BBI is not as much fun right now, partly because of the losing. Also, I just don't enjoy the vitriol spewed toward everyone affiliated with the team. I get it, there are people who when angry have to shout it at every opportunity.
What I can't really stand though are the people who rip on "the Giants way" as though it's led them to constant mediocrity forever. Yes, there has been a struggle for the last many years, but this franchise has proud moments in each of the last four decades, and has a chance to be the first and only franchise to win a super bowl in five straight decades.
Reading the rants on BBI about "the Giants way" one might think we have sucked for the last 35 years, instead of thinking that we've been to the SB 5 times during that span, winning 4.
There's a reason that ownership wants to continue to do things a certain way, or get back to doing things a certain way - it has resulted in championships. The Mara family has pride and don't think of themselves as losers.
I may not always agree with everything the Mara's have done, and I may be disappointed with how things are going (again) for the Giants, but I am fed up with the loud, angry voices who want to rip this team as though they've never accomplished anything and never will again without the Mara's selling off. Go root for someone else.
Anyone else with me?
If not for six weeks when Eli got blazing hot - three in 2008 and three in 2012 - the SB slump would still exist...
the love of Parcells blinds the fact that for an 8 year stretch under Coughlin, the team didn't have a losing record.
And won 2 SB's, but in the fucked up thinking that permeates BBI, that was a 6 week stretch with Eli being hit.
Fucking Redskins fans.....
But thanks for the cheerleads Dan.
As far as "The Giants way" -- I wouldn't be surprised if the OP invested heavily in horse buggy whips too.
Dan just wants to root for his team and vilify anyone who doesn't agree with him.
I get that you want to cheer-lead, Dan. But what if some of us aren't cheerleaders like you are and we believe "The Giants Way" has gone the way of the buggy whip?
You might be okay with your cheerleading but some others feel like there is a certain level of incompetence that we feel isn't be addressed in the manner it should. So because we differ from your cheerleading view - you choose to call us "angry."
If that makes you sleep better at night- that's fine. Apparently you keep holding on to those buggy whips waiting for the market to turn.
What's ironic is that Dan is speaking of angry yet one of the guy's that Mara hired utilizing his "Giants way" is supporting is a GM that talks down to nearly everyone. Demeans others - but that's okay with Dan. It's BBI posters that are "angry" and he doesn't care that his team has hired such an arrogant ass. So let's not care how DG acts. Let's just give him our best yah rah rah cheer-lead.
Just having fun Dan. Not angry. I guess we can all enjoy this awesome team that "The Giants way" has helped put together. .
Did you enjoy the 4 SB wins?
If not, then fuck off about the giants way
Yay for 33 years ago for winning that title The Giant Way.
And yest, the pessimist repeat the same tropes very often. In fact, just as often as the optimist repeat their "optimistic" tropes.
It strike me that the loudest and angriest post, like this thread come from a certain set of "optimistic" posters, or ones who have a long standing history of defending anything regarding team management.
At the end of the day, it strikes me that the major division is that one side doesn't think there is an issue with management (including the hand that ownership has in said management), and the other side sees the disease that is infecting the Giants start with ownership taking too beg a hand in running the team. most specifically in personnel selection both on the field and in the front office.
I may be wrong, but I read Tisch's statements as suggesting that he shares some of these feelings regarding the Mara's hand in the running football descisions. But we shall see where he takes it. That said, we have seen the movie before... Until Young got here, Wellington Mara took it upon himself to make too many of these decisions. The team got better when there was an independent football man making these decisions. We seem to have taken a step backwards in this regard.
The pessimistic voices are balanced but the positive voices are shills hired by the team!!
Perfectly logical!!
The pessimistic voices are balanced but the positive voices are shills hired by the team!!
Perfectly logical!!
Annnnnnnd there is is... Angry voice #1... Twisting the fact yet again.
I never said that "the positive voices are shills", which implies that ALL positive voices are shills. What I said is that Multi-billion dollar organizations use media outlets to control the narrative about them. I said it would be cheap and easy to
1. have an intern prepare a few summaries of fan feelings and reactions to the top management.
2. That using the same intern would be a cheap and easy method to put their message out on a media outlet.
My opinion is that it is likely that they do both. But I never suggested that it is a large scale operation, and that all positive voices are shills.
One of the things about fan based entertainment businesses is that they derive 80% of their revenues from only the 5% of the most fanatical of fans. Of course the NFL is a little different in that most of the revenues come from TV contracts. So in this case, lets say that 80% of non-TV based revenues come from the top 5% of fans... BBI and other message boards is the very definition of that base.
here are a couple of links expressing the kinds of strategies that fan bases entertainment businesses (including sports teams) should be using (note: I didn't spend a huge amount of time researching this issue since it is really common sense, so these are the first 2 articles I found on the subject and the only ones I spent any time reading there were tons more that I didn't look at):
https://www.strategy-business.com/article/How-to-Make-Entertainment-and-Media-Businesses-Fan-tastic?gko=977b5
In todays hypercompetitive landscape, entertainment and media businesses designed around and for fans command multiple strategic advantages. They know more about who their users are, what they want, and how and where to deliver it. Fans spend more per capita and are less likely to churn. Todays fans recruit tomorrows. E&M companies need to orient themselves around fans. They need capabilities that help them operate in new, more flexible ways across content, distribution, and user experience. They must become fan-centric. The good news is that they can accomplish all these objectives by focusing on five key functions: user/fan insight, content and experiences, distribution, monetization, and operations.
User/Fan Insight
As user behaviors rapidly evolve and consumption occurs across an ever-expanding universe of distribution environments and platforms, companies with the deepest, most direct insight into their fans have a decisive advantage. Unfortunately, too many large E&M companies remain focused on analyzing outputs such as ratings, unique visitors, and time spent rather than drilling into the functional, emotional, and social behaviors that translate into fandom for their brands. And although most companies sit on a treasure trove of first-party data, few have organized their people, processes, and technology to mine those insights into fan preferences at the necessary operational
https://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/how-to-turn-fans-engaged-superfans/
Your fan adds their voice to your marketing through actions like comments or direct emails. The scale and frequency of the dialogue matters, but any dialogue at all is a sign of deeper engagement.
The last point is the same point am making. Participate in the conversations and get fans to react positively is critical. "The scale and frequency of the dialogue matters"... I don't think the Giant's interaction is "large scale", but I bet its there.
The pessimistic voices are balanced but the positive voices are shills hired by the team!!
Perfectly logical!!
Oh and you're other MO is when you can't attack the post with anything of merit... Attack the poster with some made up twisted crap... Twist the facts, scream louder, use foul language and lots of exclamation points. That is all you know how to do. But you are very good at it, even though it amounts to nothing.
Let me ask you a few questions. Did you post anything of substance? How many exclamation points did my post have? How many exclamation points did your reply to me have with about 1/10 the number of words?
Likely for similar reasons, incompetence and unwilling/able to adjust to new trends and settings.
So far neither has shown any signs of learning or adjusting.
What I think is missing from here is that multiple seemingly contrary points of view must be held and accepted simultaneously for the Giants' current situation to make sense, and I think that is not understood by many and is ultimately what leads to the state of cacophony of opinion.
Those main points:
Point 1: DG is a flawed GM who lacks a vision for the modern NFL.
Point 2: Not everything DG has done has been bad.
Point 3: The team's performance this year is not an indictment of DG or Mara, and it was built in as a rebuilding year.
Point 4: Whereas Point 3 is true, the team still under-performed this year.
Point 5: Whereas Point 4 is true, some coaches are not great at making bad teams perform better than they should, while they can be quite good at getting good teams to perform better than they should.
Point 6: Shurmur is clearly not good at making bad teams perform better than they are.
Point 7: Firing coaches who can't eek mediocrity out of crap teams is frequently seen in teams that remains consistent losers.
Point 8: Shurmur has not proven to be a good in-game manager.
Point 9: Shurmur has shit to work with. On offense, his oline can't block, is star RB is hurt, his top two receivers have missed more games than they've played, so has his top TE, and he has a rookie QB. And that's his more talented side of the field.
Point 10: It is going to take more than one year to turn this team around.
Point 11: It is less disruptive to a team to replace the GM than replace the head coach.
So then it comes down to the following choice: do we blow up everything now, hit the reset button, and set things back three years? Or, does management, in their "honest post-season discussion" lay down some new visions for this team that rely more on statistics and other nascent techniques -- and, importantly, less on nepotism -- and we fans, show a little patience for a franchise that has consistently been one of the better ones in the league. It's easy to push the detonator, it's hard to build.
So let's see some real leadership from ownership and let's build.
Quote:
In comment 14709299 Dan in the Springs said:
Quote:
PS, DG, or whatever players, etc. I can live with. The team is definitely not where we want it to be. But there is a lot of evidence that the team is NOT stuck in the past, which is a false narrative that gets thrown at ownership.
There's a pretty healthy contingent of fans who would be willing to have a fact based, positive, rational debate as to whether the team is or is not stuck in the past.
What are some of the signals you see to support this?
Two years ago they hired (for the second time in 24 months) a HC to turn this franchise around who had no ties to the NYG organization. None. It hasn't worked out, but that should certainly count as something.
A couple years back they totally revamped their approach to player fitness and have had tremendous results from it.
Those are two of the signals.
Dan, are you claiming McAdoo had no ties to the Giants organization when he was hired as HC?
Thanks, GD. Appreciate it.
I should add this should -- must -- include hearing from ownership and include them taking accountability to the fanbase about their decisions and specifically what steps the are going to take to address the state of affairs. They must own what has not worked and tell us what they are going to do to make it work better. They should want to do that, too. They should want to show what they are doing and how it is different than their previous approach, and why it is going to lead to success. If they can't sell their vision then it is doomed to iterate and fail.
Dan, are you claiming McAdoo had no ties to the Giants organization when he was hired as HC?
Good catch - clearly he had been the OC for a couple of years, but was brought from outside with the intent of bringing in an entirely new system of offense. A radical change.
To me it was a hire that was about continuing to make change, not about trying to bring back something nostalgic from the past, or some type of nepotism, as those are often the criticisms of ownership here.
Quote:
I love the logic of Ace.
The pessimistic voices are balanced but the positive voices are shills hired by the team!!
Perfectly logical!!
Oh and you're other MO is when you can't attack the post with anything of merit... Attack the poster with some made up twisted crap... Twist the facts, scream louder, use foul language and lots of exclamation points. That is all you know how to do. But you are very good at it, even though it amounts to nothing.
Let me ask you a few questions. Did you post anything of substance? How many exclamation points did my post have? How many exclamation points did your reply to me have with about 1/10 the number of words?
He does this crap all the time.
No he doesn't post anything of merit. He trolls anyone that creates threads or that is mostly negative on the team. And then he twists what's said.
What I think is missing from here is that multiple seemingly contrary points of view must be held and accepted simultaneously for the Giants' current situation to make sense, and I think that is not understood by many and is ultimately what leads to the state of cacophony of opinion.
Those main points:
Point 1: DG is a flawed GM who lacks a vision for the modern NFL.
Point 2: Not everything DG has done has been bad.
Point 3: The team's performance this year is not an indictment of DG or Mara, and it was built in as a rebuilding year.
Point 4: Whereas Point 3 is true, the team still under-performed this year.
Point 5: Whereas Point 4 is true, some coaches are not great at making bad teams perform better than they should, while they can be quite good at getting good teams to perform better than they should.
Point 6: Shurmur is clearly not good at making bad teams perform better than they are.
Point 7: Firing coaches who can't eek mediocrity out of crap teams is frequently seen in teams that remains consistent losers.
Point 8: Shurmur has not proven to be a good in-game manager.
Point 9: Shurmur has shit to work with. On offense, his oline can't block, is star RB is hurt, his top two receivers have missed more games than they've played, so has his top TE, and he has a rookie QB. And that's his more talented side of the field.
Point 10: It is going to take more than one year to turn this team around.
Point 11: It is less disruptive to a team to replace the GM than replace the head coach.
So then it comes down to the following choice: do we blow up everything now, hit the reset button, and set things back three years? Or, does management, in their "honest post-season discussion" lay down some new visions for this team that rely more on statistics and other nascent techniques -- and, importantly, less on nepotism -- and we fans, show a little patience for a franchise that has consistently been one of the better ones in the league. It's easy to push the detonator, it's hard to build.
So let's see some real leadership from ownership and let's build.
If you are going to blow it up, then there is case to be made to trade Barkley, right?
Quote:
I think that's a great post that really does encapsulate the many issues with the Giants, and the divergent debate topics that we end up continuing to discuss here on BBI.
Thanks, GD. Appreciate it.
I should add this should -- must -- include hearing from ownership and include them taking accountability to the fanbase about their decisions and specifically what steps the are going to take to address the state of affairs. They must own what has not worked and tell us what they are going to do to make it work better. They should want to do that, too. They should want to show what they are doing and how it is different than their previous approach, and why it is going to lead to success. If they can't sell their vision then it is doomed to iterate and fail.
I hate DG. But I think with perfect moves the team can be decent next year. So I'm fine with seeing what he can do but I fear he's incapable of performing well.
But let me ask- what you mention above-- you think DG is the guy to do something like this? But I don't mean to be offensive when I say this -- but this is a "Proud Peacock" who never seems to shy away from telling anyone that would listen that "he's the wizard of football."
After all this time he hasn't come clean at all- you think all of sudden he will? And not to be argumentative, but why would you believe him anyways?