Today's performances by Saquon and Leveon are all you needed to see to understand why you don't invest in RB's in today's NFL. Whether you want to blame it on injury, situation, offensive line, it simply doesn't matter. RB's are successful when the situation around them is ideal and they aren't when it becomes their responsibility to lift everyone else. It's are a complementary position, not a prime one.
On top of that, the shelf life of RB's and their ability to stay on the field are both below optimal. For better or worse, workhorse backs take a beating and as seasons progress the bumps and bruises starts to affect them.
As much as we all love Barkley as a player, taking him at #2 last year was a collasal mistake. It would have been a good pick if everything else was in place and we needed a playmaker to get us over the top. Unfortunately, nothing else was in place and by the time everything gets in place, he'll be done with his rookie contract and it will be foolish to pay him what he's going to want. That pick set this franchise back and this is not soething that's being said in hindsight. Many people here said it at the time.
It's time this team invests in the offensive line and defense FIRST before addressing positions that don't mean anything in today's league. This franchise has been a failure for far too long and it's inexcusable.
Quote:
In comment 14673439 islander1 said:
Quote:
the rest of the QB's aren't better than Jones.
An offensive guard out of Notre Dame? Really?
Simple. Trade down.
But then they don't want to do that either because they feel you are playing too many games (I think the term Gettleman was used was "get too cute") in the draft where you may miss out on the player you were targeting.
So you have a team who so many roster needs to fill, limited draft picks, trading others away for various reasons, and yet is reluctant to trade down.
This is really the best point - we have so many needs that targeting a specific player rather than maximizing the aggregate opportunity to build the roster was (and is) a bit premature.
There were enough good players in that draft that trading down likely would have been the better move. That said, it's really hard to convince any GM, no matter what you think of DG, to pass on a player they have graded as highly as the Giants had Barkley. We can argue the timing of it, the fundamental value of RBs, the other roster moves which could have better supported this move, whatever - it's all irrelevant once you accept that Gettleman's grade on Barkley was never going to allow him to pass on taking SB.
The rest of it is now on Gettleman, because if Barkley fails, that means that either the grade was wrong or Gettleman failed to provide an adequate supporting cast.
we aren't 2-9 because we drafted Barkley
we aren't 2-9 because we kept eli around
we aren't 2-9 because we signed Solder or Stewart or Omehah (sp?)
and on and on and on
But you add all these up and you have to question how this org is being run
yep
End of the day I know the answer, it just fascinating to read the same points over and over and over.
Of course we don't have that communication. Its only for threads discussing all things-NYG. And responding to our views, kudos and criticisms of this regime by other posters...
we aren't 2-9 because we drafted Barkley
we aren't 2-9 because we kept eli around
we aren't 2-9 because we signed Solder or Stewart or Omehah (sp?)
and on and on and on
But you add all these up and you have to question how this org is being run
Agree 100%.
No different than why I tell the same shitty stories every time my college buddies get together.
Because, what else is there?
That's assuming that anyone who works for the Giants knows how to use the internet.
DG admitted that he had at least 1 credible offer.
There were some reports that there were more.
To even entertain the notion that there was no market for the #2 pick for the Giants to trade down in that draft is absolutely ridiculous.
DG admitted there was at least on credible offer.
The issue here is that DG was focused on SB and nothing could possibly distract him from that.
One credible offer isn't impressive in my book.
And, while DG admitted to one, there were reports of others. And DG himself said he stopped listening. I have a problem with not listening, You ALWAYS listen. You can say no, but you always listen.
I've heard behind the scenes many feel there is no plan.
I've heard behind the scenes many feel there is no plan.
I'm not surprised. I bet Gettleman has rubbed a lot of people the wrong way with his schtick, but that's just a guess.
One credible offer isn't impressive in my book.
you only need one. its not like you can trade the pick two times
Bill B's quote comes to mind
"It's not about collecting talent, it's about building a team"
Quote:
to stick to his guns with such a pick.
One credible offer isn't impressive in my book.
you only need one. its not like you can trade the pick two times
Let's skip the nitpicking. If the offer was good enough they would have traded. One credible offer isn't compelling to me.
You're entirely too narrow-minded and agenda-driven to see that though.
You're entirely too narrow-minded and agenda-driven to see that though.
Nobody is arguing that this coaching staff doesn't suck. But seems like you missed the point of the thread so I recommend you go back and read the whole thing before making an accusatory ridiculous post.
Quote:
What you saw yesterday is a coaching staff that doesn't understand how to use a RB of Saquons caliber.
You're entirely too narrow-minded and agenda-driven to see that though.
Nobody is arguing that this coaching staff doesn't suck. But seems like you missed the point of the thread so I recommend you go back and read the whole thing before making an accusatory ridiculous post.
I didn't miss the point at all. You've been pretty consistent in your opinion of the Barkley pick since it was made. There's this *faction* of fans that always seems to come out of hiding when its convenient to beat this drum over and over again. You use only portions of data (the portions that push your narrative) to prove your point and leave out the rest.
If you think the Giants could have done a better job, then please enlighten us all with your ingenious plan and how you would have done things differently and better without the benefit of hindsight. Please list the draft as you would have done it and free agent signings (contract numbers included to fit under the cap) that would have made this team so much better than it is right now. Show us all what the Giants would look like if they had done things the Josh way.
Combine sold them? Really? SB's workout or his interview?
If you knew anything about SB (I've been aware of him since he played at Whitehall HS) - just go to youtube - he's always been a workout freak. He set numerous weight lifting records at PSU and at Whitehall. So the Combine really was nothing new. Actually, most of what he did was expected...
I've heard behind the scenes many feel there is no plan.
When Gettleman arrived the plan was clear - build a better team for Eli. And they have gone all out on the offensive side to do just that.
You are probably another one who disagrees, but I think that was a dictum from Mara - "...keeping Eli is a prerequisite and let's send him out a winner. Ernie says your specialty is building OLs and DL. So let's do that, and add better offensive pieces..."
I think Gettleman was all in on that. Shurmur? I think he wanted another crack at being a HC, so he played along reluctantly. But I think he was actually the guy who knew Eli was done, and wanted to move onto to the next QB solution...
Now it definitely feels like they are doing this "plan du jour" routine and showing absolutely no discipline. The LW trade was a perfect example. We essentially pounced out of nowhere to buy a player - a player who is going to have a $15-17M yearly price tag - when we should have been the team trying to sell. That was a real blindside move under the circumstances...
Every Giant fan should listen to Mike Lombardi's podcast from this week. Towards the end he sums up the Giants perfectly. Just a lost organization.
McCaffrey is up for league MVP, its inarguable that he was a stellar pick. But that's because he's used correctly. Its how Barkley should be used.
If we are getting 4-5 years of Shurmur + Barkley, sure, we aren't going to get the return on investment. But if hire someone that actually builds the gampeplan around their star than it will pay massive dividends.
I'm just not really into these hard rules and there's no reason to be set in your ways, especially when the big gripe many of you have with DG is that he's set in his ways.
If you're going to pick Barkley 2nd overall because he's touched by the hand of God, then use him accordingly. They haven't.
Gettleman has sucked at his job, and Barkley is one of the reasons why.
Quote:
I don't know what their plan is there.
I've heard behind the scenes many feel there is no plan.
When Gettleman arrived the plan was clear - build a better team for Eli. And they have gone all out on the offensive side to do just that.
You are probably another one who disagrees, but I think that was a dictum from Mara - "...keeping Eli is a prerequisite and let's send him out a winner. Ernie says your specialty is building OLs and DL. So let's do that, and add better offensive pieces..."
I think Gettleman was all in on that. Shurmur? I think he wanted another crack at being a HC, so he played along reluctantly. But I think he was actually the guy who knew Eli was done, and wanted to move onto to the next QB solution...
Now it definitely feels like they are doing this "plan du jour" routine and showing absolutely no discipline. The LW trade was a perfect example. We essentially pounced out of nowhere to buy a player - a player who is going to have a $15-17M yearly price tag - when we should have been the team trying to sell. That was a real blindside move under the circumstances...
The no plan belief is current info, a lot of head scratching over LW, Eli, UFA choices, and what seems to be an obvious reactionary disconnect in what they're doing.
The no plan belief is current info, a lot of head scratching over LW, Eli, UFA choices, and what seems to be an obvious reactionary disconnect in what they're doing.
The LW trade is one of the dumbest trades I've ever seen. Not because of LW's skills, that's another debate, but because we spent draft capital for a player who is going to be available in the FA market anyway. And it didn't take much digging to realize LW really likes the NY area. So we would been in the running merely based on geography.
I really struggle to reconcile any of it. Further, I don't buy that there is some gentleman's agreement in place between LW's team and the Gettleman. Is he going to give us a hometown discount after being here two months? LW and his team have tremendous leverage here. Now they know a team aggressively traded draft picks for him and they absolutely want to sign him. So LW basically has a floor set going into the free agency period courtesy of the NY Football Giants. What a boon that is...
There is no telling what the price tag might be. I have been guessing $15-$17M/yr. Don't be surprised if that drifts up to $19M now...
Quote:
The no plan belief is current info, a lot of head scratching over LW, Eli, UFA choices, and what seems to be an obvious reactionary disconnect in what they're doing.
The LW trade is one of the dumbest trades I've ever seen. Not because of LW's skills, that's another debate, but because we spent draft capital for a player who is going to be available in the FA market anyway. And it didn't take much digging to realize LW really likes the NY area. So we would been in the running merely based on geography.
I really struggle to reconcile any of it. Further, I don't buy that there is some gentleman's agreement in place between LW's team and the Gettleman. Is he going to give us a hometown discount after being here two months? LW and his team have tremendous leverage here. Now they know a team aggressively traded draft picks for him and they absolutely want to sign him. So LW basically has a floor set going into the free agency period courtesy of the NY Football Giants. What a boon that is...
There is no telling what the price tag might be. I have been guessing $15-$17M/yr. Don't be surprised if that drifts up to $19M now...
I don't know how this will play out in FA, you may be right.
What bothers me more is that the Giants used resources to bring in a player at a position that was manned by players with NFL level talent, while there are so many positions on this team that don't. The DL may not have been great, but it wasn't broken... The OL is broken, ER is broken, CB is broken, FS is broken, WR is broken. Fix those first (preferably in that order) for gods sakes.
McCaffrey is up for league MVP, its inarguable that he was a stellar pick. But that's because he's used correctly. Its how Barkley should be used.
If we are getting 4-5 years of Shurmur + Barkley, sure, we aren't going to get the return on investment. But if hire someone that actually builds the gampeplan around their star than it will pay massive dividends.
I'm just not really into these hard rules and there's no reason to be set in your ways, especially when the big gripe many of you have with DG is that he's set in his ways.
Here's what Brown Recluse (and many fans) simply aren't understanding. McCaffrey wouldn't be anything close to a league MVP candidate on this team b/c the team wasn't built properly to begin with. As I said very early on in this thread, RB is a LUXURY pick b/c they do not correlate to wins and losses. They are successful when the team around them is conducive to their style of play. Drafting a non-essential position like RB at #2 overall was dumb to begin with but doing so when the offensive line was in shambles was as stupid as it gets. I completely disagree with the notion that a RB like McCaffrey is worth the #2 overall pick for the reason that a RB will never turn a losing team into a winning team in today's NFL. They can be great players and accumulate tons of yards but they are NOT players you build your team around. And that's before we even get into the whole idea of their substantially shorter shelf life.
I don't know how this will play out in FA, you may be right.
What bothers me more is that the Giants used resources to bring in a player at a position that was manned by players with NFL level talent, while there are so many positions on this team that don't. The DL may not have been great, but it wasn't broken... The OL is broken, ER is broken, CB is broken, FS is broken, WR is broken. Fix those first (preferably in that order) for gods sakes.
That is the other piece. DL is actually a position where we have quantity and potentially some real nice quality. And it's largely young and cheap. So why create a logjam by adding another player that (1) may not be any better than most of the current group and (2) is going to create visions of a Brinks Truck.
Maybe Gettleman feels better because he didn't have to pay relocation costs...
They failed. The most certainly did try. There’s a difference.
You can think Barkley is a great individual player and a bad pick at the same time.
The former is disagree with greatly. The latter is something I can’t argue because there have been too many miscalculations and too many players either not stepping up or regressing, capped off by a terrible HC who isn’t putting players in the best position to succeed.
You can think Barkley is a great individual player and a bad pick at the same time.
That is truly the only way to think about him...
You are negotiating with Gettleman, and if he doesn't land your client, it's a phenomenal failure at a time when his job security is under scrutiny.
That's a major leg up.
widmerseyebrow : 7:56 pm : link : reply
he went to a team that already had good offensive linemen and pass rush in place
The OL and pass rush has both been a focus of improvement. Their first round pick was a pass rusher. I think they were in the bottom 5 in sacks.
The OL was also considered a disappointment and the turnover there has been pretty high. McCaffery hides a lot of their weaknesses, but they were among the league leaders in allowing pressures and sacks.
CMC isn’t a luxury, he’s the teams best player and the only reason they are even competitive on offense. And that defense isn’t anything special, they are ranked in the low 20s in both PA and YA. And I’d argue CMC helps the D stay fresh and they be worse without him.
The former is disagree with greatly. The latter is something I can’t argue because there have been too many miscalculations and too many players either not stepping up or regressing, capped off by a terrible HC who isn’t putting players in the best position to succeed.
"The goalposts are moving" seems to be a common refrain but it's an unfair one - different posters have different opinions and there are multiple reasons why some disagree with the Barkley pick, any of which may or may not be valid.
So you can refute one poster on the opinion they posit and another completely different person can say "yeah, but..." and their opinion is either valid or not on its own merit, and not because the goalposts have moved.
Not everyone needs to be lumped into the same viewpoint simply because they may share the same fundamental opinion that Gettleman has made some very questionable moves overall, and/or that taking a RB could be one of those questionable moves - and the reasons why for each poster don't have to be the same.
I'm sure it's exhausting to defend Gettleman's decisions, but you can always just take comfort in the fact that the Edsel had backers, too. And I'll take comfort in knowing that even the Edsel only lasted three years.