I think you can fairly judge at least Shurmur by then, but prior to that, let them do their jobs without this inane babble.
You want to give a guy who has never won 6 games another 3 years regardless of the results?
This isn't just about Daniel Jones, he can't rescue this franchise by himself. If Shurmur wants to be the QB guru under a competent head coach, I'll pay to have his letterhead and business cards reprinted.
Here's what I'm going to give you - this team was completely devoid of talent when PS and DG took over. And what little talent that was on the roster were me-first and/or high-dollar and/or has-been's and/or all of the above. It takes a while to re-tool an entire roster filled with these kinds of players and damn near impossible to win with them.
It's similar to college football - you don't fire a college coach until they get a chance to perform with their own guys. ADs know that you can't win with a bunch of guys that the previous regime recruited and a new class of freshman. UNLESS that coach has made some egregious coaching decisions on the field and off that make it a slam dunk.
I don't always buy into the BBI group think on everything. To my eye, have there been some in-game coaching decisions where I raise an eyebrow - sure. But I can't point to a particular coaching move and say definitively - that's why they lost. As far his is team being prepared - I'm not sure how you can just determine that they are "unprepared". I mean, how do you gameplan against a team where you are clearly one dimensional on offense after losing your 2nd string RB after the first series of the game and stop the run against a team who wants to run first and your starting MLBs are basically Mayo and Stupar.
I don't know for sure if PS can win 10+ games with the Giants once he gets "his guys". But, if you were a local guy, I would bet a beer of your choice that by the end of the 2021-2022 season they have 10 wins and are in the playoffs.
If I'm wrong - I'd gladly purchase that beer during the press conference hosted by Mara and Tisch when they dismiss DG and PS.
No one wants to see this team win more than I do. No one has suffered more than I have, going to these bad, depressing games in November or October or even September, paying 1000s of dollars, believe me I know. But that shit in the past is irrelevant. New team, new regime.
The Cowboys continuity has been through solid drafting. Elliott is closing in on 5 years. To not have any players on a team from 5-7 years ago is indicative of a complete failure in the draft.
Look at the steady teams in the league. Even if they haven't drafted stellar, they still have several contributors on their team from drafts years ago.
But I understand the frustration and need to move on.
Both teams hired the same consultant to drive a search. The only way it is different is to drive yet anther useless reference to "Jints Central".
It's enormously different. Accorsi is family. He's not an independent voice. He knows exactly what Mara wants to hear.
It's like your wife asking you how her dress looks before you go out. You'd better say yes even if it's not quite her best look...
Quote:
The draft picks Reese made 10 years ago have no bearing on this team. The draft picks Reese made 5 years ago statistically had little chance to have a bearing on this team.
The Cowboys continuity has been through solid drafting. Elliott is closing in on 5 years. To not have any players on a team from 5-7 years ago is indicative of a complete failure in the draft.
Look at the steady teams in the league. Even if they haven't drafted stellar, they still have several contributors on their team from drafts years ago.
The Cowboys have 7 players on their roster they drafted 5 or more years ago. I'm not sure if this is a lot or a little. I know they have some core players in that list.
My point is statistically most players don't survive 5 years in the league.
We aren't talent-poor at running back, and yet we're giving Elijah Penny and Eli Manning crucial running plays in Dallas. We consistently manage our timeouts and the clock poorly. Our head coach used our 4th round rookie quarterback as a joke to take a shot at the media.
None of that is due to talent deficiencies on the roster.
This head coach and his staff have been dreadful, period.
Yeah ok.
You're still upset they didn't draft Lamar Jackson, and that's it.
Yeah, it's entirely reasonable to think that's the only thing Terps could possibly be upset about.
My concerns with Jackson revolved around his mom being involved in his contract negotiations, and his posting that idiotic video driving at insane speeds. But if Baltimore has squelched the bullshit, Jackson is going to end up top ten in the MVP voting.
My concerns with Jackson revolved around his mom being involved in his contract negotiations, and his posting that idiotic video driving at insane speeds. But if Baltimore has squelched the bullshit, Jackson is going to end up top ten in the MVP voting.
Well, that's really going out on a limb. A team not willing to trade their QB of the future for a dynamic RB.
The rebuttal is they have the SAME management structure now that’s brought 4 Super Bowls so they must be doing something right.
No, in that example the rebuttal would simply be that they must have once done something right.
Quote:
If we called Baltimore and offered them Barkley for him straight up they'd just point out that Jackson's done more for their running game and offense than Barkley has for ours.
My concerns with Jackson revolved around his mom being involved in his contract negotiations, and his posting that idiotic video driving at insane speeds. But if Baltimore has squelched the bullshit, Jackson is going to end up top ten in the MVP voting.
Well, that's really going out on a limb. A team not willing to trade their QB of the future for a dynamic RB.
If you ask a lot of posters, they'll tell you you can get the RB first and find the QB later. They're equally difficult positions to fill.
If you ask a lot of posters, they'll tell you you can get the RB first and find the QB later. They're equally difficult positions to fill.
You take them seriously?
Right now, I could make a case it's more worthwhile to take a great kicking prospect over a RB.
Quote:
If you ask a lot of posters, they'll tell you you can get the RB first and find the QB later. They're equally difficult positions to fill.
You take them seriously?
Right now, I could make a case it's more worthwhile to take a great kicking prospect over a RB.
I don't. The Barkley pick can be added to the pile of examples where posters warp reality in order to rationalize the Giants' errors.
Quote:
Both teams hired the same consultant to drive a search. The only way it is different is to drive yet anther useless reference to "Jints Central".
It's enormously different. Accorsi is family. He's not an independent voice. He knows exactly what Mara wants to hear.
It's like your wife asking you how her dress looks before you go out. You'd better say yes even if it's not quite her best look...
Kinda like when the owner of the team says to DG and through DG to PS, "We love Eli and think he can still win, if you get this job, you're going to give Eli every chance to succeed as possible....right?"
He's been a starting QB for less than an entire season and the jury is very much out on him, especially his throwing ability.
Hell, going into this year, Mayfield was already being called a franchise QB. Is he? we don't know. Jackson is the QB of the future for the Ravens? How do you know?
He's been a starting QB for less than an entire season and the jury is very much out on him, especially his throwing ability.
Hell, going into this year, Mayfield was already being called a franchise QB. Is he? we don't know. Jackson is the QB of the future for the Ravens? How do you know?
Jackson is the QB of the present for the Ravens, and they will probably win the division with him...again. Baltimore's not throwing away years and blaming it on past regimes like we are.
Barkley was in the same class as Jackson, and you and others haven't hesitated in jumping the gun to compliment him.
He's been a starting QB for less than an entire season and the jury is very much out on him, especially his throwing ability.
Hell, going into this year, Mayfield was already being called a franchise QB. Is he? we don't know. Jackson is the QB of the future for the Ravens? How do you know?
You're probably right, but I will say that a lot of people who say things like that (not saying you, but there are plenty of others who do) in their next breath talk about how we are set at QB for the next 15 years.
He's been a starting QB for less than an entire season and the jury is very much out on him, especially his throwing ability.
Hell, going into this year, Mayfield was already being called a franchise QB. Is he? we don't know. Jackson is the QB of the future for the Ravens? How do you know?
The "unknown" logic can just as easily be applied to Barkley. Can he consistently stay healthy, can he be an efficient part of the pass game, can the Giants have a productive rush offense with Barkley.
If last year isn't a good enough sample, and early this year is a directional indicator, there are plenty of logical questions about Barkley too.
Plenty of reasonable folks think running back is bad value because they get banged up frequently, don't pick up a lot of yards in the pass game, and despite have the 2nd leading rusher the Giants were something like 24th in rush yards.
- Baltimore has passed for the same yards on 30 fewer pass attempts
- Baltimore is the highest scoring team in the NFL; NYG is 23rd
If the situations were flipped, and we had Jackson and those offensive stats, is FMIC here telling us we're jumping the gun?
Quote:
is another case of people jumping the gun.
He's been a starting QB for less than an entire season and the jury is very much out on him, especially his throwing ability.
Hell, going into this year, Mayfield was already being called a franchise QB. Is he? we don't know. Jackson is the QB of the future for the Ravens? How do you know?
You're probably right, but I will say that a lot of people who say things like that (not saying you, but there are plenty of others who do) in their next breath talk about how we are set at QB for the next 15 years.
I think the vast majority on here have said we could be set for the next 10-15 years
- Baltimore has passed for the same yards on 30 fewer pass attempts
- Baltimore is the highest scoring team in the NFL; NYG is 23rd
If the situations were flipped, and we had Jackson and those offensive stats, is FMIC here telling us we're jumping the gun?
actually, I usually sit in the middle on most of these discussions. Because things usually aren't as good as they seem nor are they as bleak as they seem.
I try not to overreact to small sample sizes, so you won't find me calling for a coach to be fired immediately or make the case a GM should be fired because of the way he was hired or because he didn't turn a team around in year 1.
You won't find me talking about teams like the Colts and Niners as teams to emulate because they have early season success (and even the colts success isn't extraordinary).
about the biggest leap I'll make is to say it has been more exciting to watch the team and I'm hopeful our young players will develop.
But around here - everyone else seems to be doing it right and the Giants aren't, including draft strategy and personnel moves.
Terps - you are an interesting poster. You wanted the team blown up. We did it. And you still bitch.
And through it all, the coach sucks at his job.
Yeah blowing up that roster of losers (you've changed your tune on those guys just like most others here) was good, but it was only a start.
This is all pointing to more leadership and roster turnover after 2020, because any talent we add won't change the fact that Shurmur can't coach his way out of a paper bag.
How many season does Gettleman get attributed to him that weren't his fault??
But hell, if you are floating out the idea that the Barkley pick was a bad one, you probably aren't really interested in patience. Or logic.
And if we actually do show him the door, do we wind up replacing him with a substantial upgrade? Or do we hire Chuck Pagano?
But regardless, this isn't just about Gettleman. It's about the way the organization is run.
He hasn't been perfect at his job, but the vitriol he takes he is way over the top in relation to the effort he's made to rebuild the roster.
He's been disliked by some since Day 1 because of the way he was hired. Hell, just today there was a snide mention of Accorsi as a consultant (and the fucked up logic that his consultancy with the Colts was somehow different).
He's mocked for a flippant comment about analytics to the point that a couple guys used that to say he shuns analytics and doesn't use them. People treated the Stewart signing like the worst move ever made and one that would cripple the franchise.
And there are people here who whole heartedly believe Gettleman should be fired. Of course he's singled out. And if anything, I've fixated on BBI for years against the use of terrible logic. So it makes sense that I defend the guy - not to say that he's perfect, but to point out the atrocious points most are making to rail against him.
And the idea that picking a good player is bad isn't logical.
It certainly can be, because the possibility exists that you could have picked a better player, or an equal player at a more important position. That certainly is the case thus far with Barkley, whose impact has been - to repeat - negligible.
And people are not singling out Gettleman. He's a symptom of a larger problem. You are focusing on Gettleman because he's actually done a couple good things among the bad, but like I said before you're avoiding the fact that Shurmur is bad at his job. You're also avoiding the fact that the Giants' front office operates in a way that results in huge inefficiencies like paying Beckham only to trade him, and paying Eli only to sit on the bench. And in a year we'll be lamenting that they kept Shurmur because he'd "groom Jones" while in reality he was just a coordinator with a head coach's salary.
This team is no stranger to switching horses mistream, and I expect they'll be doing it again after 2020. In the meantime, another year will have been wasted.
To underscore: the way this team operates is fucked.
But the same standard is oddly not applied to others. Just look at last season. Mayfield's impact was thought to be significant. And after leading the Browns to a whopping 7-8-1 record, they were poised to make a huge leap this season. Darnold's impact was negligible, but excused under the guise that rookie QB's need experience to succeed.
You know who made an impact? Beckham. But he picked up personal fouls and punched kicking nets, so he was a terrible player too.
Barkley was Rookie of the Year last season. Unless you are suggesting he can carry an entire team to success, and unless you can compare him to peers having a massive impact, suggesting he has a marginal impact can have that same standard applied to any player.
- Baltimore has passed for the same yards on 30 fewer pass attempts
- Baltimore is the highest scoring team in the NFL; NYG is 23rd
If the situations were flipped, and we had Jackson and those offensive stats, is FMIC here telling us we're jumping the gun?
I would be careful touting those stats until about the 10th game. Why? Because they need to be smoothed out. In their first game of the year the Ravens played Miami and racked up about 700 yards in total offense. It was a total annihilation against one of the worst teams we've seen in a long, long time...
I get your point, but there is some distortion right now...
He's been disliked by some since Day 1 because of the way he was hired. Hell, just today there was a snide mention of Accorsi as a consultant (and the fucked up logic that his consultancy with the Colts was somehow different).
Well, since this is addressed to me, let me say this is very funny. You act like the Giants hiring Accorsi was like they hired Deloitte.
But you damn well there was nothing neutral about the Giants/Mara bringing Accorsi in. He understands "Giants Way-speak" and was brought in to steer Mara to find the best candidate to satisfy the "Giants Way" requisite.
You're a smart guy. To interpret in any other way is pretty naive...
Quote:
- Baltimore has outrushed NYG by 400 yards
- Baltimore has passed for the same yards on 30 fewer pass attempts
- Baltimore is the highest scoring team in the NFL; NYG is 23rd
If the situations were flipped, and we had Jackson and those offensive stats, is FMIC here telling us we're jumping the gun?
I would be careful touting those stats until about the 10th game. Why? Because they need to be smoothed out. In their first game of the year the Ravens played Miami and racked up about 700 yards in total offense. It was a total annihilation against one of the worst teams we've seen in a long, long time...
I get your point, but there is some distortion right now...
Of course. We can definitely revisit at the end of the season and see how they've ended up.
But the same standard is oddly not applied to others. Just look at last season. Mayfield's impact was thought to be significant. And after leading the Browns to a whopping 7-8-1 record, they were poised to make a huge leap this season. Darnold's impact was negligible, but excused under the guise that rookie QB's need experience to succeed.
You know who made an impact? Beckham. But he picked up personal fouls and punched kicking nets, so he was a terrible player too.
Barkley was Rookie of the Year last season. Unless you are suggesting he can carry an entire team to success, and unless you can compare him to peers having a massive impact, suggesting he has a marginal impact can have that same standard applied to any player.
Let’s not forget many on BBIs favorite alternative to Barkley, Bradley Chubb. Chubb was very good last year, yet the Broncos still sucked. Weren’t any better than the Giants. This season, the Broncos didn’t have a single sack until week 4 and won their first game of the season after Chubb went to IR. Yet somehow, we don’t see people saying he was a bad pick even though his affect on wins and losses has been “negligible”. Only Barkley gets that acclaim
At least it’s my debate...
If they actually think that, than they haven't watched a Seattle, KC, or Houston game this year...
Let’s not forget many on BBIs favorite alternative to Barkley, Bradley Chubb. Chubb was very good last year, yet the Broncos still sucked. Weren’t any better than the Giants. This season, the Broncos didn’t have a single sack until week 4 and won their first game of the season after Chubb went to IR. Yet somehow, we don’t see people saying he was a bad pick even though his affect on wins and losses has been “negligible”. Only Barkley gets that acclaim
Yeah, I think you're likely to find that a lot of players taken in the top 10 wind up having a "negligible" impact, simply because the teams bad enough to take them top 10 often stay bad enough to draft top ten... because they're bad teams!
It's not the Colts 3-2 record this year that's drawing eyes.
Going into April of 2018 the Giants were a 3-13 team with a new head coach and the 2nd overall pick. The Colts were a 4-12 team with a new head coach.
The Colts traded out, acquired a number of picks, fixed their line, added 2 All Pros in a single draft. Their 2nd year GM opted to not uproot the team and spent conservatively.
The Colts won 10 games, won a playoff game.
The Giants 1st year GM reportedly didn't field offers for a trade back. Drafted a running back, and some nice complementary players with good potential.
Then the Giants went 5-11.
It's not the Colts 3-2 record this year that's drawing eyes.
Going into April of 2018 the Giants were a 3-13 team with a new head coach and the 2nd overall pick. The Colts were a 4-12 team with a new head coach.
The Colts traded out, acquired a number of picks, fixed their line, added 2 All Pros in a single draft. Their 2nd year GM opted to not uproot the team and spent conservatively.
The Colts won 10 games, won a playoff game.
The Giants 1st year GM reportedly didn't field offers for a trade back. Drafted a running back, and some nice complementary players with good potential.
Then the Giants went 5-11.
But that's 2 more wins than 2017, a 67% improvement. So that's a real, material impact.
At least that's what I've been told my many here who insist Barkley was a brilliant pick... ;)
Ahh forget it...no need to dig any further
But you damn well there was nothing neutral about the Giants/Mara bringing Accorsi in. He understands "Giants Way-speak" and was brought in to steer Mara to find the best candidate to satisfy the "Giants Way" requisite.
You're a smart guy. To interpret in any other way is pretty naive...
It isn't rocket science.
One team talked about doing the right things hired Accorsi as a consultant. One team doing things the "wrong way" did it too. And using him as a consultant is widely viewed as a sham.
But this isn't new. BBI likes to exaggerate other team's success. The Colts and Niners are this year's faves. The Browns were the offseason darlings.
And not let us forget the awesomeness last year was going to bring for the Jags. TC's revenge!!
I interpret Accorsi being used as a consultant as just that. He advised who to hire.
The Jonathan Stewart signing was widely criticized but not for the reasons you state, mis-characterizing for effect as usual, that posters said it would "cripple the franchise". Posters jumped on it because it made no sense whatsoever for numerous reasons and, as such, gave some insight into DG's and the Front Office's twisted mindset as to how they saw the state of the team and what to address first and foremost.
Stewart was no longer a productive player...flat out. So much that, but for a NY Giant phone call, his next best option was sitting on his couch in retirement. Even moreso that he plays a position that should have been one of the last one that NYGs needed to concern themselves with while examining the roster due to its positional value and plentiful supply via draft or undrafted free agents.
So what does Gettleman do in one of his very first decisions as the new GM of the Giants to show he has a grasp of the situation...he signs Stewart to a several million dollar guaranteed deal. A deal he didn't need to give in March, nor one he needed to offer at that level unless the market for 31-year old running backs was drying up.
It simply was an example of what not to do.
With some basic-level foresight, DG could have waited to see how the draft played out and looked to sign any number of running back choices in the early summer, or even signed Stewart but to a far more reasonable contract that matched his bottomed-out value. Veteran minimum plus some kickers if he actually plays.
But DG missed it...he made a bad decision. Not really because of the money (which should have been lower), but because he completely misread 1) this player's ability to still perform 2) the position he plays in terms of resource value on a roster 3) that a deep restructuring typically does not require 31-year old RBs as part of digging itself out of trouble.
So if DG will miss on the underlying concepts of 1-3 above with a player/contract like Stewart, fans should worry it will happen again when the stakes and money are far greater.
That is why posters treated this move as such a bad one. But keep on using it as an example of why everybody "hates" DG so much...it actually only give more insight as to your defensive-takes than anything we have against DG...
it was a miss. To make it an indictment of his decision-making as if it is pervasive to all of his decisions is a ridiculous leap. It is like people railing about Tanney. It is grasping to minutia that doesn't have nearly the impact you are making it out to be. Since the market for declining RB's is out there, why would the Chiefs snap up McCoy? Why would the Bills get Frank Gore?
Stewart is a perfect example of a mistake that gets way blown out of proportion. So much so that you just wrote several paragraphs about it - mostly making assumptions and misstating the RB situation prior to Barkley being drafted.
Better times ahead for Giants' fans. Hell, even conceding a loss before the game is even played. If this defense can get after Tom Brady, perhaps we can force a couple of turnovers and change the game. The challenge will be stopping the run.
Thanks, Jim. We may have hit the jackpot. DJ sure looks the part. His lows are not insurmountable and his highs thus far have been outstanding. Actually having a (future) franchise QB is such a difficult piece of a consistently good NFL team.
it was a miss. To make it an indictment of his decision-making as if it is pervasive to all of his decisions is a ridiculous leap. It is like people railing about Tanney. It is grasping to minutia that doesn't have nearly the impact you are making it out to be. Since the market for declining RB's is out there, why would the Chiefs snap up McCoy? Why would the Bills get Frank Gore?
Stewart is a perfect example of a mistake that gets way blown out of proportion. So much so that you just wrote several paragraphs about it - mostly making assumptions and misstating the RB situation prior to Barkley being drafted.
Its not revisionist nor is it an indictment of all of DG's decisions to don't exaggerate once again. Its an example of why posters criticized the deal and the concerns they had with NYG & now possibly DG. And it wouldn't be brought up unless you want to keep using it to support your defensive-agenda like you did above.
Everybody knew the Giants needed to add a running back(s), but that doesn't mean address it moronically...and that is what is was.
I am sure the locker-room issues and the short-yardage plays were addressed or whatever you used at the time to support the move...