typically tied to an overly optimistic view on what could happen. The reason why so many new businesses fail. Right now there are a bunch of guys that could be something.
Guys like Baker, Beal, Love, Ballentine, Lawrence right now they have yet to prove that they're even JAG level. But its easy to project that they will soon surpass that and become good players.
Right now, the Giants have a bottom three roster in the league. Maybe Miami and Cinci are worse. Do we want the man who got us here shopping for the rest? I do not.
typically tied to an overly optimistic view on what could happen. The reason why so many new businesses fail. Right now there are a bunch of guys that could be something.
Guys like Baker, Beal, Love, Ballentine, Lawrence right now they have yet to prove that they're even JAG level. But its easy to project that they will soon surpass that and become good players.
Right now, the Giants have a bottom three roster in the league. Maybe Miami and Cinci are worse. Do we want the man who got us here shopping for the rest? I do not.
Jim, this is completely spot on. The assumption all the unproven guys will succeed is illogical. History says several will fall short.
New doesn't by definition mean better. They are only better when they prove it.
Really assuming those players will improve? I think a lot of us are simply saying they are still unknown who should be given adequate time with competent coaches to see their value.
When you draft players high they ARE building blocks whether they play like it or not out of the box, thus the time needed to see if they are the player you hoped for when drafted.
Players in later rounds are typically added to be depth or contributors who may take longer to show their worth.
Really assuming those players will improve? I think a lot of us are simply saying they are still unknown who should be given adequate time with competent coaches to see their value.
Crick, it does seem as though there are several posters who not only are assuming those players will improve, but even some who act as though those players are all but assured of reaching the most promising projection of their potential.
How else is one supposed to read the dozens of posts that talk about how great DG's drafts have been? The only rational view of his drafts so far is that any grade at all is an incomplete. But that's not the way it's positioned by at least a handful of fans here on BBI who dismiss each DG misstep as a justifiable one-off event, but somehow see a positive trend where there are not yet any results to support that view.
Really assuming those players will improve? I think a lot of us are simply saying they are still unknown who should be given adequate time with competent coaches to see their value.
When you draft players high they ARE building blocks whether they play like it or not out of the box, thus the time needed to see if they are the player you hoped for when drafted.
Players in later rounds are typically added to be depth or contributors who may take longer to show their worth.
That's fair. So with a roster with a significant number of players that fit that bill, would that be a roster to like (assuming that means happy with and confident in).
Or would that be closer to a roster to be hopeful for, but reasonably skeptical?
the premise of the thread is OP likes the roster.. Â
Really assuming those players will improve? I think a lot of us are simply saying they are still unknown who should be given adequate time with competent coaches to see their value.
Crick, it does seem as though there are several posters who not only are assuming those players will improve, but even some who act as though those players are all but assured of reaching the most promising projection of their potential.
How else is one supposed to read the dozens of posts that talk about how great DG's drafts have been? The only rational view of his drafts so far is that any grade at all is an incomplete. But that's not the way it's positioned by at least a handful of fans here on BBI who dismiss each DG misstep as a justifiable one-off event, but somehow see a positive trend where there are not yet any results to support that view.
Gator, I see your point.
From my view most Gettleman discussions are traveling on a two way road. One way is positive, one way is negative. Neither side cares to slow down enough to hear and discuss in a civil manner what each individual's thoughts are without injecting conclusions that may not have happened yet (like saying drafts are incomplete, you're right, they are incomplete).
I'd say in reality most of us are protecting our opinions to future conclusions without admitting that most likely we still have some road to travel to get to those conclusions.
Really assuming those players will improve? I think a lot of us are simply saying they are still unknown who should be given adequate time with competent coaches to see their value.
When you draft players high they ARE building blocks whether they play like it or not out of the box, thus the time needed to see if they are the player you hoped for when drafted.
Players in later rounds are typically added to be depth or contributors who may take longer to show their worth.
That's fair. So with a roster with a significant number of players that fit that bill, would that be a roster to like (assuming that means happy with and confident in).
Or would that be closer to a roster to be hopeful for, but reasonably skeptical?
Fair question Christian. It's ok to like or dislike the roster. The disconnect comes when the discussion turns into a competition of right and wrong. I haven't waded into the waters of right and wrong yet, I'm still waiting. I feel like the coaching staff has delayed my decision even longer, although I am not holding that hostage to not make a decision. I really believe what I write while trying my best to be self aware enough to understand that I am the one missing or not seeing correctly.
Debates can be fun as long as they are handled with respect and honesty. Fierce competition on right and wrong happens a lot here, and I don't see any good in that.
RE: RE: The reason Britt won’t throw DG under the bus as well Â
Is because that would be admitting he was wrong about a bunch of things.
It's not just that.
Gettleman is tied to the glory years, so he has Britt's loyalty and admiration right out of the box. Shurmur is not connected to the TC/Eli era at all, so Britt can actually view him objectively.
That's quite an assumption. Frankly, I just like Gettleman's philosophy. I also believe that this game is still won and lost in the by running the ball and rushing the passer. I actually liked the moves that he's made when he's made them, and I can see him trying to fulfill his plan. Have they all worked out? No. But I do like his ability to cut bait quickly rather than continue to try and force things.
I also like that he stated conviction about when/how to draft a QB, which according to many on BBI was the single biggest thing that had to be done. He stuck to his guns on what a QB should look like, and seeing Daniel Jones play I agree with his decision 100%.
As far Saquon goes, I look at what he did in Carolina drafting McCaffrey and was nailed to the wall for doing so, but that pick is looking pretty decent this year too.
At the end of the day, we got the stud RB AND the QB in subsequent drafts. I'm good with that. I'm good with Dexer Lawrence. I'm good with Will Hernandez. I can see what he's doing with those picks. I just like his process right now. That's it.
The ONLY tie to the glory years that I care about is the philosophy.
Only thing funnier than the OP's statement that he likes the roster Â
I also believe that this game is still won and lost in the by running the ball and rushing the passer. I actually liked the moves that he's made when he's made them, and I can see him trying to fulfill his plan. Have they all worked out? No. But I do like his ability to cut bait quickly rather than continue to try and force things.
Do you feel Gettleman has done a good job of acquiring players in the pursuit of a good run game? Has he succeeded at that?
Jones, Lawrence, Barkley, Hernandez, Connelly especially. Those 5 are hopefully 1/4 of our starting lineup for the next 5-10 years and Gettleman deserves credit for selecting them.
Williams, Hill, Tomlinson, Carter, Slayton, Engram, and all the DB's may or may not also be part of that core but at minimum are role players.
The coaching staff has done a terrible job turning what could be a competitive team into a doormat. Teams with worse talent and more injuries (Oakland, NYJ, Miami, Washington) are playing more competitively than we are. That is 100% on the coaching staff.
I agree, he looked good, but it was the smallest sample size imaginable and the guy will be coming back from an ACL reconstruction.
6 quarters and 3-4(?) preseason games, and a lot of what we saw looked a lot like his highlights from Wisconsin - the guy makes reads and has quickness to attack the backfield we hadn't seen in over a decade.
RE: RE: RE: RE: The reason Britt won’t throw DG under the bus as well Â
I also believe that this game is still won and lost in the by running the ball and rushing the passer. I actually liked the moves that he's made when he's made them, and I can see him trying to fulfill his plan. Have they all worked out? No. But I do like his ability to cut bait quickly rather than continue to try and force things.
Do you feel Gettleman has done a good job of acquiring players in the pursuit of a good run game? Has he succeeded at that?
It is really hard to tell because the coaching is piss poor. DG was the guy who hired him and his clown car of a staff so I'm leaning he can go to now. I won't be upset either way.
Yeah, when you (general) call somebody a pom pom waving pollyanna.... Â
that serves up whatever dish du jour ownership is selling (as if they are trying to con me and I'm some idiot for buying into it) rather than having the ability to be both optimistic and objective at the same time, yeah, that feels a little insulting.
And, since you're the one trying to pump up the roster of a 2-10 team, the burden of proof falls on you, I'm afraid.
Being shouted down rapid fire when you try to provide any burden of proof from thread to thread with the same things beaten to death gets a little exhausting.
At least we can all agree the coaching sucks.
RE: Quickness....hmmmm....nah, no way could that be impacted Â
Completely fair to have some doubt about how he comes back from injury, but in reference to Gettleman isn't it that he made the pick? Nobody can predict injuries. Dalvin Cook tore his ACL in game 4, was still a good pick even though it took him a while to come back.
RE: RE: Productive? What is ever productive about a message board? Â
And, since you're the one trying to pump up the roster of a 2-10 team, the burden of proof falls on you, I'm afraid.
Being shouted down rapid fire when you try to provide any burden of proof from thread to thread with the same things beaten to death gets a little exhausting.
At least we can all agree the coaching sucks.
If consensus is what you're after, you can just realize that objective and optimistic can't really share a bedroom for a franchise that has won 10 games in three years, especially with a GM from the owner's crony network who can't decide whether he's rebuilding or reloading for a playoff run.
I just don't think you can give Connelly any grade but Incomplete Â
He did look good in that brief stint, but that's it. I put zero stock into preseason performances.
Any draft pick will get an 'incomplete' until they produce over an extended enough period of time to warrant a 2nd contract or not. Jones is an incomplete right now despite playing twice as many games as Connelly but he looks good. Mayfield and Darnold are still incompletes in year 2. Any of our opinions are speculation - and that's what GM's do, they speculate that the guys they pick will pan out. Decisions get made based on speculation, not after the results are known.
Even after 6 quarters as you put it I'd be comfortable speculating that a healthy Connelly is a positive impact starting LB. The healthy part is a legitimate question going forward but I still credit DG for acquiring the 5 guys I mentioned because I'd be comfortable similarly speculating that they are all positive impact starters and in Connelly's case there was no way to predict he'd get hurt at the time he was selected other than it's the NFL and injuries happen.
are just as many gaps on the roster today compared to when Gettleman got his security pass two years ago. We have issues on the offensive line, receiver, pass rushing, linebackers, secondary and special teams. There are promising youngsters but also a bunch of unknowns.
Gettleman is a good college scout and some rookies and second year players have flashed; but so far does a piss poor job of managing a roster. He gets rid of talented players he inherited who he doesn’t bond with and brings in damaged goods who are supposed locker room champions who flat out suck. And he was involved in hiring Shurmur - probably because It’s Pat! would be humble and deferential to his ways of working.
So yeah Its Pat! Has gotta go but DG should be on the hot seat in 2020.
members of the Resume Dave Fan Club go study his "great drafts" in Carolina from 2013 to 2017.
My guess is members of the Resume Dave Fan Club in Charlotte really "liked" those drafts too. But that team was really built by Marty Hurney. Check out his drafts from 2002 - 2012 compared to Resume Dave's.
For example:
Julius Pepper, DeShaun Foster, Chris Gamble, Jordan Gross, Thomas Davis, DeAngelo Williams, Ryan Kalil, Cam Newton, Luke Kuechly, etc.
members of the Resume Dave Fan Club go study his "great drafts" in Carolina from 2013 to 2017.
My guess is members of the Resume Dave Fan Club in Charlotte really "liked" those drafts too. But that team was really built by Marty Hurney. Check out his drafts from 2002 - 2012 compared to Resume Dave's.
For example:
Julius Pepper, DeShaun Foster, Chris Gamble, Jordan Gross, Thomas Davis, DeAngelo Williams, Ryan Kalil, Cam Newton, Luke Kuechly, etc.
Haven't many of those guys been gone for years? Like Gettleman got rid of them or they were gone pre-DG? Browsing the best players on their current roster, many are gettleman picks starting with Mccaffrey no? Kawann Short, Trai Turner, Curtis Samuel, James Bradberry, Shaq Thompson.
In contrast 2 years later what do we (or the entire league) have left from Reese drafts those few years? Engram, Shepard, Tomlinson, and Apple?
Fair question Christian. It's ok to like or dislike the roster. The disconnect comes when the discussion turns into a competition of right and wrong. I haven't waded into the waters of right and wrong yet, I'm still waiting. I feel like the coaching staff has delayed my decision even longer, although I am not holding that hostage to not make a decision. I really believe what I write while trying my best to be self aware enough to understand that I am the one missing or not seeing correctly.
Debates can be fun as long as they are handled with respect and honesty. Fierce competition on right and wrong happens a lot here, and I don't see any good in that.
Crick, I applaud this new found temperance, self awareness, and diplomacy on your part.
But lets not pretend that you haven't been one of the leaders of the divisiveness here. In the past you have been very quick to call people names and use foul language rather than make a real point yourself. It seemed like you were taking your cues from another poster from your your state.
I wonder if this turn is because the state of the team has made your core positions regarding the Giants untenable to continue to defend, or if this is something more permanent. I hope for the latter, I for one will give you the benefit of the doubt for now. But I would not be surprised with a return to past ways.
Fair question Christian. It's ok to like or dislike the roster. The disconnect comes when the discussion turns into a competition of right and wrong. I haven't waded into the waters of right and wrong yet, I'm still waiting. I feel like the coaching staff has delayed my decision even longer, although I am not holding that hostage to not make a decision. I really believe what I write while trying my best to be self aware enough to understand that I am the one missing or not seeing correctly.
Debates can be fun as long as they are handled with respect and honesty. Fierce competition on right and wrong happens a lot here, and I don't see any good in that.
Crick, I applaud this new found temperance, self awareness, and diplomacy on your part.
But lets not pretend that you haven't been one of the leaders of the divisiveness here. In the past you have been very quick to call people names and use foul language rather than make a real point yourself. It seemed like you were taking your cues from another poster from your your state.
I wonder if this turn is because the state of the team has made your core positions regarding the Giants untenable to continue to defend, or if this is something more permanent. I hope for the latter, I for one will give you the benefit of the doubt for now. But I would not be surprised with a return to past ways.
Mcl, I'm afraid you have me mixed up with someone else. I don't remember the last time I used foul language or called anyone any name other than their handle, it's not my style.
Fair question Christian. It's ok to like or dislike the roster. The disconnect comes when the discussion turns into a competition of right and wrong. I haven't waded into the waters of right and wrong yet, I'm still waiting. I feel like the coaching staff has delayed my decision even longer, although I am not holding that hostage to not make a decision. I really believe what I write while trying my best to be self aware enough to understand that I am the one missing or not seeing correctly.
Debates can be fun as long as they are handled with respect and honesty. Fierce competition on right and wrong happens a lot here, and I don't see any good in that.
Crick, I applaud this new found temperance, self awareness, and diplomacy on your part.
But lets not pretend that you haven't been one of the leaders of the divisiveness here. In the past you have been very quick to call people names and use foul language rather than make a real point yourself. It seemed like you were taking your cues from another poster from your your state.
I wonder if this turn is because the state of the team has made your core positions regarding the Giants untenable to continue to defend, or if this is something more permanent. I hope for the latter, I for one will give you the benefit of the doubt for now. But I would not be surprised with a return to past ways.
Mcl, I'm afraid you have me mixed up with someone else. I don't remember the last time I used foul language or called anyone any name other than their handle, it's not my style.
You've done it with me, more than once.
And you have certainly encouraged the other other poster to whom I am referring.
Again, I believe you are mistaken. I don't even cuss at Googs. I doubt I've even addressed you with any kind of attitude. We have probably responded to each other's posts under ten times. You and I don't typically converse.
You're boostering for Gettleman because he supposedly drafted the core of Carolina's current team.....the team that's 5-7 and has lost four straight, including most recently against the Redskins? Very strong endorsement there!
Again, I believe you are mistaken. I don't even cuss at Googs. I doubt I've even addressed you with any kind of attitude. We have probably responded to each other's posts under ten times. You and I don't typically converse.
I don't think you do cuss at me. Why the call out though?
Again, I believe you are mistaken. I don't even cuss at Googs. I doubt I've even addressed you with any kind of attitude. We have probably responded to each other's posts under ten times. You and I don't typically converse.
I don't think you do cuss at me. Why the call out though?
is why he has made no changes other than starting Jones. It would have been such an easy win if after the bye week gave Shula playcalling duties so he could focus on more of the details, like game management, offensive line play and developing Jones. It sends the message to everybody, ownership included, that he recognizes there is a problem and he is willing to everything to fix that.
members of the Resume Dave Fan Club go study his "great drafts" in Carolina from 2013 to 2017.
My guess is members of the Resume Dave Fan Club in Charlotte really "liked" those drafts too. But that team was really built by Marty Hurney. Check out his drafts from 2002 - 2012 compared to Resume Dave's.
For example:
Julius Pepper, DeShaun Foster, Chris Gamble, Jordan Gross, Thomas Davis, DeAngelo Williams, Ryan Kalil, Cam Newton, Luke Kuechly, etc.
Haven't many of those guys been gone for years? Like Gettleman got rid of them or they were gone pre-DG? Browsing the best players on their current roster, many are gettleman picks starting with Mccaffrey no? Kawann Short, Trai Turner, Curtis Samuel, James Bradberry, Shaq Thompson.
In contrast 2 years later what do we (or the entire league) have left from Reese drafts those few years? Engram, Shepard, Tomlinson, and Apple?
After trading away OBJ for a few picks and letting Landon Collins go to a mega deal. Everyone shits on Collins but he had an All-Pro year here. Hernandez was picked in virtually the same spot as Collins, and if we're lucky he may one day be a better than average guard.
Again, I believe you are mistaken. I don't even cuss at Googs. I doubt I've even addressed you with any kind of attitude. We have probably responded to each other's posts under ten times. You and I don't typically converse.
I am not going to go back through all your comments. I may be wrong about cussing.
But you have certainly posted in support of others who were calling names and cussing...
Here is one example of a response to a poster who was cussing at me and said if he was wrong he would gladly piss out of his skull... Turns out he was wrong, and I haven't seen him pissing out of his skull yet.
The
crick n NC : 6/7/2019 6:04 pm : link
Quote:
Pissing out of my skull comment was funny
There have been other time you have supported this poster. So, it is possible that even though you may not have been the one posting crap yourself, supporting others when they do, isn't a good look and that is what has probably stuck in my mind about you as a poster.
I will say there have been a few reinforcing posts. I recall the time I was saying we had an average amount of cap space. Crick criticized my post harshly for being hyberbolic. And for being a "certain type of poster". You and I think GD defended me over a long conversation, saying I wasn't that kind of poster, and crick insisting that I was. I finally got on in the morning to explain that the last time I looked, SpotTrac had the Giants at 14th in a cluster of a bunch of teams. At the time SpotTrac was having a problem and was showing us much higher than we really were. Turns out when they fixed it, we were right back to 14th. But the cap is fluid based on in season signings. Then there was another post recently where he questioned my "self awareness". So, while we may not have interacted often, and I will say that we have almost never debated the merits of something, almost all of our interactions have been crick making a personal attack against me for something.
I will say that crick apologized for the cap space misunderstanding. The fact that he did apologize that one time gives me a reason to have respect for him and to observe more in the future, which as I said above, is something for which I am always willing. Even the other poster from his his state, though that is likely a lost cause.
Got it, but as mentioned earlier though...move on. Â
There was a small disturbed facet on here that acted in concert in defending bad positions with respect to the NY Giants. They have basically dissipated at this point so no need to keep piling on.
Quote:
Is because that would be admitting he was wrong about a bunch of things.
Wrong about what?
The difference between me and a lot of you is that I didn't have my mind made up on Gettleman from day one.
I think you did.
The talent gap is clear.
This roster sucks.
You continue to be delusional. Sorry.
Guys like Baker, Beal, Love, Ballentine, Lawrence right now they have yet to prove that they're even JAG level. But its easy to project that they will soon surpass that and become good players.
Right now, the Giants have a bottom three roster in the league. Maybe Miami and Cinci are worse. Do we want the man who got us here shopping for the rest? I do not.
Guys like Baker, Beal, Love, Ballentine, Lawrence right now they have yet to prove that they're even JAG level. But its easy to project that they will soon surpass that and become good players.
Right now, the Giants have a bottom three roster in the league. Maybe Miami and Cinci are worse. Do we want the man who got us here shopping for the rest? I do not.
Jim, this is completely spot on. The assumption all the unproven guys will succeed is illogical. History says several will fall short.
New doesn't by definition mean better. They are only better when they prove it.
When you draft players high they ARE building blocks whether they play like it or not out of the box, thus the time needed to see if they are the player you hoped for when drafted.
Players in later rounds are typically added to be depth or contributors who may take longer to show their worth.
Crick, it does seem as though there are several posters who not only are assuming those players will improve, but even some who act as though those players are all but assured of reaching the most promising projection of their potential.
How else is one supposed to read the dozens of posts that talk about how great DG's drafts have been? The only rational view of his drafts so far is that any grade at all is an incomplete. But that's not the way it's positioned by at least a handful of fans here on BBI who dismiss each DG misstep as a justifiable one-off event, but somehow see a positive trend where there are not yet any results to support that view.
When you draft players high they ARE building blocks whether they play like it or not out of the box, thus the time needed to see if they are the player you hoped for when drafted.
Players in later rounds are typically added to be depth or contributors who may take longer to show their worth.
That's fair. So with a roster with a significant number of players that fit that bill, would that be a roster to like (assuming that means happy with and confident in).
Or would that be closer to a roster to be hopeful for, but reasonably skeptical?
Quote:
Really assuming those players will improve? I think a lot of us are simply saying they are still unknown who should be given adequate time with competent coaches to see their value.
Crick, it does seem as though there are several posters who not only are assuming those players will improve, but even some who act as though those players are all but assured of reaching the most promising projection of their potential.
How else is one supposed to read the dozens of posts that talk about how great DG's drafts have been? The only rational view of his drafts so far is that any grade at all is an incomplete. But that's not the way it's positioned by at least a handful of fans here on BBI who dismiss each DG misstep as a justifiable one-off event, but somehow see a positive trend where there are not yet any results to support that view.
Gator, I see your point.
From my view most Gettleman discussions are traveling on a two way road. One way is positive, one way is negative. Neither side cares to slow down enough to hear and discuss in a civil manner what each individual's thoughts are without injecting conclusions that may not have happened yet (like saying drafts are incomplete, you're right, they are incomplete).
I'd say in reality most of us are protecting our opinions to future conclusions without admitting that most likely we still have some road to travel to get to those conclusions.
Quote:
Really assuming those players will improve? I think a lot of us are simply saying they are still unknown who should be given adequate time with competent coaches to see their value.
When you draft players high they ARE building blocks whether they play like it or not out of the box, thus the time needed to see if they are the player you hoped for when drafted.
Players in later rounds are typically added to be depth or contributors who may take longer to show their worth.
That's fair. So with a roster with a significant number of players that fit that bill, would that be a roster to like (assuming that means happy with and confident in).
Or would that be closer to a roster to be hopeful for, but reasonably skeptical?
Fair question Christian. It's ok to like or dislike the roster. The disconnect comes when the discussion turns into a competition of right and wrong. I haven't waded into the waters of right and wrong yet, I'm still waiting. I feel like the coaching staff has delayed my decision even longer, although I am not holding that hostage to not make a decision. I really believe what I write while trying my best to be self aware enough to understand that I am the one missing or not seeing correctly.
Debates can be fun as long as they are handled with respect and honesty. Fierce competition on right and wrong happens a lot here, and I don't see any good in that.
Quote:
Is because that would be admitting he was wrong about a bunch of things.
It's not just that.
Gettleman is tied to the glory years, so he has Britt's loyalty and admiration right out of the box. Shurmur is not connected to the TC/Eli era at all, so Britt can actually view him objectively.
That's quite an assumption. Frankly, I just like Gettleman's philosophy. I also believe that this game is still won and lost in the by running the ball and rushing the passer. I actually liked the moves that he's made when he's made them, and I can see him trying to fulfill his plan. Have they all worked out? No. But I do like his ability to cut bait quickly rather than continue to try and force things.
I also like that he stated conviction about when/how to draft a QB, which according to many on BBI was the single biggest thing that had to be done. He stuck to his guns on what a QB should look like, and seeing Daniel Jones play I agree with his decision 100%.
As far Saquon goes, I look at what he did in Carolina drafting McCaffrey and was nailed to the wall for doing so, but that pick is looking pretty decent this year too.
At the end of the day, we got the stud RB AND the QB in subsequent drafts. I'm good with that. I'm good with Dexer Lawrence. I'm good with Will Hernandez. I can see what he's doing with those picks. I just like his process right now. That's it.
The ONLY tie to the glory years that I care about is the philosophy.
Have a quarter of them worked out? No.
Britt just can't get enough of Gettleman's blather. He swallows it all, hook line and sinker.
Do you feel Gettleman has done a good job of acquiring players in the pursuit of a good run game? Has he succeeded at that?
Have a quarter of them worked out? No.
Britt just can't get enough of Gettleman's blather. He swallows it all, hook line and sinker.
He's moved on from Saint Tommy, to Eli, to now Gettleman.
Williams, Hill, Tomlinson, Carter, Slayton, Engram, and all the DB's may or may not also be part of that core but at minimum are role players.
The coaching staff has done a terrible job turning what could be a competitive team into a doormat. Teams with worse talent and more injuries (Oakland, NYJ, Miami, Washington) are playing more competitively than we are. That is 100% on the coaching staff.
I think they're just observations based on your general POV when posting. Does it feel insulting?
6 quarters and 3-4(?) preseason games, and a lot of what we saw looked a lot like his highlights from Wisconsin - the guy makes reads and has quickness to attack the backfield we hadn't seen in over a decade.
Quote:
I also believe that this game is still won and lost in the by running the ball and rushing the passer. I actually liked the moves that he's made when he's made them, and I can see him trying to fulfill his plan. Have they all worked out? No. But I do like his ability to cut bait quickly rather than continue to try and force things.
Do you feel Gettleman has done a good job of acquiring players in the pursuit of a good run game? Has he succeeded at that?
It is really hard to tell because the coaching is piss poor. DG was the guy who hired him and his clown car of a staff so I'm leaning he can go to now. I won't be upset either way.
And, since you're the one trying to pump up the roster of a 2-10 team, the burden of proof falls on you, I'm afraid.
And, since you're the one trying to pump up the roster of a 2-10 team, the burden of proof falls on you, I'm afraid.
Being shouted down rapid fire when you try to provide any burden of proof from thread to thread with the same things beaten to death gets a little exhausting.
At least we can all agree the coaching sucks.
Completely fair to have some doubt about how he comes back from injury, but in reference to Gettleman isn't it that he made the pick? Nobody can predict injuries. Dalvin Cook tore his ACL in game 4, was still a good pick even though it took him a while to come back.
Quote:
All any of us do is spout our opinions.
And, since you're the one trying to pump up the roster of a 2-10 team, the burden of proof falls on you, I'm afraid.
Being shouted down rapid fire when you try to provide any burden of proof from thread to thread with the same things beaten to death gets a little exhausting.
At least we can all agree the coaching sucks.
If consensus is what you're after, you can just realize that objective and optimistic can't really share a bedroom for a franchise that has won 10 games in three years, especially with a GM from the owner's crony network who can't decide whether he's rebuilding or reloading for a playoff run.
Any draft pick will get an 'incomplete' until they produce over an extended enough period of time to warrant a 2nd contract or not. Jones is an incomplete right now despite playing twice as many games as Connelly but he looks good. Mayfield and Darnold are still incompletes in year 2. Any of our opinions are speculation - and that's what GM's do, they speculate that the guys they pick will pan out. Decisions get made based on speculation, not after the results are known.
Even after 6 quarters as you put it I'd be comfortable speculating that a healthy Connelly is a positive impact starting LB. The healthy part is a legitimate question going forward but I still credit DG for acquiring the 5 guys I mentioned because I'd be comfortable similarly speculating that they are all positive impact starters and in Connelly's case there was no way to predict he'd get hurt at the time he was selected other than it's the NFL and injuries happen.
Gettleman is a good college scout and some rookies and second year players have flashed; but so far does a piss poor job of managing a roster. He gets rid of talented players he inherited who he doesn’t bond with and brings in damaged goods who are supposed locker room champions who flat out suck. And he was involved in hiring Shurmur - probably because It’s Pat! would be humble and deferential to his ways of working.
So yeah Its Pat! Has gotta go but DG should be on the hot seat in 2020.
So yeah Its Pat! Has gotta go but DG should be on the hot seat in 2020.
So DG HIRES a new coach then gets fired. The new coach now has a GM who didn't hire him. That's the fuckin JETS. We cannot operate that way.
My guess is members of the Resume Dave Fan Club in Charlotte really "liked" those drafts too. But that team was really built by Marty Hurney. Check out his drafts from 2002 - 2012 compared to Resume Dave's.
For example:
Julius Pepper, DeShaun Foster, Chris Gamble, Jordan Gross, Thomas Davis, DeAngelo Williams, Ryan Kalil, Cam Newton, Luke Kuechly, etc.
My guess is members of the Resume Dave Fan Club in Charlotte really "liked" those drafts too. But that team was really built by Marty Hurney. Check out his drafts from 2002 - 2012 compared to Resume Dave's.
For example:
Julius Pepper, DeShaun Foster, Chris Gamble, Jordan Gross, Thomas Davis, DeAngelo Williams, Ryan Kalil, Cam Newton, Luke Kuechly, etc.
Haven't many of those guys been gone for years? Like Gettleman got rid of them or they were gone pre-DG? Browsing the best players on their current roster, many are gettleman picks starting with Mccaffrey no? Kawann Short, Trai Turner, Curtis Samuel, James Bradberry, Shaq Thompson.
In contrast 2 years later what do we (or the entire league) have left from Reese drafts those few years? Engram, Shepard, Tomlinson, and Apple?
Debates can be fun as long as they are handled with respect and honesty. Fierce competition on right and wrong happens a lot here, and I don't see any good in that.
Crick, I applaud this new found temperance, self awareness, and diplomacy on your part.
But lets not pretend that you haven't been one of the leaders of the divisiveness here. In the past you have been very quick to call people names and use foul language rather than make a real point yourself. It seemed like you were taking your cues from another poster from your your state.
I wonder if this turn is because the state of the team has made your core positions regarding the Giants untenable to continue to defend, or if this is something more permanent. I hope for the latter, I for one will give you the benefit of the doubt for now. But I would not be surprised with a return to past ways.
Quote:
Fair question Christian. It's ok to like or dislike the roster. The disconnect comes when the discussion turns into a competition of right and wrong. I haven't waded into the waters of right and wrong yet, I'm still waiting. I feel like the coaching staff has delayed my decision even longer, although I am not holding that hostage to not make a decision. I really believe what I write while trying my best to be self aware enough to understand that I am the one missing or not seeing correctly.
Debates can be fun as long as they are handled with respect and honesty. Fierce competition on right and wrong happens a lot here, and I don't see any good in that.
Crick, I applaud this new found temperance, self awareness, and diplomacy on your part.
But lets not pretend that you haven't been one of the leaders of the divisiveness here. In the past you have been very quick to call people names and use foul language rather than make a real point yourself. It seemed like you were taking your cues from another poster from your your state.
I wonder if this turn is because the state of the team has made your core positions regarding the Giants untenable to continue to defend, or if this is something more permanent. I hope for the latter, I for one will give you the benefit of the doubt for now. But I would not be surprised with a return to past ways.
Mcl, I'm afraid you have me mixed up with someone else. I don't remember the last time I used foul language or called anyone any name other than their handle, it's not my style.
Quote:
In comment 14699197 crick n NC said:
Quote:
Fair question Christian. It's ok to like or dislike the roster. The disconnect comes when the discussion turns into a competition of right and wrong. I haven't waded into the waters of right and wrong yet, I'm still waiting. I feel like the coaching staff has delayed my decision even longer, although I am not holding that hostage to not make a decision. I really believe what I write while trying my best to be self aware enough to understand that I am the one missing or not seeing correctly.
Debates can be fun as long as they are handled with respect and honesty. Fierce competition on right and wrong happens a lot here, and I don't see any good in that.
Crick, I applaud this new found temperance, self awareness, and diplomacy on your part.
But lets not pretend that you haven't been one of the leaders of the divisiveness here. In the past you have been very quick to call people names and use foul language rather than make a real point yourself. It seemed like you were taking your cues from another poster from your your state.
I wonder if this turn is because the state of the team has made your core positions regarding the Giants untenable to continue to defend, or if this is something more permanent. I hope for the latter, I for one will give you the benefit of the doubt for now. But I would not be surprised with a return to past ways.
Mcl, I'm afraid you have me mixed up with someone else. I don't remember the last time I used foul language or called anyone any name other than their handle, it's not my style.
You've done it with me, more than once.
And you have certainly encouraged the other other poster to whom I am referring.
I don't think you do cuss at me. Why the call out though?
Quote:
Again, I believe you are mistaken. I don't even cuss at Googs. I doubt I've even addressed you with any kind of attitude. We have probably responded to each other's posts under ten times. You and I don't typically converse.
I don't think you do cuss at me. Why the call out though?
It was meant to be light hearted. I apologize.
Quote:
members of the Resume Dave Fan Club go study his "great drafts" in Carolina from 2013 to 2017.
My guess is members of the Resume Dave Fan Club in Charlotte really "liked" those drafts too. But that team was really built by Marty Hurney. Check out his drafts from 2002 - 2012 compared to Resume Dave's.
For example:
Julius Pepper, DeShaun Foster, Chris Gamble, Jordan Gross, Thomas Davis, DeAngelo Williams, Ryan Kalil, Cam Newton, Luke Kuechly, etc.
Haven't many of those guys been gone for years? Like Gettleman got rid of them or they were gone pre-DG? Browsing the best players on their current roster, many are gettleman picks starting with Mccaffrey no? Kawann Short, Trai Turner, Curtis Samuel, James Bradberry, Shaq Thompson.
In contrast 2 years later what do we (or the entire league) have left from Reese drafts those few years? Engram, Shepard, Tomlinson, and Apple?
After trading away OBJ for a few picks and letting Landon Collins go to a mega deal. Everyone shits on Collins but he had an All-Pro year here. Hernandez was picked in virtually the same spot as Collins, and if we're lucky he may one day be a better than average guard.
I am not going to go back through all your comments. I may be wrong about cussing.
But you have certainly posted in support of others who were calling names and cussing...
Here is one example of a response to a poster who was cussing at me and said if he was wrong he would gladly piss out of his skull... Turns out he was wrong, and I haven't seen him pissing out of his skull yet.
The
crick n NC : 6/7/2019 6:04 pm : link
Pissing out of my skull comment was funny
There have been other time you have supported this poster. So, it is possible that even though you may not have been the one posting crap yourself, supporting others when they do, isn't a good look and that is what has probably stuck in my mind about you as a poster.
Move on and see if observe differently...
Move on and see if observe differently...
I agree Googs...
I will say there have been a few reinforcing posts. I recall the time I was saying we had an average amount of cap space. Crick criticized my post harshly for being hyberbolic. And for being a "certain type of poster". You and I think GD defended me over a long conversation, saying I wasn't that kind of poster, and crick insisting that I was. I finally got on in the morning to explain that the last time I looked, SpotTrac had the Giants at 14th in a cluster of a bunch of teams. At the time SpotTrac was having a problem and was showing us much higher than we really were. Turns out when they fixed it, we were right back to 14th. But the cap is fluid based on in season signings. Then there was another post recently where he questioned my "self awareness". So, while we may not have interacted often, and I will say that we have almost never debated the merits of something, almost all of our interactions have been crick making a personal attack against me for something.
I will say that crick apologized for the cap space misunderstanding. The fact that he did apologize that one time gives me a reason to have respect for him and to observe more in the future, which as I said above, is something for which I am always willing. Even the other poster from his his state, though that is likely a lost cause.