Hello BBI, 1st time poster with a war and peace length dissertation to digest yet, I am hardly a newbie to this site. Been coming to BBI ten times a day for what must be 20 years now. This site has been and remains an integral part of my daily existence. I have always been content to just read the daily back and forth banter without being compelled to post myself. Given the state of neurosis consuming so many fellow Giant fans these days, I finally feel a strong urge to finally participate. So many on here are angry and disgruntled and I get that. Years of putrid football evokes an emotional beat down over time. From my perspective though, the anger and rathe of so many is fundamentally misguided and misplaced. Despite all the negative noise in both the media and on this site, the needle is positively pointing upward for our beloved Giants. Unfortunately, many are unable to recognize it yet because of the years of recurring loosing seasons that seem to flow and blur together. Though these loosing seasons seem to flow as one continuous body of work, that is simply not the case. There is a distinct demarcation line between management regimes and that will be a recurring theme here. In any sport, you can historically see when franchises have toiled and labored in mediocrity for years and where their fortunes began to rise again. Many times it was the result of regime change. My sole intention is to convince not all, but many and Eric with a thoughtfully conceived treatise that this franchise is positively in good hands and on the rise again. So who the hell am I? Just another old dude I guess with too much to say. For some perspective, I was at the 62 Championship game against the pack at Yankee stadium with my dad. Had a 4 seat front row box for the Giants till Metlife was built. Let my seats go because of the hundred K upfront cost. I had know way of knowing when the Giants lost the Championship to the Bears that following year in 63 that I would be in my thirties before my team would sniff the playoffs again. The best years of my youth are littered with the remnants of incompetent football. It took a league intervention to turn the franchise around. First thing big George did was draft Simms and it was not a popular choice. Two years later he grabbed LT, courtesy of the 2nd pick in the draft. Young is considered the best GM this franchise has ever had, yet it still took him 8 years to get to the Super Bowl. There were many ups and downs on the march towards the 1986 Championship team. Hell, Parcells was almost run out of town before he became the legend go the Big Tuna. The fact is, the prior 19 years of horrific football had no bearing on Young when he became GM. The distinct demarcation line for Young was 1979, not 1964. From that point on, the clock started ticking on his management and player personnel decisions. Even though those early loosing seasons under Young seemed to flow concurrently with the prior 19, that was not the case. The fortunes of the franchise from that point on were on the rise, it was just difficult to recognize under the circumstances of continued loosing. Likewise, the prior 7 years of loosing under Reece has nothing to do with Gettleman. Yes, Giant ownership has made mistakes, Mr. Mara is loyal to a fault. Yet, they stuck with Reece for a good reason. Two Super Bowls were won early in his tenure and that unfortunately earned him more slack than he ultimately deserved. From my perspective, Reece's tenure has parallel similarities to the Yankees GM Cashman. In 1998, Brian took over one of the greatest teams ever assembled and takes the credit for four championship wins in five years for a team essentially built by Gene Michael. He has just one Championship in the last 20 years since, but this is a topic for another day. So, go on line and google the 2006 Giant roster. 95% of the key personnel were already in place when Reece became GM. Yes, he had a very nice draft his first year in 2007 with great contributions from some of his choices. When you truly asses the situation though, Reece never built a great team here. Those two Bowl winning teams were pedestrian at best compiling 10-7 and 9-7 season records respectively. They barely made it into the dance. Yes, they got hot at the right time of the year leading to Championship runs, but no serious student of the game looks upon those teams as being great. Yet, those two Super Bowl victories created the illusion that Reece was a brilliant GM and player evaluator. Ironically, the 2008 team was the best under Reece. Defending Champs and the clear class of the league at 11-1 until it literally shot itself in the leg. I will get into the specifics of Reece's Draft record when we discuss the current regime. First, let's look at several other NFL rebuilds starting with everyone's flavor of the moment, the 49ers. The first two seasons under the triumvirate of Lynch, Shanahan and Saleh, the Niners were 6-10 and 4-12 ending with the second slot in the 2019 draft. With his first draft in 2019, Lynch selected Soloman Thomas #3 overall and Ruben Foster at #31. Foster now resides on the Redskins IR and Soloman has been a top of the draft bust. Now in his third season, he still can't crack the starting lineup and his play has been pedestrian at best. If that had taken place here, Lynch would be tar and feathered on this site. Last years 2018 Niner defense under Saleh set historical records for defensive futility. They accumulated just two interceptions while 40 players around the league had as many or more. The team had just seven takeaways for the entire season breaking the previous NFL worst of 11 total takeaways. How bad were the Niners last year? Hell, we gave them a beat down out in SF last year. So what suddenly turned it around, because so many here are under the delusion that it happened over night. How about six years of high octane draft resources into the front 7 sprinkled with a savvy trade and some key free agent additions and voila, you have a juggernaut. Eric Reid 13/1, Jimmy Ward 14/1, Arik Armstead 15/1 #17, Deforest Buckner 16/1 #7, Soloman Thomas 71/1 #3, and Nick Bosa 19/1 #2. Clearly a defensive foundation has been being laid in SF for years yet, Lynch did not draft most of those players, he inherited them. So what really tipped the scales and turned the worst defense into perhaps the league's best? Years of top pf the draft capital was put over the top by the Bosa pick at #2, the trade for Dee Ford and the free agent addition of Kwon Alexander. Add Richard Sherman last year and you now have defense stacked with talent. Juxtapose this against the draft capital Gettleman has had at his disposal to this point. Any comparison is frankly absurd. Bosa and Ford are the number one and two ranked edge rushers in the league and have transformed what was a seriously underperforming unit into a beast. I wonder what these two additions could do for our defense next year? Now Shanahan and Saleh are both the toast of BBI, brilliant coaches in their third seasons. I do not recall anyone clamoring for their services last year on this site. Let's take a look at the Jerry Jones/Jimmy Johnson Cowboys. Jones took over the team in 1989, but I consider the rebuild starting with the selection of Michael Irvin the previous season with the 11th overall pick. Jones/Johnson subsequently drafted Aikman #1/1989, Emmit Smith #17/1990, Russel Maryland #1/1991 and Alvin Harper #12/1991. They also traded for Tony Casillas, the #2 overall pick in the 1986 draft. The Hershel Walker trade netted them unprecedented draft capital. In 1991, the Cowboys had 11 picks in the first 4 rounds consisting of 3 first rounders, 1 2nd, 3 third rounders and 4 4th rounders. They had 18 picks in total. Read those crazy numbers again. In 1992, they again had two first rounders and two second rounders. There has never been a franchise with insane draft capital like this, prior to or after. My point is that even with this over-the-top wealth of draft riches, it still took them 5 years to get to the Super Bowl. Aikman's first year 1989, the Cowboys finished 1-15. The future Hall of Fam-er threw just 9 TD's juxtaposed against 18 interceptions. He was knocked around that year like a rag doll. It's called growing pains and most of the great ones have gone through it. It's learning to play in a man's league, the baddest on the planet. Jones and Johnson put most of their high end resources into elite offensive skill players, QB, RB , and two WRS. The other was the center piece of the defensive line, Russel Maryland. Does any of this draft pattern look familiar here the last two years? So let's compare these rebuilds to the to the current Giant regime, a regime just one and a half years in. The indisputable reality is this is a regime in its infancy. Just as prior 19 years had nothing to do with Young, the Last 7 years under Reece have nothing to do with Gettleman. There is a distinct demarcation line for Gettleman and it is 2018. The simple fact is DG inherited a football roster bereft of talent caused by a draft record of futility maybe unmatched. Here is Reece's first round draft record: Aaron Ross 2007, Kenny Philips 2008, Hakeem Nicks 2009, JPP 2010, Prince 2011, David Wilson, Justin Pugh 2013, OBJ 2014, Flowers 2015, Apple 2016, and Ingram 2017. This resume of drafting is abysmal. It is hard to fathom that there is only one player from this list left on our team in Evan Ingram. Compare that with the 49er roster. Every 1st round pick for the past 7 years is still there and contribution in a big way, sans Thomas. And I did not even mention Mike McGlinchey, the 2018 1st rounder. JPP had one stellar season in 2011. He had 18 sacks and was a force in winning the Super Bowl that year. Kudos for that, but he never came close to that level of play again. Beckham is the real deal. Unfortunately, he is a me-first-media-hound head case and it was a brilliant move to jettison his butt out of here. Good riddance. It was worth it for big Dex alone. So here is my declaration BBI. I submit that Gettleman is in the early stages of constructing one of the best teams in franchise history, most just can see it occurring yet. I do not put forth this claim in an empty vacuum. Simply put, he has quickly acquired resources for this team the likes we have never possessed before. One, the Giants have never had a QB with the skill set of Daniel Jones. Not Phil, not Eli, not Charlie, not YA. Jone's possesses an intriguing package of accuracy, touch, poise, mobility, speed, toughness and intelligence. His rookie growing pains are for a separate post, we all know what hey are. I have watched hundreds of young QBs enter the league over the years. I know the goods when I see it and Jones has the goods. I think he will be a force in this league in two to three years leading this team for a very long time. Two, this team has never had a RB with the skill set of Barkley. Hell, the NFL has had few prospects with this kids measurables, both physical and intangible. Someone recently posted a video of Max Kellerman and Stephen A. Smith discussing this very subject. That video say's all you need to know. The fact so many on this site are giving up on this kid already is really quite disturbing. Three, this team has never had a nose tackle with the size and skill set of big Dex. Not Howard, Not Burt, Not Snacks. Nobody. Many seem to forget this dude should be in his senior year at Clemson. He is a man child learning in the toughest trenches of them all. Do you think this kid can get bigger and stronger? You bet your ass he can. He is 21 years old. It is freighting to think what he will be like after a couple of NFL off-season workout programs, especially for the guys lining up across from him. This is exactly how you start a total rebuild of a defense, with an athletic monster to control the center of the line. Four, we have never had 3 first round picks before. We had two once in 1984. That kind of draft capital fast tracks a rebuild in the right direction. Five, ever since Russel Wilson came into the league, the buzz has been about those envious teams with the young QB playing on a rookie contract freeing up large amounts of dollars to enrich the rest of the roster. The Rams/Goff, Atlanta/Ryan, Eagles/Wentz, Cowboys/Zac. All these teams have reached the Super Bowl except our beloved Cowboys. Well BBI, starting this up coming off-season, we are now that team and DG is the one who got us there. Each year you only get a limited number of premium draft assets to construct your team. The two highest were used on skilled offensive talent, QB and RB, just like the Jones/Johnson lead Cowboys. Our team has a storied defensive tradition and we all long for a competent D once again. Yet this is an offensive driven league now. The offensive side of the ball has all the advantages in todays NFL. This is not the 1980's Taylor era of football anymore. Yearly rule changes continue to stack the deck in favor of the offense. Build a juggernaut offense and you will succeed in this league. Either way, Gettleman has spread his initial assets quite evenly to both sides of the ball. Both sides needed a complete rebuild and that is a hell of a lot of bodies to replace in a short period of time. So, despite the bad quality of football we are presently enduring, these are exciting times. Key foundational pieces to this football team are now in place, now the job needs to be finished. This will be one of the most important off-seasons in our team's history. Embrace this rebuild, it should be something to enjoy. Finally, I want to give a shout out to Eric in Lieu of your "How to fix the Giants" post. You do not know me, but I feel like I know you somewhat. I have read hundreds of your posts over the years, seen pictures and video of you. If I bumped into you on the street I would recognize you. So I know you in that very limited sense. I have always thought of you as the rock on this site, not because you own it but by the way you conduct yourself and convey your thoughts. You are the person that can always be relied on for intelligent discourse and a measured response to a fellow poster. Most importantly, I have always looked to you as the one who knows most where this team is currently at and the things it really needs to help it improve. Which is why I find your post "How to fix the Giants" so bewildering. Like you, I also think the Giants have been a broken franchise. However, I think that broken period in our history came to end last year. I think you are missing the demarcation line of 2018 between regime change. I disagree with most of your conclusions. Gettleman weak and old? Picking on our GM's age is quite frankly an insult to the many older posters who reside on this site. Quite contrary, I find DG's battle over cancer a positive, not a negative. It is a testament to the man's grit and determination. He has an unwavering, firm and steadfast conviction. It takes balls of brass to stand up to the mob that is the media and fan base. The scrutiny and criticism he has endured has been nothing short of cruel and unwarranted. The man does it his way and I thank the heavens for that, other wise Barkley and Jones would be members of other NFL franchises. You spoke of his bad free agent acquisitions. Exactly what is your list of players he both should have and could have signed, and with what dollars. Do you really think the 35 year old Bethea was considered a long term solution? They were looking for bodies to plug the many holes with little cash to compete for the better players. The Solder signing was an imperative, we were desperate to replace Flowers and he was the only real option. You want to replace Shurmur. Fine, because I do not really know if he is the answer or not. What I do know is Parcells did not look so hot initially. Little Bill in Cleveland? Shanahan and Saleh were at the bottom of the heap last year with a roster far superior to ours. Boy wonder McVie not looking so hot this year. How many examples do we need? Simply put, I think a coach, any coach needs talented players to win and we just do not have enough yet. I also do not believe we are years and years away from competing. If implemented correctly, this team will be more than competitive with just two more off-seasons of player acquisitions. I think DG knows what he is doing and will complete the mission, apparently you do not. Where I do agree with you is the awful record of player acquisition that has occurred for so long. But let's place the blame where it solely belongs and there again lies that demarcation line. I previously stated the full list of Jerry Reece's first round draft picks. Let me finish this post with the rest of the Reece and that arrogant idiot Marc Ross's draft choices. Every single one. Clint Sintim, William Beatty, Ramses Barden, Travis Beckum, Andre Brown, Rhett Bomar, Deandre Wright, Stoney Woodson ,Rueben Randle, Jayron Hosley, Adrien Robinson, Brandon Mosley, Matt McCants, Markus Kuhn, Marvin Austin, Jerel Jernigan, James Brewer, Greg Jones, Damotre Moore, Ryan Nassib, Cooper Taylor, Eric Herman Michael Cox, Philip Dillard, Adrian Tracy, Matt Dodge, Davis Webb, Avery Bisnowaty, Jay Bromley, Andre Williams, Nat Berhe, Bennet Jackson, Odighizuwa, Mykkele Thompson, Geremy Davis, Bobby Hart, Darien Thompson, B.J. Goodsen, Paul Perkins and Jerell Adams. Wow, when you see the list presented in front of you, it is really something to behold. Truth be told, a Monkey with a dart board would yield a better result. And people are bewildered why we are so bad right now. Eric, you you should start a game on here called "find a player on this list who is still in the NFL". This Abortion of draft choices has created a monumental hole for any GM to crawl out of. Thank God we have a pro to tackle the job. So in closing, I thank my lucky stars everyday that Mr. Gettleman is our GM. The rest of you should too. Thank you Mr. Gettleman.
Unless you have an absolute pitch-perfect 2005-style draft where you nail 75 percent of the picks, you aren't going to enough quality starters to overcome the mess that Reese made with only a handful of day 1 and 2 selections. That's why I'll give DG credit for the 2019 draft. Missing someone like Baker stings less if you nail Lawrence and Jones. Missing on Love hurts less if you grab Slayton and Connolly (ACL aside). But you need the picks to do that.
I do think this is off base
I don't think it is indicative of society. Why is the burden on us to absorb a poorly formatted block of text? Why should we have to muddle through a wall of words to parse out messages? It doesn't have to do with intelligence, it has to do with courtesy. Putting that much time into a post that will likely not be read because it is unreadable and then casting blame on the readers is more indicative of society. Lack of accountability or personal responsibility.
In fact, it was the software's fault!!
A few thoughts I have been having:
1. Gettlemen is 50/50 at this point - he seems to be drafting better talented players, but is horrific in free agency - whether through evaluation, bad luck, old loyalties, whatever.
2. I seriously question our coaching staff simply for the reason that we have yet to see any 2nd year players actually playing better. Most are regressing. Many of those players flashed or had great 1st years in the league. If this trend continues DJ is going to have a Baker Mayfield type sophomore year next year
3. I get your point about us being neurotic - we do seem to be at a point where we can't even enjoy things like. rookie QB who is actually throwing well or last year having an amazing rookie RB. I think as fans we are the equivalent of Eli behind those OLs. We are essentially shell shocked and can only see bad things at this point.
Thanks again for your take and points - I particularly liked your points on how long it took the SF & Dallas franchises to rebuild.
Most importantly is the clear line of demarcation you are making - the complaints about losing for years simply shouldn't apply in a fair analysis of Dave G or Pat S. They are part of what we've suffered through, but not part of their history.
Again, like your post.
To me the difference in Solder if he performed was insurance allowing a new QB. A prerequisite for a rapid transition if that was available. Having not been privy to any 2018 QB scouting at the time, for all DG knew he was going to find a QB in 2018.
Because to me the Eli decision was: 1) Separate 2) He was insurance.
The only other way was to be truly awful as a team...and risk the health and development of the new QB. If that is what you are advocating...then lets call it the low cost high risk plan. Is that what you are advocating?
As we have seen, new QBs don't feel or even see NFL speed.
When a poster cannot parse this particular decision, anchor it in time and label the downside risks of their proposed alternative - I tune them out on a wide range of their opinions.
That's just me. Its not a big deal. We can all watch and think what we want. We are anyway.
Just wanted to clarify why I don't call it GM malpractice
Most importantly is the clear line of demarcation you are making - the complaints about losing for years simply shouldn't apply in a fair analysis of Dave G or Pat S. They are part of what we've suffered through, but not part of their history.
Again, like your post.
Hi Dan, good to see you posting whether we agree or not.
I don’t get the hysteria and anger here either. Most here thought this was a 5 win team at best. They were right. What to be angry about after a year and a half of a new regime. They are what was expected.
As far as the rest there are some institutional problems at the core of the Giants org. I don't think the Mara's are the worst kinds of owners (like Dolan or Wilpon) because they mostly stay out of the way, but they have proven to be pretty bad at hiring coaches and evaluating their leadership teams. They almost didn't hire Coughlin, they determined he was the problem moreso than Reese, they hired McAdoo, and now it looks like Shurmur is another mistake on the list.
The decision on the head coach this offseason is going to be almost as big as the decision of which young QB to draft early. There is a window coming up where there's a good young foundation of talent and cap room to supplement it. DG will likely add another good player with a top 5 pick. They need to find a coach who can step in and lead the franchise back to winning.
Isn't that high risk precisely what Gettleman was about to embrace had he successfully signed Norwell in 2018 before he wound up - through circumstance only - pivoting to Solder?
It's not just that we as fans are claiming 20/20 hindsight on Solder; it's that Gettleman's plan A for the OL didn't even include Solder in the first place. So whatever downside anyone believes would have been created/amplified by going with a lesser (or less-known) option at OLT, it's important to maintain the context that DG did supposedly have a plan that included that downside.
We shouldn't act like Solder was the only plan when he wasn't even Gettleman's top OL target. Even leaving the implications of DG's initial self-scouting of the relative quality of the roster at that time, he was prepared to take on whatever risk it is that posters think would have resulted by not signing Solder. So I don't see how anyone can give him a pass for what he actually did intend to do.
Barkley - huge disappointment this year. Yes, the o-line stinks, but they stunk last year too.
Hernandez - has been a functional starter, but as Sy has pointed out, he hasn't improved at all from last year.
Carter - he'll make a play or two per game and be invisible aside from those.
Hill - He's been so good this year that the Giants are willing to pay through the nose in picks and a future FA contract for Leonard Williams.
Lauletta - gone
McIntosh - zero impact
Beal - Has only just now gotten on the field after a year and a half. We'll see what he does if he can stay on it.
Jones - has shown much more than expected. Still has a long way to go.
Lawrence - has the makings of an impact player. We'll see if he gets there.
Baker - major disappointment. Has had his moments but has also looked really bad sometimes, plus seems to have a questionable motor.
Ximenes - little impact. Looks slow as molasses out there.
Love - has had trouble getting on the field despite Bethea being a disaster. We'll see how he does now that he's getting some burn.
Connelly - was looking like a steal in his brief stint before the ACL. Hope he can come back 100%.
D. Slayton - pleasant surprise, but he looks more like a future Mario Manningham than a Nicks or Cruz.
Asafo-Adjei - IR, probably never amounts to anything
C. Slayton - practice squad
So there it is. Hardly an eye-opening collection of talent.
To me the difference in Solder if he performed was insurance allowing a new QB. A prerequisite for a rapid transition if that was available. Having not been privy to any 2018 QB scouting at the time, for all DG knew he was going to find a QB in 2018.
Because to me the Eli decision was: 1) Separate 2) He was insurance.
The only other way was to be truly awful as a team...and risk the health and development of the new QB. If that is what you are advocating...then lets call it the low cost high risk plan. Is that what you are advocating?
As we have seen, new QBs don't feel or even see NFL speed.
When a poster cannot parse this particular decision, anchor it in time and label the downside risks of their proposed alternative - I tune them out on a wide range of their opinions.
All well in good how you want view how DG was looking at the Eli and the team back in spring of 2018. I have my own opinions which differ...he was all in on the team competing and Eli being his guy imv. Hence Solder and the hand of god RB.
And talk all you want regarding insurance & health for a young QB (or older one) or downside risk because a LT in decline was going to give up his share of hits too. He was so concerned that after a declining 2018 year and offseason surgery, DG didn't even think about getting Solder's replacement.
And you can tune whomever you want out at anytime but regarding this topic...it was an example of what not to do.
Gatorade Dunk also adding comments that he and I have been consistent on from the get-go...
Barkley - huge disappointment this year. Yes, the o-line stinks, but they stunk last year too.
Hernandez - has been a functional starter, but as Sy has pointed out, he hasn't improved at all from last year.
Carter - he'll make a play or two per game and be invisible aside from those.
Hill - He's been so good this year that the Giants are willing to pay through the nose in picks and a future FA contract for Leonard Williams.
Lauletta - gone
McIntosh - zero impact
Beal - Has only just now gotten on the field after a year and a half. We'll see what he does if he can stay on it.
Jones - has shown much more than expected. Still has a long way to go.
Lawrence - has the makings of an impact player. We'll see if he gets there.
Baker - major disappointment. Has had his moments but has also looked really bad sometimes, plus seems to have a questionable motor.
Ximenes - little impact. Looks slow as molasses out there.
Love - has had trouble getting on the field despite Bethea being a disaster. We'll see how he does now that he's getting some burn.
Connelly - was looking like a steal in his brief stint before the ACL. Hope he can come back 100%.
D. Slayton - pleasant surprise, but he looks more like a future Mario Manningham than a Nicks or Cruz.
Asafo-Adjei - IR, probably never amounts to anything
C. Slayton - practice squad
So there it is. Hardly an eye-opening collection of talent.
Great post!
Barkley - huge disappointment this year. Yes, the o-line stinks, but they stunk last year too.
Hernandez - has been a functional starter, but as Sy has pointed out, he hasn't improved at all from last year.
Carter - he'll make a play or two per game and be invisible aside from those.
Hill - He's been so good this year that the Giants are willing to pay through the nose in picks and a future FA contract for Leonard Williams.
Lauletta - gone
McIntosh - zero impact
Beal - Has only just now gotten on the field after a year and a half. We'll see what he does if he can stay on it.
Jones - has shown much more than expected. Still has a long way to go.
Lawrence - has the makings of an impact player. We'll see if he gets there.
Baker - major disappointment. Has had his moments but has also looked really bad sometimes, plus seems to have a questionable motor.
Ximenes - little impact. Looks slow as molasses out there.
Love - has had trouble getting on the field despite Bethea being a disaster. We'll see how he does now that he's getting some burn.
Connelly - was looking like a steal in his brief stint before the ACL. Hope he can come back 100%.
D. Slayton - pleasant surprise, but he looks more like a future Mario Manningham than a Nicks or Cruz.
Asafo-Adjei - IR, probably never amounts to anything
C. Slayton - practice squad
So there it is. Hardly an eye-opening collection of talent.
Barkley? Yes, nevermind that high ankle sprain thing!
One of my closest friends is not a Giants fan but we talk football everyday. I had expressed my concern with Shurmur and his record. He noted that Daniel Jones really runs his offense well and if he can control the fumbling and improve the o-line, keeping him might not be the worst decision. Of course he said the defense for the Giants is a glaring problem and the coordinator needs to go. The 3rd down conversions are killers.
Anyway, we will see. I appreciate giant power's post, as all of you.
Quote:
The legend of Gettleman's drafting is getting more outsized with every telling.
Barkley - huge disappointment this year. Yes, the o-line stinks, but they stunk last year too.
Hernandez - has been a functional starter, but as Sy has pointed out, he hasn't improved at all from last year.
Carter - he'll make a play or two per game and be invisible aside from those.
Hill - He's been so good this year that the Giants are willing to pay through the nose in picks and a future FA contract for Leonard Williams.
Lauletta - gone
McIntosh - zero impact
Beal - Has only just now gotten on the field after a year and a half. We'll see what he does if he can stay on it.
Jones - has shown much more than expected. Still has a long way to go.
Lawrence - has the makings of an impact player. We'll see if he gets there.
Baker - major disappointment. Has had his moments but has also looked really bad sometimes, plus seems to have a questionable motor.
Ximenes - little impact. Looks slow as molasses out there.
Love - has had trouble getting on the field despite Bethea being a disaster. We'll see how he does now that he's getting some burn.
Connelly - was looking like a steal in his brief stint before the ACL. Hope he can come back 100%.
D. Slayton - pleasant surprise, but he looks more like a future Mario Manningham than a Nicks or Cruz.
Asafo-Adjei - IR, probably never amounts to anything
C. Slayton - practice squad
So there it is. Hardly an eye-opening collection of talent.
Barkley? Yes, nevermind that high ankle sprain thing!
Shouldn't injury risk for RBs be something that is considered within the decision to take one a #2 overall, even if that player is incredibly dynamic and supremely talented? That's all part of the equation, isn't it?
Barkley - huge disappointment this year. Yes, the o-line stinks, but they stunk last year too.
Hernandez - has been a functional starter, but as Sy has pointed out, he hasn't improved at all from last year.
Carter - he'll make a play or two per game and be invisible aside from those.
Hill - He's been so good this year that the Giants are willing to pay through the nose in picks and a future FA contract for Leonard Williams.
Lauletta - gone
McIntosh - zero impact
Beal - Has only just now gotten on the field after a year and a half. We'll see what he does if he can stay on it.
Jones - has shown much more than expected. Still has a long way to go.
Lawrence - has the makings of an impact player. We'll see if he gets there.
Baker - major disappointment. Has had his moments but has also looked really bad sometimes, plus seems to have a questionable motor.
Ximenes - little impact. Looks slow as molasses out there.
Love - has had trouble getting on the field despite Bethea being a disaster. We'll see how he does now that he's getting some burn.
Connelly - was looking like a steal in his brief stint before the ACL. Hope he can come back 100%.
D. Slayton - pleasant surprise, but he looks more like a future Mario Manningham than a Nicks or Cruz.
Asafo-Adjei - IR, probably never amounts to anything
C. Slayton - practice squad
So there it is. Hardly an eye-opening collection of talent.
Thanks. How objective of you.
Barkley - huge disappointment this year. Yes, the o-line stinks, but they stunk last year too.
Hernandez - has been a functional starter, but as Sy has pointed out, he hasn't improved at all from last year.
Carter - he'll make a play or two per game and be invisible aside from those.
Hill - He's been so good this year that the Giants are willing to pay through the nose in picks and a future FA contract for Leonard Williams.
Lauletta - gone
McIntosh - zero impact
Beal - Has only just now gotten on the field after a year and a half. We'll see what he does if he can stay on it.
Jones - has shown much more than expected. Still has a long way to go.
Lawrence - has the makings of an impact player. We'll see if he gets there.
Baker - major disappointment. Has had his moments but has also looked really bad sometimes, plus seems to have a questionable motor.
Ximenes - little impact. Looks slow as molasses out there.
Love - has had trouble getting on the field despite Bethea being a disaster. We'll see how he does now that he's getting some burn.
Connelly - was looking like a steal in his brief stint before the ACL. Hope he can come back 100%.
D. Slayton - pleasant surprise, but he looks more like a future Mario Manningham than a Nicks or Cruz.
Asafo-Adjei - IR, probably never amounts to anything
C. Slayton - practice squad
So there it is. Hardly an eye-opening collection of talent.
1. How much of this is coaching vs. raw talent?
2. Using this pessimistic analysis, are there any teams that have a 50/50 chance of drafting talented players?
Yes, we are 2-8, but lets acknowledge some of the good things that are happening with the Giants in addition to the overwhelmingly bad.
2. Using this pessimistic analysis, are there any teams that have a 50/50 chance of drafting talented players?
Yes, we are 2-8, but lets acknowledge some of the good things that are happening with the Giants in addition to the overwhelmingly bad.
So when Reese's picks didn't contribute, it was because he was a poor talent evaluator, but when Gettleman's don't, it's poor coaching. That sounds like a pretty sweet gig.
Quote:
1. How much of this is coaching vs. raw talent?
2. Using this pessimistic analysis, are there any teams that have a 50/50 chance of drafting talented players?
Yes, we are 2-8, but lets acknowledge some of the good things that are happening with the Giants in addition to the overwhelmingly bad.
So when Reese's picks didn't contribute, it was because he was a poor talent evaluator, but when Gettleman's don't, it's poor coaching. That sounds like a pretty sweet gig.
But at least Coughlin has a proven track record. Shurmur doesn't.
The 27 highest winning percentage for a team over 10 years is 58%. Only three teams got between 60-66%. One team won 79% of the time so they are a statistical outlier and a half.
ditto the prior 10 years of NFL history.
All FO/GM's will eventually revert to that mean.
Now, we are below that recently. For us 51% is an actual improvement. Sad as that is.
So I don't expect a GM to get more than 60% right for a few years. And I don't expect a different Gm to do any better. No data supports the idea that is likely. Possible, but highly unlikely. So two things:
1) imo, many here decided the Dg was terrible the minute he was hired by Accorsi. I thought actual performance was the criteria, not who he knew. If who you knew was the criteria that determined outcome, then Washington would have gone to jail along with the land speculators who hired him to "survey" into the Allegheny's. Performance across an appropriate performance timeline in the job to judge is the metric. For everyone.
So to me, torturing the initial data into supporting an emotional hot take is not going to get us to be one of the upper 5 teams in the NFL over 10 years.
In a prior discussion GD insightfully bought up the Norwell decision loop. ( which if successful and if it was the only move would have left Flowers at left tackle). If we knew all we needed to know about this sequence that would be a pretty bad misuse of dollars vs performance.
But none of us know outside of agent and media reporting some important items:
A) Did DG put a hard stop on Norwell's pay with enough to do better than Flowers? Did we lose Norwell of just no go over a number we thought was too much? ( again, don't care about words anyone said about Norwell. People flatter agents and FA all the time)
b) Did DG know if Solder was likely to be re signed or was truly open and available?
c) Did he know Omenah ( or however one spells that RG) was going to be that bad?
D) Did he hear from our bad scouts that there were more OL available in the draft than there turned out to be?
I have no idea. Neither do any of us. So im not there on the idea that its malpractice on this one thing alone.
Has the rebuild of the OL been good? Not at all. Not at all.
On our worse day do we deserve to be fired? Probably. That's why we hope to get ourselves an assessment based on average.
Do I think DG is on the way to getting us to a top 5 team level? Doubt it. But naming a new GM before this next FA/Draft sure doesn't give me confidence we wont miss a vital year of even getting to 50%.
I would like to see the scouting under someone else after this round so we can move on if we need to.
Claiming we could do better than our teams Gm is a go to reaction by most fans in most sports. So I don't think we can trade volume or claim many others say what we say as a reason to make a decision.
Again, to me, if the mess on the coaching staff is not significant this off season, I will join the chorus in claiming DG has to go sooner than later. That, not the mixed record on past choices made, is a big "tell" for me. Right now, pending more time to assess, fast action on obvious mistakes is imo, a big factor for judging Dg performance.
Hope he moves boldly to correct this. If not, Ill wait until someone tells me the Giants are watchable again.
That said he needs to recognize it's a results business and Shurmur and Bettcher's results are pretty much indefensible. There are other coaches out there who have done a lot more with less. Reich and Kingsbury are 2 examples this year who are succeeding despite difficult circumstances. Each of the last 2 years Shurmur/Bettcher have had non-ideal circumstances but their abject failures need to be recognized and if necessary changes must be made.
How do you remove the best team from the data set and still end up with a winning percentage above .500 in a zero sum environment?
Those of us who have suffered through the very dark 70's (as bad as too many of our 1st round picks have been, Rocky Thompson was the low-water point) have some perspective on today's troubles.
I generally agree with the OP and he (I assume) makes many excellent points. Where we may diverge is (adumbrated in Mara's being 'loyal to a fault') that I would like the Mara family to take a giant (ha) step back and become more fans than actors involved in the weeds.
After all, we got George Young (my favourite exec) through Rozelle's intervention with the Mara family.
A critique of Young may be that he eventually failed to recognize changes in the game. I think the need to accommodate to the current changes is a good take-away from the post. I'm not so convinced that DG is the best guy to do that.
Quote:
Outside of the Patriots the ten year winning percentage of all other 31 teams is 51%.
How do you remove the best team from the data set and still end up with a winning percentage above .500 in a zero sum environment?
That said, your overall point is well taken and I do agree that we should hope that we all get judged on the aggregate body of our work and not just on our worst days. I think that Gettleman simply doesn't have enough days on the job to fairly balance out some of his worst decisions to date, and that it is fair to say that he deserves more time simply as a matter of judgment in a macro sense. I don't think that's unreasonable - where I get frustrated is when fans try to make the case that Gettleman is doing a great job and should be beyond reproach. Based on what, exactly?
Personally, I think that some of Gettleman's missteps stem from a fundamental philosophy that may be antiquated, in which case they're not simply unlucky outcomes of otherwise defensible decisions.
And I think that some of his missteps are very consistent with the verbal bluster of his persona (such as trying to take all of his dead money medicine in one year and then having to restructure two underperforming vets in Solder and Ellison when it turned out that he had bitten off more than he could chew), but I admit that I'm connecting those two things myself because of the way that I find myself reacting to his personality and his tendency to remind media and fans of his resume rather than simply just doing a great job and letting that do his talking for him.
Do I think that Gettleman is running the ship into the ground? It's hard to say that with certainty, but I can't rule it out. And I think there's a lot about his performance to date that makes me think that his regime is really just an addendum to the Reese regime (and by extension, the Accorsi era), with both Reese and Gettleman displaying some Peter Principle tendencies that make me think they probably were excellent lieutenants for EA, and both much weaker as GMs themselves, especially when neither had an equivalent of themselves to rely on the way EA did.
As you well know.
If I may paraphrase to make sure I got it?
If our objection is that the Giants knew him from before...eh, that doesn't mean much to me. Knowing an organization, leaving it and coming back is often a good blend of distance yet shortens time being mistrusted by the incumbent and the organization. They speak the same language, know you cant find John on his Tuesday golf game or whatever.
And I agree that most of the world fails upward.
But the real concern is not fresh blood. Its the instincts and insights as to what works best learned in a whole different era of football.
I accept that. But few proven new age GMs proved it in this era. And the early adopters that did are too busy painting their masterpieces to revert to the new mean and then extract rent from repeating themselves.
That's why to me, escape velocity from a sport inside a set of rules now designed for overall TV revenue from multiple markets is now entertainment with casino like odds.
Multi year TV buys pick on lower than average ratings in metro-markets to unbundle the pricing. its a slippery slope from there. Hence how for example, Walmart disaggregates Coke and Pepsi pricing and destroyed Nabisco.
Food for further thought.
Thanks
Quote:
And those that are crying about it not being formatted the way they want is....just...so typical society right now. Read it...ain't that hard and you ain't that dumb
I do think this is off base
I don't think it is indicative of society. Why is the burden on us to absorb a poorly formatted block of text? Why should we have to muddle through a wall of words to parse out messages? It doesn't have to do with intelligence, it has to do with courtesy. Putting that much time into a post that will likely not be read because it is unreadable and then casting blame on the readers is more indicative of society. Lack of accountability or personal responsibility.
In fact, it was the software's fault!!
Quote:
In comment 14682836 Bill2 said:
Quote:
Outside of the Patriots the ten year winning percentage of all other 31 teams is 51%.
How do you remove the best team from the data set and still end up with a winning percentage above .500 in a zero sum environment?
That said, your overall point is well taken and I do agree that we should hope that we all get judged on the aggregate body of our work and not just on our worst days. I think that Gettleman simply doesn't have enough days on the job to fairly balance out some of his worst decisions to date, and that it is fair to say that he deserves more time simply as a matter of judgment in a macro sense. I don't think that's unreasonable - where I get frustrated is when fans try to make the case that Gettleman is doing a great job and should be beyond reproach. Based on what, exactly?
Personally, I think that some of Gettleman's missteps stem from a fundamental philosophy that may be antiquated, in which case they're not simply unlucky outcomes of otherwise defensible decisions.
And I think that some of his missteps are very consistent with the verbal bluster of his persona (such as trying to take all of his dead money medicine in one year and then having to restructure two underperforming vets in Solder and Ellison when it turned out that he had bitten off more than he could chew), but I admit that I'm connecting those two things myself because of the way that I find myself reacting to his personality and his tendency to remind media and fans of his resume rather than simply just doing a great job and letting that do his talking for him.
Do I think that Gettleman is running the ship into the ground? It's hard to say that with certainty, but I can't rule it out. And I think there's a lot about his performance to date that makes me think that his regime is really just an addendum to the Reese regime (and by extension, the Accorsi era), with both Reese and Gettleman displaying some Peter Principle tendencies that make me think they probably were excellent lieutenants for EA, and both much weaker as GMs themselves, especially when neither had an equivalent of themselves to rely on the way EA did.
Except he did a good job as GM in Carolina and also made the right calls as to whether to re-sign players or not -he just happened to not want to sign the owners favorite player the Lbr..oops but he was proven it was the right call after all is said and done -and Norman was over rated. But the players he did draft played a big part in helping that team get to the Super Bowl.
Barkley - huge disappointment this year. Yes, the o-line stinks, but they stunk last year too.
Hernandez - has been a functional starter, but as Sy has pointed out, he hasn't improved at all from last year.
Carter - he'll make a play or two per game and be invisible aside from those.
Hill - He's been so good this year that the Giants are willing to pay through the nose in picks and a future FA contract for Leonard Williams.
Lauletta - gone
McIntosh - zero impact
Beal - Has only just now gotten on the field after a year and a half. We'll see what he does if he can stay on it.
Jones - has shown much more than expected. Still has a long way to go.
Lawrence - has the makings of an impact player. We'll see if he gets there.
Baker - major disappointment. Has had his moments but has also looked really bad sometimes, plus seems to have a questionable motor.
Ximenes - little impact. Looks slow as molasses out there.
Love - has had trouble getting on the field despite Bethea being a disaster. We'll see how he does now that he's getting some burn.
Connelly - was looking like a steal in his brief stint before the ACL. Hope he can come back 100%.
D. Slayton - pleasant surprise, but he looks more like a future Mario Manningham than a Nicks or Cruz.
Asafo-Adjei - IR, probably never amounts to anything
C. Slayton - practice squad
So there it is. Hardly an eye-opening collection of talent.
I would say that it is likely that many teams 2-year drafts looks similar or worse. I don't see what the big issue is here.
About 10 of those guys have been starting for the Giants at one point or another this year. That either shows the lack of talent that was here to begin with, or that the drafting was done well these last 2 years or a combination of the two.
Not many teams get 10 starters out of the most recent 2 year draft window.
As you well know.
I love these statistical arguments where the whole universe is am N=32
I did not define properly, which is a show stopper when discussing statistics.
Doesn't change the point at all. But GD was right to point it out
Quote:
In comment 14682884 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 14682836 Bill2 said:
Quote:
Outside of the Patriots the ten year winning percentage of all other 31 teams is 51%.
How do you remove the best team from the data set and still end up with a winning percentage above .500 in a zero sum environment?
That said, your overall point is well taken and I do agree that we should hope that we all get judged on the aggregate body of our work and not just on our worst days. I think that Gettleman simply doesn't have enough days on the job to fairly balance out some of his worst decisions to date, and that it is fair to say that he deserves more time simply as a matter of judgment in a macro sense. I don't think that's unreasonable - where I get frustrated is when fans try to make the case that Gettleman is doing a great job and should be beyond reproach. Based on what, exactly?
Personally, I think that some of Gettleman's missteps stem from a fundamental philosophy that may be antiquated, in which case they're not simply unlucky outcomes of otherwise defensible decisions.
And I think that some of his missteps are very consistent with the verbal bluster of his persona (such as trying to take all of his dead money medicine in one year and then having to restructure two underperforming vets in Solder and Ellison when it turned out that he had bitten off more than he could chew), but I admit that I'm connecting those two things myself because of the way that I find myself reacting to his personality and his tendency to remind media and fans of his resume rather than simply just doing a great job and letting that do his talking for him.
Do I think that Gettleman is running the ship into the ground? It's hard to say that with certainty, but I can't rule it out. And I think there's a lot about his performance to date that makes me think that his regime is really just an addendum to the Reese regime (and by extension, the Accorsi era), with both Reese and Gettleman displaying some Peter Principle tendencies that make me think they probably were excellent lieutenants for EA, and both much weaker as GMs themselves, especially when neither had an equivalent of themselves to rely on the way EA did.
Except he did a good job as GM in Carolina and also made the right calls as to whether to re-sign players or not -he just happened to not want to sign the owners favorite player the Lbr..oops but he was proven it was the right call after all is said and done -and Norman was over rated. But the players he did draft played a big part in helping that team get to the Super Bowl.
I doubt we'll see eye to eye on this because I get the sense that you generally prop up the positive things Gettleman has done and flat out ignore the negatives. That's fine; it's your prerogative to root how you choose, but I don't think it's particularly rooted in reality.
If you want to bring up Gettleman's time in Carolina, here's an interesting perspective from a Panthers' fan, written about a year ago:
We all know that the best NFL teams with the most sustainable rosters are built by developing young talent through the draft. With that in mind, I did a breakdown of Dave Gettleman's draft picks. To make a long story short, it is not pretty.
Between 2013 and 2017 Dave Gettleman drafted 29 players. Of those 29, only 15 are still with the team. Of that 15, only 9 are players that are starters or can be considered "starting caliber."
15 players on the team: Kawann Short, Kenjon Barner, Trai Turner, Shaq Thompson, Devin Funchess, Daryl Williams, David Mayo, Cameron Artis-Payne, Vernon Butler, James Bradberry, Christian McCaffrey, Curtis Samuel, Taylor Moton, Corn Elder, Alex Armah.
The 9 players I consider "starting caliber" are: Short, Turner, Thompson, Funchess, Williams, Bradberry, McCaffrey, Samuel, and Moton. (Of course, this is debatable.)
Of the 29 players drafted by Gettleman, only two have made Pro Bowls: Short and Turner. (Although I don't see a scenario where McCaffrey doesn't make it this year, so call it three. It's also very likely that Alex Armah makes it as a fullback.)
Of the 29 players drafted by Gettleman, 8 of them are no longer in the league with ANY team. That's nearly a third of the players he drafted. They are: Kugbila, Benjamin, Ealy, Benwikere, Gaffney, Sanchez, Sandland, and Hall.
One concession I'll make is that three players drafted by Gettleman are starting caliber for other teams: Lotulelei, Klein, and Boston.
Note that two of the players listed as still on the Panthers' roster (Mayo and Elder) as of that post have since done a turn with the Giants.
The post doesn't give him credit for UDFA Andrew Norwell and Corey Brown, so I don't think he was quite as unsuccessful as that makes it sound, but also far from an overwhelming success.
Reddit r/Panthers: How Dave Gettleman's draft picks have crippled this team - ( New Window )
Quote:
The legend of Gettleman's drafting is getting more outsized with every telling.
Barkley - huge disappointment this year. Yes, the o-line stinks, but they stunk last year too.
Hernandez - has been a functional starter, but as Sy has pointed out, he hasn't improved at all from last year.
Carter - he'll make a play or two per game and be invisible aside from those.
Hill - He's been so good this year that the Giants are willing to pay through the nose in picks and a future FA contract for Leonard Williams.
Lauletta - gone
McIntosh - zero impact
Beal - Has only just now gotten on the field after a year and a half. We'll see what he does if he can stay on it.
Jones - has shown much more than expected. Still has a long way to go.
Lawrence - has the makings of an impact player. We'll see if he gets there.
Baker - major disappointment. Has had his moments but has also looked really bad sometimes, plus seems to have a questionable motor.
Ximenes - little impact. Looks slow as molasses out there.
Love - has had trouble getting on the field despite Bethea being a disaster. We'll see how he does now that he's getting some burn.
Connelly - was looking like a steal in his brief stint before the ACL. Hope he can come back 100%.
D. Slayton - pleasant surprise, but he looks more like a future Mario Manningham than a Nicks or Cruz.
Asafo-Adjei - IR, probably never amounts to anything
C. Slayton - practice squad
So there it is. Hardly an eye-opening collection of talent.
I would say that it is likely that many teams 2-year drafts looks similar or worse. I don't see what the big issue is here.
About 10 of those guys have been starting for the Giants at one point or another this year. That either shows the lack of talent that was here to begin with, or that the drafting was done well these last 2 years or a combination of the two.
Not many teams get 10 starters out of the most recent 2 year draft window.
If it's too early to judge a draft class as a negative, isn't it also premature to declare it a success? A lot of Reese's drafts were brimming with optimism in their first year or two, only to never receive a 2nd contract here (in some cases, anywhere).
This goes right to my point - this team is just as bad, if not worse, than when Gettleman took over. It's a results-oriented business, and the results speak for themselves. The key elements that Gettleman spoke about when he took over the team - run the ball, stop the run, rush the passer - are not materially better than before he arrived. The "hog mollies" he promised to deliver have not arrived in any way that has resulted in wins.
If you choose to subscribe to a view that Gettleman's actions so far have been to the benefit of the long-term competitiveness of the team, you're doing so purely on fan-based blind optimism. I salute that - I think it's a perfectly fair way to approach being a fan. But just be honest with yourself that it's not coming from an objective standpoint.
You (and the OP and anyone else) can tell me that what Gettleman's done so far is working, but that really is just an opinion. In order for it to be a fact, we might have to actually improve our winning percentage.
You (and the OP and anyone else) can tell me that what Gettleman's done so far is working, but that really is just an opinion. In order for it to be a fact, we might have to actually improve our winning percentage.
True - but it's a process that takes time. There needs to be patience. DG has been on the job less than two years and there are a lot of young players. I'm willing to wait and see how it plays out, rather than saying the sky os falling.
Quote:
You (and the OP and anyone else) can tell me that what Gettleman's done so far is working, but that really is just an opinion. In order for it to be a fact, we might have to actually improve our winning percentage.
True - but it's a process that takes time. There needs to be patience. DG has been on the job less than two years and there are a lot of young players. I'm willing to wait and see how it plays out, rather than saying the sky os falling.
How about saying the opposite - that we're in fact primed to be possibly the best Giants team ever?
Quote:
You (and the OP and anyone else) can tell me that what Gettleman's done so far is working, but that really is just an opinion. In order for it to be a fact, we might have to actually improve our winning percentage.
True - but it's a process that takes time. There needs to be patience. DG has been on the job less than two years and there are a lot of young players. I'm willing to wait and see how it plays out, rather than saying the sky os falling.
Well this is the part that's difficult and probably unfair for Gettleman, though it's a level playing field for all GMs in all sports: we can see his mistakes clearly, and quickly, but the positives might take more time to emerge.
But I think anyone who is being fair would like to see fewer mistakes this far. The process may take time, true, but proper self-scouting of the roster would have prevented some of the mistakes, better scouting of free agents would have prevented a few more, more efficient management of the cap could have prevented a few more as well.
The constant blaming of the mess left by Reese is growing tiresome (not that you've made that claim, but many do), when Gettleman has made enough messes on his own that he does merit some questioning independent of whatever shoddy roster he inherited.
Like I said, I do understand that it takes time. But IMO a lot of Gettleman's most vocal supporters really just like his rhetoric and don't even bother trying to parse his results to date.
As to the Dave Gettleman neurosis on BBI, the concept is actually a bit complex. General Managers absolutely deserve adequate time to develop & implement their views/strategies, allow for execution and assessment, and modify and adjust accordingly but largely stick to the same core agenda.
However, DG used up about a year or so to actually determine his core agenda. And in doing so only delayed the inevitable while putting pressure on himself because of poor results during his self-inflicted misstep process. Moreso, he was a big spender during this feeling out process and not a shedder of salaries only making this uphill battle even tougher.
He had a team that needed a full-blown restructuring but he wholly underestimated that concept (massively actually). He kept Eli in charge of the offense and on the payroll and then started making free agent decisions that are nowhere near aligned with a move towards the restructuring that was required such as making Solder the highest paid OL in the game, trading away picks and adding a fairly average, flawed linebacker in Ogletree to a nice size deal as well as adding other moronic non-value added pieces like Jonathan Stewart as an example. I can add drafting a prize thoroughbread to the mix when our positional desperation (excuse me...need) may have been elsewhere but lets just save that argument for another thread.
Simply put...DG kind of screwed up. But again, GMs deserve some time.
So should that time be given to the GM that mis-stepped right off the bat or the one that generally has the right mindset and only needs a longer rope before he can show the rewards of his strong core decisions.
before he hangs himself with it...
They were also savvy enough to draft outstanding prospects at the same position a few years apart. And they were able to actually develop many of these players.
It's awfully optimistic to simply think we can follow their blueprint.
My take on the decisions that are contradictory to a core direction are:
A) I don't know if he mis read Eli's decline ( or constricting playbook absent a good OL) or was stuck with the contract and tried to extract time to strengthen other facets of an empty roster. Or thought the exact right QB was worth it if he got him within a 2 year window. Don't know
B) Solder was a gamble that if performance and health, bought time to get the second hardest/risk piece of the puzzle.
C) Lesser mistakes that are annoyances but not crippling.
To me, the apparent zig and zag shorten the typical GM window if they are followed by:
1) offseason window dressing on the coaching.
This is where GD's point about him being possibly from a different era of football will show up. To me, the radical shortening of practice time in the last years radically increases the importance of front line positional coaching.
(And it also places new emphasis on the scouting of players who can make a transition from a wider range of players from college, not pro styles of play)
2) To me, the pay for performance windows,structure and optionality of most of the FA acquisitions, not their stated dollar numbers, tells us if he kept cap churn rather than ossification in mind. In our situation, Id rather see more FA in the second tier than tied up in only a few harder to jettison contracts.
One of the reasons its hard to get above 50% for any length of time in the NFL is that the lifespan of the average asset is 4 years with a 30% chance of sizeable injury lost time in that 4 years. Those are tough odds to offset if sustained success is the goal.
One of the hallmarks of the prior eras of football was the tendency to acquire and build on stable assets rather than be willing to embrace the roster churn levels the Patriots consider the path to success.
I don't think the Giants gain much (and do add risk) by a firing out of cycle with a risky unproven GM pool. But I do think the lurches shorten patience with a 5 year cycle absent impatience with the shortcomings of the team ( coaching) that we can do something about and actions that show he understands how to structure contract risk out of longer term pay for performance declines.
I believe you expressed a similar sentiment above. Just to make clear, there were numerous alternatives that off season.
The Patriots opted not to sign Solder and instead traded for Trent Brown who played admirably for the Pats.
The 2018 draft included numerous OTs that are starting around the league:
LT:
Mike McGlinchey
Kolton Miller
Isiah Wynn
Brian O'Niell (started at both LT and RT)
RT:
Orlando Brown
Joseph Noteboom
There have also been several tackles moved inside to G, and it is unclear if that is permanent or just a way to get them on the field and part of their development.
Certainly any of the play of the LTs listed above has been far superior to Solder. I tend to believe that even Brown and Noteboom could have held down the fort at LT until a better choice was selected, and then move them over to the right side. Same for some of the guards.
Focusing on Solder, and giving DG a pass because most of us do not have insight into other teams players and availabilities as well as draftable targets is overly generous. DG is supposed to be a professional, when so many amateurs on a message board can foresee and predict the folly of many of his moves, it doesn't bode well.
BUT-
Since Macadoo, though, it's starting to look as though the version of wco our leaders apparently want to run is restricting the development and outcomes of our OL unit members.
So flip the narrative now:
Perhaps the way to flip that script is ditch the wco altogether.
Look around the league there are run blocking systems that are O line friendly, run blocking centric, and yet which can be tightly uncorporated into play action or rpo etc.
That could be achieved with a D centric head coach and a new particular O and OL staff broadly. And, no, I don't think it's a wasted year for Danny Jones.
Live reps are live reps and some of the shurms pass concepts can be incorporated into all that.
Without discussing specifics I just want to say....THANK YOU and to give you a Cyber man hug. This is a well thought out and backed nicely with great details and conclusions. I am VERY impressed. I especially am impressed with you rebutting Eric’s post because when I read Eric’s thread on fixing the Giants, I too thought he was missing it, but unlike you, I didn’t want to confront him because.....well, he is the boss, right?
But there is one thing I do want to fully agree with you on.....DG May not be perfect, but he is certainly good enough and does have us on the right path. I sure hope he is not let go (for now, I don’t really care about Shurmur).
Anyhow....welcome aboard and thanks for coming out of the closet here.
2. Drafts where opportunity was there for OL but drafted "talent " instead (Reese during little fella but nice guy David Wilson when OL greats were there ).
3. Forcing OL pick due to mistakes of prior years (flowers).
4. Forcing faulty "WCO light" system in team (Macadoo, Shurmer) at a time when still dealing with prior JR years unbalanced roster. Such system which impedes OL outcomes given not having the very rare specialized unit coaches and schematic overall being too passive vs today's D fronts
Creating a negative feedback loop as the OL situation now vacuumes resources away from defense .