I am frustrated--6 of the last 7 years have been basically

is just a poster child for the many misses under the Gettleman regime.

I don't think many are bashing DG for his effort in rebuilding. He's putting in massive effort. The problem is that the effort has not yet paid dividends and a payoff is not yet in sight.

Maybe things will gel, and the 1st/2nd yr players will step up to the plate and make a solid (hopefully better) core. Maybe the FAs will start panning out.

Until all that happens, though, and things look like we're heading in the right direction, a lot of people are not going to give the regime the benefit of the doubt.

DG is going to be here a while. Shurmur likely has another year before the seat starts getting hot. The coordinators/position coaches probably overall are safe for another year. might as well just settle in for the ride.

Much was said about how picking the wrong QB could set the team back 5 years. The same can be said about picking the wrong regime. Unfortunately, the view so far for many is that we're looking at the inside of a wrong regime. Maybe those of us who see things that way are wrong/impatient, but until the clouds lift and the sun shines, it'll be a hard sell to change our minds.

Googs with an eight paragraph post.

He must be exhausted...;)

I will revert to short, pithy comments again when the mood strikes...

In comment 14620422 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

I think the debate is better couched not that Barkley was a bad pick, but he was the easy one. The better pick would be to find a player at a more valued position than running back, or trade it away for multiple picks (if available) since the team is in full restructuring mode and needs to improve almost everywhere. At least it’s my debate...

Exactly. That is my point as well...

In comment 14620560 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

there. When Stewart was signed, he became the only veteran RB on the team. Barkley was not yet drafted and Gettleman signed a player he was familiar with and who was expendable because of McCaffery. 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.

The reason people point to, is it is the first example of a bad pattern... The same pattern exists with Ogletree, Omameh, and Tate off the top of me head.

Any criticism of the Giants you somehow flip into a criticism of DG personally, and defend him with everything you've got.

Sitting in the middle means that you can objectively assess both the good and the bad going on with the team.

For example:

Gettleman has done a better job actually picking players who may stick with the team longer than the previous regime. The jury is still out on this, but it seems that way right now. So give DG props for that.

DG has made some absolutely awful decisions on FA signings, as pointed out above...

DG was right to trade Beckham, (a move I agreed with at the time)

I'm not convinced that DG got as much as he could have for Beckham. But what he got he has made the most of, Peppers is starting to look like a SS, and Lawrence may be a beast. Again the jury is out.

I am convinced that it was monumentally bad to sign him to the deal he got only to trade him 6 months later.

DG made a good trade for Zeitler for Vernon.

DG was right to blow the team up, I think you will find overwhelming support of that.

When blowing the team up, there were a few cuts that maybe went a little too deep and now we find ourselves lacking at those positions. Relatively inexpensive players like Kennard come to mind.

Drafting Lauletta when the team had Webb, only to have both cut is a head scratcher.

Shurmur at times looks like he has a dynamic playbook, and can call some good plays.

Shurmur sometimes gets too cute with his play calling.

Shurmur seems to be doing a nice job bringing DJ along.

Under Shurmur and Hunter, the OL keeps making bad mistakes, they still have trouble picking up stunts, and it has been widely noted that there have been communication problems to the point of player frustration.

Shurmur has not done a good job managing the clock.

I actually like many of his calls to go for it on 4th down.

The defense under Bettcher has been truly awful. Players don't seem to understand their roles and are often caught out of position. The scheme that was supposed to be so dynamic seems anything but.

The players and the game plans seem ill prepared for the actual games, and that is an ongoing problem.

Some players are starting to look a little better, Lawrence, Baker, Peppers have all improved as the season has gone along. The real question is why did they all look so ill prepared to start the season.

The hiring of Bettcher and switching schemes witohout the proper personnel is another head scratcher.

I can go on. But that is somewhere in the middle. Pointing out both the good and the bad.

Some of the moves DG made that may have cut too deep were not outright cuts. Some like Kennard who should have been an easy resign wasn't.

In comment 14620433 christian said:

Quote:

Personally I'll start liking Shurmur and Gettleman more when the Giants show they are legitimately competing for a playoff spot. 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.

That's a little misleading...the Colts had Andrew Luck

In comment 14620716 Dnew15 said:

Quote:

In comment 14620433 christian said: Quote: Personally I'll start liking Shurmur and Gettleman more when the Giants show they are legitimately competing for a playoff spot. 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. That's a little misleading...the Colts had Andrew Luck

What's misleading? Andrew Luck and Eli Manning had nearly identical cap hits. The running story was Manning being handicapped by poor surroundings, specifically a poor offensive line. Both teams had fragile QB situations. Not to mention Manning ended up lasting longer than Luck.

The Giants general manager spent upward of 75M potential dollars to bolster the line and it arguably got worse for half the season.

The Colts from a slightly less strong position went and fixed their line.

Andrew Luck played behind a giant turnstile for almost his entire career. Last season was literally the first time in probably his entire career that he actually got plus OL play.

I think what IND wound up with along their OL has excellent and exactly what I'd love for NYG to have.

But, it's certainly a bit misleading to compare NYG/IND last year when the difference in QB play was as large as it was. 2018 Andrew Luck was one of the best QB's in the league. Eli wasn't even close.

Swap the QB's and those records aren't holding true.

In comment 14620655 .McL. said:

Quote:

Any criticism of the Giants you somehow flip into a criticism of DG personally, and defend him with everything you've got. Sitting in the middle means that you can objectively assess both the good and the bad going on with the team. For example: Gettleman has done a better job actually picking players who may stick with the team longer than the previous regime. The jury is still out on this, but it seems that way right now. So give DG props for that. DG has made some absolutely awful decisions on FA signings, as pointed out above... DG was right to trade Beckham, (a move I agreed with at the time) I'm not convinced that DG got as much as he could have for Beckham. But what he got he has made the most of, Peppers is starting to look like a SS, and Lawrence may be a beast. Again the jury is out. I am convinced that it was monumentally bad to sign him to the deal he got only to trade him 6 months later. DG made a good trade for Zeitler for Vernon. DG was right to blow the team up, I think you will find overwhelming support of that. When blowing the team up, there were a few cuts that maybe went a little too deep and now we find ourselves lacking at those positions. Relatively inexpensive players like Kennard come to mind. Drafting Lauletta when the team had Webb, only to have both cut is a head scratcher.

Vert fair assessment in my opinion.

I would add one more, when blowing up the team, it makes no sense to hold on to your expensive declining QB

In comment 14620770 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

Andrew Luck played behind a giant turnstile for almost his entire career. Last season was literally the first time in probably his entire career that he actually got plus OL play. I think what IND wound up with along their OL has excellent and exactly what I'd love for NYG to have. But, it's certainly a bit misleading to compare NYG/IND last year when the difference in QB play was as large as it was. 2018 Andrew Luck was one of the best QB's in the league. Eli wasn't even close. Swap the QB's and those records aren't holding true.

If the Giants had made the improvement the Colts made to their line in 2018, and no Barkley how many games difference do you think it makes?

It's not about swapping the QBs, it's about swapping the players that were the fruit of a very productive trade and the associated moves and savings.

I believe Gettleman when he says the game is won in the trenches. One viable option was to make a move similar to what the Colts did and solidify the line.

Simply put I would much rather have 2 foundational offensive lineman than a great running back.

It's not about the QB's specifically, but the QB's played very significant roles in the outcomes of the teams - so, you can't just remove them from the equation. Luck wasn't just a passenger last year, he was the driving force behind the entire offense. He was one of the best QB's in football.

We also have a tendency to operate in a vacuum where we assume moves other teams made could have been made identically here or that things would have played out the same exact way in an alternate reality.

I think most people would gladly take two foundational offensive linemen than a RB, but we have a way of simplifying things here to an almost unreasonable degree and take all sorts of leaps in reasoning where we just assume Gettleman could have made the same exact deal and would have wound up with the same exact players and that those players would have performed the same exact way here and that nothing else would have been different.

That's not reality.

I agree with the general premise; I like what the Colts have done. I am and have been a broken record regarding the offensive line here - I want them to keep dumping assets into it and make it the strength of the team.

But, we're quick to forget while we're lauding the Colts for the OL they've put together that for almost all of Andrew Luck's career, they had mish-mash units in front of him that were criminally bad and basically ended his career prematurely because he was running for his life on nearly every dropback.

So, for all the talk about NYG being in year 17 of their rebuild or whatever, it's not really fair to paint Indy as this model franchise all of a sudden in terms of how to quickly fix your offensive line. They had a really, really bad one for years.. It took them a long time to get here.

We can't unabashedly heap praise onto the Colts and then turn around and spit in the face of the people preaching patience here. That doesn't really work.

Both the Giants and Colts have had shitty lines forever. With hopefully an uncommon top 5 draft pick, the Colts chose to multiply that pick and focus directly on their line.

I'm not saying the Giants could have done exactly what the Colts did. I'm just saying I prefer what they did. And I don't think it's wild a stretch to think the Giants could have done something similar.

Sure, but it's also not wild to see the Giants having a top 10 pick again next year... maybe it'll be top 5. Why can't they do the same thing?

It's like the whole QB thing from the same 2018 draft.

The argument all last year wasn't this - it was that we should have taken a QB, that we were crazy for punting on this generational QB class, missed our chance, etc.

Then we wound up with the QB the very next year and most fans seem to be fairly happy with who it is.

So, now it's morphing into an argument that we should have instead traded down and stocked the offensive line. People keep changing what they think the Giants should have done in a past draft based on the way things are playing out in successive years. It's an exercise in futility.

Barkley continues to be the focus when he shouldn't and doesn't need to be. Having Saquon and a plus OL isn't a mutually exclusive proposition. We didn't forego the opportunity to build a strong offensive line just because we drafted Barkley - just like we didn't forego the opportunity to find a franchise QB when many were saying we did throughout last season.

Dallas took Elliott 4th overall; all of these fallacies about not being able to build a competitive team when you draft a RB that high should go out the window by watching them. The difference between Dallas and the Giants is that Dallas has handled the other areas of their roster better and also don't have one GM trying to clean up a mess the last one left behind.

Be smarter in free agency, continue to draft well and the team will be competitive. We don't need to make Barkley the poster child for why NYG aren't a good team right now.

We're not a good team because we had several zero-yield drafts and made some crappy decisions in free agency. Not because we drafted Barkley 2nd overall last year.

Castonzo LT 1st rd pick in '11
Nelson LG 1st rd pick in '18
Kelly C 1st rd pick in '16
Glowinski RG FA '17 - cut by Sea - 4th rd pick '15
Smith RT - 2nd pick in '18

I'm not sure what comparisons you can draw to what the NYG have now with the way the colts went about building their OL.

3/5 of the OL starting now was there before the new regime took over and they took OL in '18, granted, both guys are really good if not great players.

DG and PS inherited literally a pile of crap. None of those guys are left.

But Reese wasn't the guy that decided to overpay Solder and Ogeltree. Nor was he the guy that let his head coach publicly treat a rookie 4th round QB like shit. Nor did he commit the errors of paying Beckham to trade him, and paying Eli to bench him...these last two decisions were stupid on a galactic level; the pitfalls were easily visible but ignored nonetheless. Just incredibly naive and lacking logical, objective reasoning.

There's a deeper problem than the years of poor drafting, and that is this: the Giants' don't know who and what they are. The self-scout poorly, if they even do it at all. They don't understand why they lose when they lose, or why they win when they win. They don't have an accurate assessment of the larger picture...if they did, the Beckham and Eli errors would never have happened.

People keep talking about the arrow pointing up, and I agree that some of their young players look promising. But that won't matter if they can't accurately and honestly assess who and what they are. An organizational timeline in the NFL isn't a sine wave...bad years don't necessarily presage good years.

This team has made some really stupid mistakes since Reese left; the reason they keep being rehashed and discussed is because the people that made those mistakes are still running the team, and the football they're giving us is so poor that there is little else to talk about.

If you're still blaming Reese you're missing the bigger picture, just like the Giants are.

In comment 14620993 Dnew15 said:

Quote:

Castonzo LT 1st rd pick in '11 Nelson LG 1st rd pick in '18 Kelly C 1st rd pick in '16 Glowinski RG FA '17 - cut by Sea - 4th rd pick '15 Smith RT - 2nd pick in '18 I'm not sure what comparisons you can draw to what the NYG have now with the way the colts went about building their OL. 3/5 of the OL starting now was there before the new regime took over and they took OL in '18, granted, both guys are really good if not great players. DG and PS inherited literally a pile of crap. None of those guys are left.

When April came ended the Giants factually could have ended up with a line for 2018 that was:

LT - Solder
RG - Nelson
C - Halopio
RG - Omameh
RT - Smith

That's not a far fetched fantasy, that's a complete factual possibility. This has nothing to do with replacing crap, this was completely within Gettleman's control with the resources he either did employ or had the ability to employ.

Maybe Omameh sucks no matter what, maybe Halopio still gets hurt. But that's a substantially better offensive line than what the Giants dragged out last year.

In comment 14621037 christian said:

Quote:

In comment 14620993 Dnew15 said: Quote: Castonzo LT 1st rd pick in '11 Nelson LG 1st rd pick in '18 Kelly C 1st rd pick in '16 Glowinski RG FA '17 - cut by Sea - 4th rd pick '15 Smith RT - 2nd pick in '18 I'm not sure what comparisons you can draw to what the NYG have now with the way the colts went about building their OL. 3/5 of the OL starting now was there before the new regime took over and they took OL in '18, granted, both guys are really good if not great players. DG and PS inherited literally a pile of crap. None of those guys are left. When April came ended the Giants factually could have ended up with a line for 2018 that was: LT - Solder RG - Nelson C - Halopio RG - Omameh RT - Smith That's not a far fetched fantasy, that's a complete factual possibility. This has nothing to do with replacing crap, this was completely within Gettleman's control with the resources he either did employ or had the ability to employ. Maybe Omameh sucks no matter what, maybe Halopio still gets hurt. But that's a substantially better offensive line than what the Giants dragged out last year.

Sure - I agree the OL would be better wit Nelson and Smith (I remember Sy being all over him) - but that doesn't necessarily mean they would have won more games or been in better shape long term this year than last.

It just means that the OL would probably be better.

To you point though, I think the Giants will take several OL in the upcoming draft. Re-tooling the OL (and improving the depth) is the #2 need on this team behind some defensive play makers.

as to what the narrative becomes if the Giants are competitive next season.

I fully understand why people have frustration with the losing seasons, but there are two things at play also:

1) Not enough realization at the effort needed to turn the team around. You can't ignore what Reese did (and I pin it more on Ross). They left a roster devoid of any home-grown talent. It isn't something you just magically erase. It was a historic failure to not have players on the roster from a whole swath of drafts. That isn't hyperbole - the stretch of drafts was unmatched in league history.

2) Expecting perfection in the moves and simplifying things as if there is a blueprint of a model to follow.

So it causes the value of draft picks to be questioned. It causes all FA signings to be considered unecessary and underperforming. Hell, it even leads to comments that cutting bait with an often injured player was an "easy resign". And a lot of the moves in the past two years are judged swiftly and harshly without patience or even trying to figure out what happens in the alternative.

arc was dead on. When Barkley was selected, the overwhelming response was that the Giants simply couldn't afford to not take a QB there. In fact, it has been a situation that some has referred to as being handed to us on a silver platter. a move we had to make. But now that argument is shifting not to the QB discussion - but to the OL or pass rusher discussion. Could that be because the other QB's haven't exactly been fantastic?

Even the signing of Beckham to trade him has been called a fireable offense. But what would the take have been if an unsigned Beckham played the year out and left for aonly a compensatory pick or was attempted to be traded without leverage for a far less package? I'm assuming it wouldn't be a glowing review. Keep in mind, Gettleman took shit for not trading Collins.

Gettleman hasn't been perfect, and even if he had, I'm not sure the results would be vastly different. But what continually is happening that his moves are being called successes or failures immediately and people are going to great lengths to talk about how we are destined to have several years of poor football while other teams are rising quickly (even if those other teams have taken 5-7 years to get to this point too).

Quote:

Even the signing of Beckham to trade him has been called a fireable offense. But what would the take have been if an unsigned Beckham played the year out and left for aonly a compensatory pick or was attempted to be traded without leverage for a far less package? I'm assuming it wouldn't be a glowing review. Keep in mind, Gettleman took shit for not trading Collins.

On Beckham - my take would have been why wasn't he traded earlier? If we believe what we hear, Shurmur had to convince Gettleman to keep him. "I can work with him" is what we heard. So Gettleman was considering moving Beckham in spring 2018 (rumors were circulating, if you remember), but Shurmur convinced him to make him the richest WR in the NFL? The question shouldn't be what if we didn't sign Beckham...it should be why wasn't he traded between spring 2018 and the trade deadline in fall 2018?

On Collins - Gettleman didn't take any shit from me on that. I stated repeatedly that I wanted all of Beckham, Collins, Vernon, Harrison and others gone. Losers, each and every one. Not a popular view at the time, but generally accepted now that they're no longer Giants.

never meant it to be some autopsy on the team. I was frustrated that we had injuries to the very players that would be helpful in us evaluating Jones. Tonight, he will be without RB1 and RB2, without WR1, and Tight End 1. Given that we have lost so much since Hurricane Sandy it is just frustrating for me that when we start to see positive it just gets taken away from us with injuries. I had no expectation that we would win a lot of games this year or that we would seriously compete for a playoff spot (although I have to admit I did hold out some hope if we split the Vikings/Pat games we could because our schedule is not really that hard).

Fwiw, my take on Gettleman is really the standard account by many fans. His drafts show a lot of promise, his FA/trade signings have been less than stellar (although I do go back and forth on the OBJ trade and do think it might work out for us in the end), but I think overall he has us trending in the right direction. Whether we are, in fact, going in the right direction will be demonstrated over the next year or so and most likely barring major injury to Jones by the end of 2020. Until then, I prefer to give him space to let him rebuild the team as he sees fit.

on why Beckham wasn't traded earlier. But we have been put into one of those scenarios where the state of the team was so bad, that anything less than perfection fails to move the needle.

We don't know why he wasn't traded. Maybe they wanted too much value in him. Maybe they wanted to keep his talent. But in the end, he was moved for fair compensation and only a short-term hit to the cap.

There's a wide gulf between perfection and incompetence, but Gettleman has been directly called incompetent and I don't think he's ever been called perfect. Despite having past results of an above average GM.

Some of that is frustration - but some of that is also rampant stupidity.

Because the fans loved him and that matters to Mara. It's the same damn reason they brought back Eli. In both instances they made big decisions based on what they hoped would happen instead of what was likely to be the actual truth.

They hoped Beckham would grow up and paid him accordingly. He turned out to just be an asshole. $16M in 2019 cap space gone.

They hoped Eli had one more run in him, and they hoped the team around him was good enough to support him. But inexplicably they didn't use the #6 pick overall to help support Eli. Eli turned out to be done. $17M in 2019 cap space gone.

And now the team around Jones isn't good enough to support him in part because $33M in cap space isn't on the field. And yeah, we got Peppers, Lawrence, and Ximenes for Beckham...but we could have had that + $16M in cap space had we just traded him before we signed him.

When I look at this team I don't see a clear and consistent vision or strategy. I see a GM who should probably just be the Director of College Scouting, and I see a head coach who never should have risen above offensive coordinator. The strong leadership that results in a clear overall comprehensive plan is not there.

wasn't traded because the fans loved him????

He wasn't traded because it would've been fairly groundbreaking to trade a player of his talent so early in a career.

It was a Mara directive? Jesus.

around calling DG incompetent. How many posters continue to indicate they see both good and bad with is moves before you stop thinking everybody is throwing him under the bus?

Even good GMs get questioned and second guessed, so what the hell do you think is going to happen in the hyper-sensitive world of NYC and a team that has been largely a poor performer for a decade.

Particularly when there is more than enough evidence to show questionable moves and poor timing from a new incoming GM that should have seen a declining QB and a team in need of a deep restructuring before he walked into his office...

In comment 14621148 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

wasn't traded because the fans loved him???? He wasn't traded because it would've been fairly groundbreaking to trade a player of his talent so early in a career. It was a Mara directive? Jesus.

I'm not saying it was a Mara directive. I'm saying that Mara's one of 6 or 7 voices running the team, and Mara unquestionably weighs fan and media reaction on big decisions.

Beckham was a popular player (funny how everyone hates him now when the only thing about him that ever changed was the jersey), and that matters to Mara. That's one of Mara's flaws.

In comment 14621073 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Quote: Even the signing of Beckham to trade him has been called a fireable offense. But what would the take have been if an unsigned Beckham played the year out and left for aonly a compensatory pick or was attempted to be traded without leverage for a far less package? I'm assuming it wouldn't be a glowing review. Keep in mind, Gettleman took shit for not trading Collins. On Beckham - my take would have been why wasn't he traded earlier? If we believe what we hear, Shurmur had to convince Gettleman to keep him. "I can work with him" is what we heard. So Gettleman was considering moving Beckham in spring 2018 (rumors were circulating, if you remember), but Shurmur convinced him to make him the richest WR in the NFL? The question shouldn't be what if we didn't sign Beckham...it should be why wasn't he traded between spring 2018 and the trade deadline in fall 2018? On Collins - Gettleman didn't take any shit from me on that. I stated repeatedly that I wanted all of Beckham, Collins, Vernon, Harrison and others gone. Losers, each and every one. Not a popular view at the time, but generally accepted now that they're no longer Giants.

I never gave DG shit for Collins either.

You referenced my post about "easy resign", which I think Kennard should have been. Yes he'd had some injuries, but he had shown real ability at position where we were devoid of talent, and at the time needed an extra player moving to the 3-4. He would not have been an expensive resign.


You go on to talk about a "shift" in the discussion from a QB to OL. To be clear, I have never shifted, I never wanted any of the QBs that year. I wanted to trade down and target OLs. I am also one of, if not the primary person who has been pushing that narrative. For me it was never a shift...

Exaggeration??

Quote:

Just continued exaggeration that everybody is running Jimmy Googs : 12:48 pm : link : reply around calling DG incompetent

I didn't say everyone is running around calling him incompetent, I said he has been called incompetent. He's also been said to have made "fireable offenses".

But nice try creating hyperbole where none is intimated.

If you didn’t intimate it then why even mention it? Your MO is often to extrapolate a few posters (who you don’t respect anyway) opinions and include it in your rants to embellish. As if BBI needs to be aware there are both irrational and rational posters...some of which both include contrarians I guess...

In comment 14621127 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Because the fans loved him and that matters to Mara. It's the same damn reason they brought back Eli. In both instances they made big decisions based on what they hoped would happen instead of what was likely to be the actual truth. They hoped Beckham would grow up and paid him accordingly. He turned out to just be an asshole. $16M in 2019 cap space gone. They hoped Eli had one more run in him, and they hoped the team around him was good enough to support him. But inexplicably they didn't use the #6 pick overall to help support Eli. Eli turned out to be done. $17M in 2019 cap space gone. And now the team around Jones isn't good enough to support him in part because $33M in cap space isn't on the field. And yeah, we got Peppers, Lawrence, and Ximenes for Beckham...but we could have had that + $16M in cap space had we just traded him before we signed him. When I look at this team I don't see a clear and consistent vision or strategy. I see a GM who should probably just be the Director of College Scouting, and I see a head coach who never should have risen above offensive coordinator. The strong leadership that results in a clear overall comprehensive plan is not there.

I agree with most of this post.

I also think that the Mara/Tisch ownership group won't just take DG/PS word for it all at the jump. There's got to be clear and obvious evidence that it's not working, and in defense of DG and PS - they had to make a deal with the devil to get the job (agree at the start they would do everything they could to win with what they had and promise that they wouldn't just tear it all down and make it an obvious rebuild b/c they could sell tickets with Eli/OBJ).

To be fair to ownership - Eli has been counted out as dead before only to make some magical Super Bowl runs...twice.

And it's hard to just dump talent and OBJ was as talented as they get.

So I get the hope - even though the evidence was pretty glaring that it was time to move on.

In comment 14621155 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 14621148 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: wasn't traded because the fans loved him???? He wasn't traded because it would've been fairly groundbreaking to trade a player of his talent so early in a career. It was a Mara directive? Jesus. I'm not saying it was a Mara directive. I'm saying that Mara's one of 6 or 7 voices running the team, and Mara unquestionably weighs fan and media reaction on big decisions. Beckham was a popular player (funny how everyone hates him now when the only thing about him that ever changed was the jersey), and that matters to Mara. That's one of Mara's flaws.

You forgot to add the bottom line to his factors on decision making - fan and media reaction in addition to sales and $$$ coming in.

in their ear who like the visibility that OBJ and Eli bring.

Could have played a part, more likely for OBJ than Eli

- Reading this board makes it sound like Gettleman caused most of the issues and is making no good moves to fix the mess he was given.

- Gettleman is considered "backward thinking" and too tied to the organization.

- But around here - everyone else seems to be doing it right and the Giants aren't, including draft strategy and personnel moves.

- How many season does Gettleman get attributed to him that weren't his fault??

- 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.

- He's mocked for a flippant comment about analytics

- And there are people here who whole heartedly believe Gettleman should be fired.

- Gettleman has been directly called incompetent and I don't think he's ever been called perfect.

Quote:

arc was dead on. When Barkley was selected, the overwhelming response was that the Giants simply couldn't afford to not take a QB there. In fact, it has been a situation that some has referred to as being handed to us on a silver platter. a move we had to make. But now that argument is shifting not to the QB discussion - but to the OL or pass rusher discussion. Could that be because the other QB's haven't exactly been fantastic?

Overwhelming? No. The better debate, in my eyes, was/has been whether investing the 2nd pick in a RB was prudent. And that has branched out into what other positions were wiser investments at #2 - QB, OL, DE, TE, etc.

So I find this narrative a reverse spin move to say Barkley was the right move because we may have landed the QB in Jones a year later. So this affirms the new theory, adopted by the Gettlemanites, that going RB first then QB with high first round picks is reasonable as long as you nail the QB on the back end.

i like that one...

The reason the Colts came up was that they did exactly what some of us saying that trading out of #2 and using some of the resulting picks to target the OL. And it worked out well for them.

As a single data point it validates the the idea of trading down and targeting OL was possible to foresee and a valid path at the time of the draft.

Overall the Colts are still rebuilding as well. Their defense is as bad as ours (except for the KC game). Somehow bringing them up to show that they handled that particular draft move well, somehow morphed into they are blueprint the Giants should emulate, and that is not a good narrative. Lets just stick to the Trade down and target OL move.

the #11 ranked defense in the NFL.

I'll admit I didn't like the SB pick at the time - I wanted one of the QBs. In hindsight, I'm glad they didn't.

There's nothing about Mayfield, Allen, Darnold or Rosen that gives me buyer's remorse.

The other thing I'll tell you is that you have to have a partner to trade back in the draft...who did the Colts make that deal with??? You think that same trade was on the table with the Giants?

In comment 14621148 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

wasn't traded because the fans loved him???? He wasn't traded because it would've been fairly groundbreaking to trade a player of his talent so early in a career. It was a Mara directive? Jesus.

I think it's naive to believe fan (customer) sentiment isn't a big part of Mara's decision making rubric.

There's plenty of circumstantial evidence by way of his own comments about Manning and Beckham to infer Mara's feelings for players resonates in the building.

Mara in that sense is not Gettleman.

I will say, first of all, this season isn't a waste yet. Granted, I don't have delusions of a good season. But, from what I have seen thus far, this is a team that may be competitive enough to at least keep things interesting. Jones is also a QB that so far has looked like the kind of guy who can keep us in some games, especially when Barkley is back. The rest of this season became about grooming Jones and he stepped in and hit the ground running. That's a win in my book.

Second, I loved the Barkley pick last year and still do. First of all, I wasn't enamored with any of the QBs last year and nothing that has transpired to change my mind. I'd much rather have Barkley/Jones than Darnold/whoever they may have taken this year. I do not see a 10-15 year franchise QB in Darnold. I do think Jones has shown he may be.

Third, I don't know how much better of a market there would have been for OBJ earlier. I'm glad he is gone, and that is coming from a huge fan of his. Hell, 5 games in and Cleveland is rumored to be shopping him now.

I don't love Gettleman or Shurmer, but I do like Shurmer more than his predecessor and I like Gettleman better than the last 4 or 5 years we got from Reese. Thse guys inherited a roster devoid of talent. It wasn't just lack of depth. We had guys starting at some positions who would have had trouble making some other rosters at all. In two years they cleaned house, which is a good thing. They can be judged in another 1-2 years, as the roster takes more shape from their designs.

It's certainly not all Reese's fault that we're in this position. But it's also not fair to just pretend zero-yield drafts won't set a team back badly - and we more or less had a few of them. That's extremely damaging.

The bit about the bad FA signings/offseason moves was also directed @ Gettleman moreso than Reese - he's made his share of mistakes.

It's a combination; but I don't think there's much sense in combining regimes and then looking at this as a 7-8 year linear failure. Gettleman was tasked with first cleaning up a large mess left behind, then he had to essentially create a new foundation and build something entirely different from the bottom up.

He's not executing it flawlessly and there are clear errors along the way - mostly in the way of mistake signings and some questionable handling of our cap dollars - but to correct and repair what the state of the roster was following the 2017 season, this was always going to need at least a couple of years.

On one hand, the approach in free agency appears to be suboptimal. On the other, the drafting seems to be vastly improving and is actually now producing some promising young players who can and should be part of a turnaround.

That said, I still think there's a reasonably clear path towards getting this team back in contention. I don't think Gettleman has FUBAR'd this rebuild to a point that will require someone else coming in and doing it all over again. I think he just has to get this next phase correct and it's crucial that he does - otherwise we won't take the next step forward.

Shurmur also may be a better coordinator than coach. As a tactician, he leaves a bit to be desired. So, for him to be the right guy to move forward with, I also think we need to see some real signs the rest of the way. I suspect he's reasonably safe for next year, but if we really struggle down the stretch and look bad/lose a lot of games, he shouldn't be.

Quote:

I think he just has to get this next phase correct and it's crucial that he does - otherwise we won't take the next step forward.

What phase is that, and what does "correct" mean? "Correct" can mean different things depending on the perspective. Gettleman is 68 years old and Shurmur might feel his seat getting warm..."correct" to them is whatever can be done to win in 2020. In that scenario, maybe we're paying Shaq Barrett and Jadeveon Clowney each like they're Khalil Mack.

They're not likely to be all that concerned with building anything sustainable following back to back 5 win seasons.

So let's say they spend money on big FAs with the goal of making a push in 2020...is that going to change the fact that Shurmur can't coach his way out of a paper bag? What happens when, after another lousy season in 2020, we have to hire a new head coach (and possibly new GM)? They're going to want to bring in their guys, which means they're going to do with Barrett and Clowney (or whomever the expensive 2020 FA bandaids are) what Gettleman already did with Vernon and Beckham. So that will mean more dead money in '21.

We have got to stop reacting to problems, and start actually building something sustainable. That ain't gonna happen with these two guys.

In comment 14621344 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

It's certainly not all Reese's fault that we're in this position. But it's also not fair to just pretend zero-yield drafts won't set a team back badly - and we more or less had a few of them. That's extremely damaging. The bit about the bad FA signings/offseason moves was also directed @ Gettleman moreso than Reese - he's made his share of mistakes. It's a combination; but I don't think there's much sense in combining regimes and then looking at this as a 7-8 year linear failure. Gettleman was tasked with first cleaning up a large mess left behind, then he had to essentially create a new foundation and build something entirely different from the bottom up. He's not executing it flawlessly and there are clear errors along the way - mostly in the way of mistake signings and some questionable handling of our cap dollars - but to correct and repair what the state of the roster was following the 2017 season, this was always going to need at least a couple of years. On one hand, the approach in free agency appears to be suboptimal. On the other, the drafting seems to be vastly improving and is actually now producing some promising young players who can and should be part of a turnaround. That said, I still think there's a reasonably clear path towards getting this team back in contention. I don't think Gettleman has FUBAR'd this rebuild to a point that will require someone else coming in and doing it all over again. I think he just has to get this next phase correct and it's crucial that he does - otherwise we won't take the next step forward. Shurmur also may be a better coordinator than coach. As a tactician, he leaves a bit to be desired. So, for him to be the right guy to move forward with, I also think we need to see some real signs the rest of the way. I suspect he's reasonably safe for next year, but if we really struggle down the stretch and look bad/lose a lot of games, he shouldn't be.

Good post arc.

I agree that DG hasn't completely FUBARed the rebuild, but some of his moves have slowed it down. He should get more time but he needs to get better as well. Half of what a GM does are the non-Draft moves.

I agree he will get another year, after that, he is either gone or on very thin ice if he doesn't show significant improvement.

Quote:

I agree he will get another year, after that, he is either gone or on very thin ice if he doesn't show significant improvement.

If we've gotten to this point with a coach and/or GM, we should move on. We can't sit around hoping that these guys all of a sudden get better at their jobs for no reason.

DG would survive a PS firing if it happened in the next year?

Or is it more likely they both go?

In comment 14621365 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Quote: I think he just has to get this next phase correct and it's crucial that he does - otherwise we won't take the next step forward. What phase is that, and what does "correct" mean? "Correct" can mean different things depending on the perspective. Gettleman is 68 years old and Shurmur might feel his seat getting warm..."correct" to them is whatever can be done to win in 2020. In that scenario, maybe we're paying Shaq Barrett and Jadeveon Clowney each like they're Khalil Mack. They're not likely to be all that concerned with building anything sustainable following back to back 5 win seasons. So let's say they spend money on big FAs with the goal of making a push in 2020...is that going to change the fact that Shurmur can't coach his way out of a paper bag? What happens when, after another lousy season in 2020, we have to hire a new head coach (and possibly new GM)? They're going to want to bring in their guys, which means they're going to do with Barrett and Clowney (or whomever the expensive 2020 FA bandaids are) what Gettleman already did with Vernon and Beckham. So that will mean more dead money in '21. We have got to stop reacting to problems, and start actually building something sustainable. That ain't gonna happen with these two guys.

If Gettleman goes on a spending spree like Reese did in 2016, he should be fired on the spot. The Giants have a league average amount of cap space next year. They should be looking for younger vets who they can sign to reasonable contracts that don't mortgage the future. Anything else, you're right, it would be a sign of desperation.

In comment 14621384 Dnew15 said:

Quote:

DG would survive a PS firing if it happened in the next year? Or is it more likely they both go?

I don't think he should, but I could live with Gettleman being around after Shurmur. Gettleman at least is good at identifying college talent.

Shurmur on the other hand is incompetent. If the Giants fired him today I'd be fine with it. He should absolutely not be back in 2020.

To me, there were/are 3 phases that needed to be addressed when Gettleman was hired. The first thing was to clear all of the bullshit and dead weight out of the locker room and give ourselves a cleaner slate to build upward from. There was virtually nothing after the 2017 season that warranted hanging onto.

The next key point was to get the QB here.

Now we need to actually accumulate talent and build the rest of the team without mortgaging the entire future to do it.

To get that 'correct', I'd say Gettleman needs to do a better job with the cap dollars. We have to stop handing out deals that turn into dead money. Almost all of these recent contracts are becoming that. We have space clearing out. It'd be good if we could learn from some past mistakes.

Smart contract - Markus Golden

Stupid contract - Nate Solder

More of the former, less of the latter.

Another strong draft goes without saying, that's another key component. I like the two drafts so far for the most part, so I have a little more confidence in this area.

I will also continue to hammer home the importance of finding not one, but two OT's as soon as humanly possible. Replacements for Solder and Remmers are urgently needed before we wind up spending 3-5 more years with horrendous tackle play.

Continue to pour resources into the offensive line, address the pass rush. That's a simple blueprint that has this team winning 10 games in the near future.

We're in agreement on the types of FA contracts this team needs to be considering, but I'd be concerned that we're looking at more big deals this winter. Gettleman and Shurmur will know their asses may be on the line in 2020.

The time to move on is before they make those big moves.