to rebuild this OL in particular?
After missing on Solder, Omameh, Remmers, Will Hernandez, trading up for DeAndre Baker instead of staying put and taking a Dalton Risner or Elgton Jenkins whom both would have been available at our 2nd round slot... only good OL move he has made is getting Zeitler in the OBJ/OV trade.
Okay, maybe Will Hernandez isnt a bust yet but I think after 2 years he is trending more toward being a bust than he is being a hit.
Do you trust Dave to get this OL right, yes or no?
I am a fan of DG. I like hearing him speak. Actions speak louder though. And I have seen enough to believe he can't fix this OL. 2 years, 2 strikes. This 3rd year should be his final try at fixing the OL IMO. It should be fixed after 3 years, no?
So, if this staff is competent and knows what they want then I am cautiously optimistic.
So, for now it’s wait and see.
Bobby Hart
Ereck Flowers
Adam Bisnowaty
Justin Pugh
John Jerry
Weston Richburg
Brett Jones
Jon Halapio
D.J. Fluker
There is maybe one solid NFL starter in there, Richburg. That is basically it. How long should it take to replace 10 positions? At least 3 years if you hit on every FA and draft. Probably more like 4 years
However there is a part of me that feels like the coaching was just terrible, and Shurmur had no idea how to win a football game.
I'm going to have to wait till after this season, lets see what happens. Right now though i'm on the side of having no faith at all. I'm not even sure on Jones yet.
gonna be alot a good players available with that high #3 the idiot gave away.
dumb moves like multiple washed up or crappy veteran FA signings bother me too.
Hope to god someone has his ear if viable trade downs are available to get another pick or 2 and still likely get the player we wanted
d baker trade- not ready to rip it yet, lets see if he becomes a building block in 2020. But probably no need to have traded up for him.
Bobby Hart
Ereck Flowers
Adam Bisnowaty
Justin Pugh
John Jerry
Weston Richburg
Brett Jones
Jon Halapio
D.J. Fluker
There is maybe one solid NFL starter in there, Richburg. That is basically it. How long should it take to replace 10 positions? At least 3 years if you hit on every FA and draft. Probably more like 4 years
Richburg was promising here, flashed, showed some athleticism and ability. Of course he stays completely healthy at SF.
1. Draft selection collaboration with coaching staff...
2. Jason Garrett was apart of a draft selection collaboration in Dallas that drafted 3 all pro OL...
So 1. Shurmur and company didnt do enough to help him and 2. Hopefully Garrett can/will
But nothing shown by DG himself that makes you believe he will get it right... right?
Quote:
Chad Wheeler
Bobby Hart
Ereck Flowers
Adam Bisnowaty
Justin Pugh
John Jerry
Weston Richburg
Brett Jones
Jon Halapio
D.J. Fluker
There is maybe one solid NFL starter in there, Richburg. That is basically it. How long should it take to replace 10 positions? At least 3 years if you hit on every FA and draft. Probably more like 4 years
Richburg was promising here, flashed, showed some athleticism and ability. Of course he stays completely healthy at SF.
That’s sarcasm, right?
I have little faith in DG in FA. More in the draft, but his refusal to trade down seems to mirror that of the rest of the Giants organization. I hope they will be more open to it this year.
Further, as mentioned, the lines are/were supposedly DG's "strength". And that has been an enormous disappointment.
So unless you just refuse to acknowledge his record, and think DG has really been a victim of circumstance, I don't really know how anyone can rationally have much faith at all...
That says alot.
Think he barely skated through Mara's last round of decisions and got his wings clipped.
My understanding is that Judge and staff is frightfully organized, non stop many hours six days a week, all facts and on top of everything that moves. Jump shift to keep up.
Based on stuff, I think folks tend to think he has more power than he now does.
Bobby Hart
Ereck Flowers
Adam Bisnowaty
Justin Pugh
John Jerry
Weston Richburg
Brett Jones
Jon Halapio
D.J. Fluker
There is maybe one solid NFL starter in there, Richburg. That is basically it. How long should it take to replace 10 positions? At least 3 years if you hit on every FA and draft. Probably more like 4 years
What actually are you arguing? This is all the more reason he should have used more than 1 pick on OL in the past two years. ....oh wait, he used a 7th rounder last year too.
Meanwhile he used 6 picks on DBs last year, nearly half our total.
I have faith that this will be the year he puts it all together. I think he has two pieces in Hernandez and Zietler, who will both benefit even more with a competent Center in between them.
If he can score a big time Tackle in the first 2 rounds of the draft, I think we will see an above-average Giants OL for the first time in about a decade.
Make no mistake though, this is absolutely a "make or break" year for Getty and rebuilding this OL. He started from scratch in 2017. This is his final chance IMO.
I’ve seen too many legendary or good GMs lose a lot of games and for long stretches of time. We’ve seen this right here with the giants.
In the end the proof is in the pudding. A GM needs to find good players more than the competition does. I think DG can do that.
On the surface it seems that DG’s evaluation of Barkley, Jones, Hernandez, Slayton, etc are not shabby. Will await further evidence on his choice of DBs . I think he’s done much better on DL than OL, and lb’ers are ?.
Gettleman hasn’t been perfect but I think he does draft pretty well. I am surprised he hasn’t drafted more OL.
That should change this coming draft.
So, if this staff is competent and knows what they want then I am cautiously optimistic.
No input from Bettcher? Probably not. But the guys that are obvious Bettcher guys were not expensive in terms of resources, and the team massively underinvested on defense. There's no way for Gettleman to escape blame for that disaster of a D.
At the same time, in Bettcher's defense - the only FA acquisition of Gettleman's tenure that panned out was Markus Golden, so I guess that means without Bettcher he's batting zero in FA.
Young definitely lost his fastball in the '90s, especially when the cap model was implemented.
But GY was one of the best GMs in football in the '80s. So I believe that ends up trumping the last third of his career...
And this is not based on team performance because he just simply inherited an awful team. However, it is based on him not realizing that fact and not actively restructuring the team in more appropriate fashion and timeline with his questionable moves from the get-go.
Examples of which include, but are not limited to, keeping Eli Manning in place; the free agent disaster class of 2018; lack of positional awareness in drafting in 2018; not actually fixing the O-line; the continuing special usage of extra draft picks versus gathering them; and last but not least...the ridiculous Leonard Williams deal.
If you want to add in whatever role he played in the last coaching staff hirings and his arrogant showings in front of the media, then I think he actually does reach train-wreck status.
His "Hail Mary" is Daniel Jones. If Jones becomes the guy then a lot of the above can be forgiven. If not, then he made his own bed.
You're giving grades when the mid terms aren't even in.
Quote:
Part of the reason Gettleman has failed is because he got players the coaching staff wanted. When you look at the defense particularly nobody can convince me there was no input from Bettcher. Same for the O.
So, if this staff is competent and knows what they want then I am cautiously optimistic.
No input from Bettcher? Probably not. But the guys that are obvious Bettcher guys were not expensive in terms of resources, and the team massively underinvested on defense. There's no way for Gettleman to escape blame for that disaster of a D.
At the same time, in Bettcher's defense - the only FA acquisition of Gettleman's tenure that panned out was Markus Golden, so I guess that means without Bettcher he's batting zero in FA.
I hate cherry picking. The point of the post was that even though Gettleman has been very poor in FA (no argument from me there), was that more on him or this coaching staff? Yes, ultimately it falls in him. What I am saying is that as a coach I would love working with a GM that gets me players I want. And if you look at the amount of FAs that were brought in that had connections to our coaching staff it was overwhelming.
So, again, this falls in Gettleman because that is his job but why has he failed so far? That is the more intriguing question. Is it because he doesn't know how to evaluate talent or is it because he gave the coaches what they wanted? I personally think it is more toward the second. The reason I believe that is twofold. One, he has done well in the drafts where the coaches didn't have prior relationships with the majority of players and, two, he was in charge of veteran personnel or whatever it was called when we signed McKenzie, Plaxico, and Pierce all in the same offseason. I do believe he has an eye for talent. Now, that was a long time ago. I get it. What I am ultimately getting at is that we know this is a collaborative process so I am hoping this coaching staff is way more competent than the last one where they can all work together and watch it blossom into something great. It still needs to be accomplished though so we will see but I have a much better feeling about it this time around.
I am definitely more hesitant on the defensive side of the ball than the offensive side.
You're giving grades when the mid terms aren't even in.
Re: Baker... wasn't meant as a knock on him but I was pointing out how well the rookie OL (Risner and Jenkins) performed in year 1. Either could have been had at por spot in round 2 if DG didnt trade up. Baker maybe great but besides that, can he fix this OL?
35% confidence level is a good number for me too
In comment 14814364 djstat said:
We get a 3rd for Landon Collins which you can trade to earlier part of round 3 when you trade back round 1 as a swap pick
In comment 14814392 Payasdaddy said:
gonna be alot a good players available with that high #3 the idiot gave away.
dumb moves like multiple washed up or crappy veteran FA signings bother me too.
Hope to god someone has his ear if viable trade downs are available to get another pick or 2 and still likely get the player we wanted
d baker trade- not ready to rip it yet, lets see if he becomes a building block in 2020. But probably no need to have traded up for him.
Yes, he's turned over the entire 53 man roster and the entire 5 person offensive line. So technically, this is true. That's what I do get.
What I don't get, is lack of understanding of just how hard it is to replace THAT MANY players in such a short time with finite resources. He had to replace the entire offensive line in his first season. Oh, and at the same time, he had to field a team to play. I don't know about you guys, but I don't exactly know where he was supposed to get 5 starting offensive linemen in one offseason. And that's just one example of how bad the roster was. Everything needed turned over.
It's one thing if you have a roster with a couple of holes in it, and you only need like 3-5 guys. But when your entire roster needs turning over, that takes time. Multiple drafts. Multiple free agency periods. He needs to keep churning from the bottom of the roster up.
You can, and have relentlessly, criticize him for not starting it from Day one. But for me, it seems to me that last offseason we finished razing the foundation of it all, and now we're building the foundation from the ground up. The worst thing you can accuse Gettleman of, IMO, is starting one year too late. And that's even understandable considering the state of the franchise when he inherited the roster.
Bobby Hart
Ereck Flowers
Adam Bisnowaty
Justin Pugh
John Jerry
Weston Richburg
Brett Jones
Jon Halapio
D.J. Fluker
There is maybe one solid NFL starter in there, Richburg. That is basically it. How long should it take to replace 10 positions? At least 3 years if you hit on every FA and draft. Probably more like 4 years
People really don’t appreciate the crap roster this team had when he took over. It was one of the worse rosters in the league. It takes time. But also, some of the moves he has made are suspect at best. So really his grade right now is incomplete. Drafts are impossible to grade after a year or two. It takes at least 3-4 yrs to really get a good feel on how a draft went. So I’m willing to give him the benefit of doubt and hope it all works out. Drafting DJ may be his saving grace. Drafting a top tier QB makes everything you do a lot easier. Hopefully DJ becomes that. We’ll see.
The roster now as the tear down approaches its end has a good number of prospects they believe are part of the new core, but a long way to go with the OL and LB units, not to mention starters needed at FS, WR, and depth everywhere.
With a salary cap and a CBA that provides a team with precious few resources to build in real time, it's a few years just to get a solid idea of the foundation and if their direction is sound. And, to overcome the mistakes that will no doubt be made, even by the best run franchises.
Now, throw in a new head coach and staff and who knows what players from the last two years will fit, wash out, explode, need to be replaced, etc.
It's a big bag of wait and see. Even Mara said it during one of the recent pressers, we've made all the changes and now it takes time to build and see if it's the right direction.
I can understand posters on BBI optimistically hoping for a 10 win playoff season, but a seasoned General Manager?
But the question is do you have faith in the guy that didn't see it that same way.
The roster now as the tear down approaches its end has a good number of prospects they believe are part of the new core, but a long way to go with the OL and LB units, not to mention starters needed at FS, WR, and depth everywhere.
With a salary cap and a CBA that provides a team with precious few resources to build in real time, it's a few years just to get a solid idea of the foundation and if their direction is sound. And, to overcome the mistakes that will no doubt be made, even by the best run franchises.
Now, throw in a new head coach and staff and who knows what players from the last two years will fit, wash out, explode, need to be replaced, etc.
It's a big bag of wait and see. Even Mara said it during one of the recent pressers, we've made all the changes and now it takes time to build and see if it's the right direction.
Does Dave survive if we go 5-11 or 6-10 next year? Maybe it’s my total contempt for the man, but I don’t see how he would deserve a 4th year.
Although the LW trade kinda throws a wrench into that theory.
I can understand posters on BBI optimistically hoping for a 10 win playoff season, but a seasoned General Manager?
Because he saw a team one season removed from a playoff season on defense. He already had Eli Manning, Odell Beckham, Engram, and SHeppard as weapons on offense. He drafted Barkley and signed what he thought was going to be a new quality starting LT, drafted a G high, while attempting to salvage Flowers by moving him to RT. Additionally, it's hard to say exactly how much or how little McAdoo losing the lockerrom had on the overall product.
Manning had two years left on his contract, was 36, and they thought he could, rightfully so, still play. He hoped that with those tweaks, he could field a competitive team while continuing to retool the roster. Eight games in, that was clearly not working and he cut bait. You may not agree with the decision, but if you look at it as a whole it's understandable why he thought he might have been able to field a competitive team while continuing to work on the roster at the same time.
Clearly, they thought they could do a more seamless transition than the scorched earth approach. It just didn't work so they pulled the plug.
I was pleased he began to quickly cut bait, but I saw little that said to me Eli and that roster was going to win in 2018 in the first place.
DG tried for quick, small wins and it blew up.
Based on the other trades in 2018 (the Jets giving up 3 2nd's to move from 6 to 3 and the Cardinals giving up a long 3rd to move from 15 to 10, both for QB's), I can understand that the value may not have been there for the #2 overall pick.
I think Dave Gettleman is on the tail end of his career one way or the other. The guy is pushing 70 and they brought him here to get the ship back on the right track.
I don't think he's going to spend for the purpose to "save his job" like Reese did in 2016, if that's the worry here. I think he's trying to set the Giants up for the long term and wants to leave a quality team ala Accorsi when he retired in 2006. THAT'S the "Giants Way".
Quote:
that looked rather amateurish, and I hope it goes away with the outed coaches. But, now armed with big cap space and people trying to protect their jobs, the UFA usage must improve otherwise there will be more painful seasons until the draft development catches up on the football field.
I think Dave Gettleman is on the tail end of his career one way or the other. The guy is pushing 70 and they brought him here to get the ship back on the right track.
I don't think he's going to spend for the purpose to "save his job" like Reese did in 2016, if that's the worry here. I think he's trying to set the Giants up for the long term and wants to leave a quality team ala Accorsi when he retired in 2006. THAT'S the "Giants Way".
JonC and Britt...you both nailed it. The self scouting was pathetic, but I do give them some credit for coming out and admitting it. At least it seems like the orginazition is back on track. DG's FA record is sub average right now, and his LW trade doesn't look great at the moment, but I think now that we have a competent coaching staff his draft picks will look better than they currently do, and a lot of them look pretty damn good.
Britt - its just not understandable imv that DG didn't see what had to happen to this team , Eli, et al. One year removed from a playoff team that got there ass handed to them in the wildcard round? Need to be somewhat future looking...not the other way.
He has found what looks like a franchise QB, what looks like a stud RB, Drafted a real good prospect at WR who could be the steal of the draft. drafted Lawrence who looked real good.
FA has been bad for the most part. The LW trade was a kick in the nuts and makes no sense. That was his biggest mistake and the fact that the jets fleeced us makes it worse.
I can't ding him too hard for Solder as at the time I thought it was a good move and you always overpay for top FA. its not like NE didnt offer him a big salary, they did so they did want him back.
He has done enough good to warrant this season and see what he can do with real money to spend. I am confident he can draft well. If he starts to hit on FA we can turn this around. I also believe that Mara is more at fault here than DG. I think the Shurmur hire was more Mara that DG, Mara wanted a guy with head coaching experience and there just wasnt the candidates at that time. i could be wrong on that but I know he was forced to keep Eli and the last 2 years was wasted because of it.
Really? Bad enough to make a poor decision on keeping Eli in place, but to double-down on not rebuilding properly even if he stays another year or so is egregious.
Quote:
.
Really? Bad enough to make a poor decision on keeping Eli in place, but to double-down on not rebuilding properly even if he stays another year or so is egregious.
Here's were the breakdown occurs in this argument.
I don't believe it was an either/or proposition. I thought the right move was to try and do both at the same time. That's what they tried, and it didn't work. So in hindsight, it wasn't the right move. But that's why I understood what they did.
It has been discussed a number of times, but even if we moved away from Eli and drafted Darnold, we could be in as bad of a position today (if not worse). Even a trade down scenario has that pesky little element of finding the right players - picking a guy who doesn't pan out negates the reason for the trade down in the first place.
The conclusion many come to is that 2 years have been wasted because we are 9-23 in that time, but if the results this year put us in a position to compete, I'd argue we didn't really waste anytime because an overhaul of the roster was needed.
I understand complaints about certain moves, but to project that to definitively state that the wrong path has been taken isn't necessarily correct. Yet some of you go on as if things have been fucked up without hope of repair.
I feel like you're changing your tune a bit here. I might be misremembering or thinking of someone else, but I feel like you were staunchly of the opinion that the rebuild was happening around Eli and that the QB position could simply be addressed at a later date.
Now, if that wasn't your take, I apologize. And if it was, I definitely can understand how you might have been saying that both with your head and your heart because it seemed like you would have preferred for the rebuild to happen around Eli to potentially extend Eli's career for your own enjoyment.
But if it was you, and you're now saying that the rebuild couldn't begin in earnest until the QB was replaced? Well, I find it a bit convenient coming from the guy who likes to frequently accuse others of moving the goalposts.
It has been discussed a number of times, but even if we moved away from Eli and drafted Darnold, we could be in as bad of a position today (if not worse). Even a trade down scenario has that pesky little element of finding the right players - picking a guy who doesn't pan out negates the reason for the trade down in the first place.
The conclusion many come to is that 2 years have been wasted because we are 9-23 in that time, but if the results this year put us in a position to compete, I'd argue we didn't really waste anytime because an overhaul of the roster was needed.
I understand complaints about certain moves, but to project that to definitively state that the wrong path has been taken isn't necessarily correct. Yet some of you go on as if things have been fucked up without hope of repair.
That's fair, although DG himself admits to having fucked up the 2018 offseason with a poor job of evaluating the roster in his first few months on the job.
Quote:
In comment 14814706 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
.
Really? Bad enough to make a poor decision on keeping Eli in place, but to double-down on not rebuilding properly even if he stays another year or so is egregious.
Here's were the breakdown occurs in this argument.
I don't believe it was an either/or proposition. I thought the right move was to try and do both at the same time. That's what they tried, and it didn't work. So in hindsight, it wasn't the right move. But that's why I understood what they did.
Well, at least the ol' memory is still working at full strength!
Quote:
Maybe he didn't like the QB's in 2018.
I feel like you're changing your tune a bit here. I might be misremembering or thinking of someone else, but I feel like you were staunchly of the opinion that the rebuild was happening around Eli and that the QB position could simply be addressed at a later date.
Now, if that wasn't your take, I apologize. And if it was, I definitely can understand how you might have been saying that both with your head and your heart because it seemed like you would have preferred for the rebuild to happen around Eli to potentially extend Eli's career for your own enjoyment.
But if it was you, and you're now saying that the rebuild couldn't begin in earnest until the QB was replaced? Well, I find it a bit convenient coming from the guy who likes to frequently accuse others of moving the goalposts.
It was a little more nuanced than that.
Yes, I thought the rebuild could happen concurrently with keeping Eli around for the end of his contract.
However, I said they should be actively seeking his replacement while doing it, which they were (and did).
Again, it's was never an either/or proposition.
I did not create the narrative of any sort of "Win with Eli" mandate.
Rebuild around Eli while searching for his replacement, yeah, I endorsed that.
I point far more to the fact that there are still so many parts/units on the team that are in need of rebuilding because of his poor past decisions. With different decisions, if we had won only 2 more games but there was more stability in the OL, LB corps, secondary, etc, and we were sitting here with extra draft picks (from unloading) versus less than normal I would be far more optimistic in the team.
Some of you guys hinge on the Solder move or the Ogletree trade to say that the Giants were in win-now mode. Meanwhile, we have a new RB, a new QB, an entirely new secondary and an entirely new OL from the previous regime.
You can't just base a rebuild on 53 draftees and UDFA's and hope they all develop.
It's pretty clear that we have churned the roster over and tried to rebuild while still hoping to compete. And that might have been the plan everyone signed off on - meaning that it wasn't a misread of the situation - but a strategy. You guys have debated that strategy to death - and still can't conclude we'd be better off today with a different plan.
I do think Judge will turn it around, his attention to detail and he's been around championship programs for the past ten years. He knows what it takes and carries the seal approval from BB and Saban, leaving me more hopeful we've got modern football program builders ready to put the work in. Hopefully, it's just a case of DG needing the collaborative effort from the boots on the ground to get the collective arrow pointing up.
Ok and I agree with the above sentiment. In fact, it was just another reason to shed Eli sooner unless you really believed 2011 was going to relive itself 7 years later.
It's pretty clear that we have churned the roster over and tried to rebuild while still hoping to compete. And that might have been the plan everyone signed off on - meaning that it wasn't a misread of the situation - but a strategy. You guys have debated that strategy to death - and still can't conclude we'd be better off today with a different plan.
I think its fair to say this strategy was a misread.
And you may not like what was said about other alternatives but the team would undoubtedly be much further up the curve now if the rebuild was done differently. Again, don't need to say that 9 wins would have been 11, 7 or whatever, just that the NYG would have more roster stability/promise.
Quote:
was more about the team moving forward to a new era, which was never going to truly happen until Manning was gone.
Ok and I agree with the above sentiment. In fact, it was just another reason to shed Eli sooner unless you really believed 2011 was going to relive itself 7 years later.
It wasn't about reliving 2011.
It was about stability at the position through the transition, and not David Carr'in the new QB by just throwing him out there.
I have faith that this will be the year he puts it all together. I think he has two pieces in Hernandez and Zietler, who will both benefit even more with a competent Center in between them.
If he can score a big time Tackle in the first 2 rounds of the draft, I think we will see an above-average Giants OL for the first time in about a decade.
Make no mistake though, this is absolutely a "make or break" year for Getty and rebuilding this OL. He started from scratch in 2017. This is his final chance IMO.
This needs to read and re read by everyone. How GFans fail to understand that this is the guy who built the OL w Seubert, Ohara, Mackenzie - I mwntuion these because they were all pro pick ups and he was in charge of Pro personell at the time he also picked up Hedgecock for the OL and so on lastly he built a solid / dominant line in Carolina too. but yeah suxy lol
I also think that the need to have something to complain about is more important to thinking rationally these days. Lets take Will Hernandez for example. We know the O Line is a work in progress. We know that Halapio did not play well last season. We know Solder did not play well last season.
But somehow, someway, Will Hernandez was supposed to be fantastic, even knowing those things. Some have even called him a bust.
Total lack of logic and reason. I don't understand it for the life of me.
Quote:
In comment 14814744 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
was more about the team moving forward to a new era, which was never going to truly happen until Manning was gone.
Ok and I agree with the above sentiment. In fact, it was just another reason to shed Eli sooner unless you really believed 2011 was going to relive itself 7 years later.
It wasn't about reliving 2011.
It was about stability at the position through the transition, and not David Carr'in the new QB by just throwing him out there.
But there were other alternatives to that. They were not chosen, for whatever the rational or irrational reasons, and the team now is not better for it.
Quote:
In comment 14814751 LBH15 said:
Quote:
In comment 14814744 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
was more about the team moving forward to a new era, which was never going to truly happen until Manning was gone.
Ok and I agree with the above sentiment. In fact, it was just another reason to shed Eli sooner unless you really believed 2011 was going to relive itself 7 years later.
It wasn't about reliving 2011.
It was about stability at the position through the transition, and not David Carr'in the new QB by just throwing him out there.
But there were other alternatives to that. They were not chosen, for whatever the rational or irrational reasons, and the team now is not better for it.
I don't think they are worse off for it, either. Frankly, I just can't figure out what the big difference between either or would have been right now.
I’ve seen too many legendary or good GMs lose a lot of games and for long stretches of time. We’ve seen this right here with the giants.
In the end the proof is in the pudding. A GM needs to find good players more than the competition does. I think DG can do that.
i don't think you're right because owners wouldn't pay them such great salaries if that was true - it's the actual literal opposite of dime a dozen. if there were so many they would get paid "dimes" but they don't - they get paid millions. i just think it is hard to judge their day-in day-out performance very well from the perspective of us fans, and therefore they can all seem to blend.
maybe i'm misinterpreting what you mean to say and what you mean is that not much separates the middle of the bell curve in the distribution of poor to great gm's? i could see that. but again, i think it is difficult for us fans to judge gm's on the basis of anything but the wins and losses, and to lesser extent draft results and contract signings.
right now dg's w/l record with us is horrible, and he's admitted to questionable vision/judgement in how he took to building this team when he came on. that doesn't mean he's outright horrible or inept, and it certainly does not mean every move he's made has been bad.
but i can't say that it gives me the warm and tinglies.
so my faith is weakened, yes. but my hope is not. i hope he does great.
Yes, that could have forced them to make a questionable QB pick (although that would have just been another bad decision) and not been better off but there are absolutely alternatives that could have made them better off.
Yes, that could have forced them to make a questionable QB pick (although that would have just been another bad decision) and not been better off but there are absolutely alternatives that could have made them better off.
I'm saying that it could have been better or worse, marginally.
We would have had an extra what? 7 million in free agency to spend? 10 million? Eli's contract was not the albatross it's made out to be. If they needed that money, they could've and would've been able to find it elsewhere. What's the point of cutting your veteran QB to sign stop gap QB?
Keeping Eli did not prevent them in going in any single direction that you think they should have gone. Even if they drafted Darnold.
They knew they had to find Manning's replacement. It was inevitable. It did not prevent them, IMO, from making any other move. They drafted Barkley, which they could have done with or without Manning. They could have still traded down at 2 for (Nelson) with or without Manning. They could have still taken a QB with Manning.
So what exactly did keeping Manning prevent them from doing, exactly? What would cutting Manning outright upon Dave Gettleman's arrival done for the franchise moving forward?
DG is very much old school just like TC in his mantra of establishing the run and stopping the run and further emphasis on prioritizing the obtaining of 'hog molllies'.
The way the NFL game has evolved is to really place emphsis on speed.
Everyone needs to be able to quickly go sideline to sideline on both lines.
LBs need to be able to cover
Safeties need to be able to cover the deep zones as well as come up to the los and tackle.
Corners need to press
The development of mobile qb's has really revolutionized the need for the Defense to be able to move effectively at every level of the D.
Running plays by the succesfful teams are more prone to be jet sweeps, tosses, reverses or qb option plays that place an emphasis on the D to be able to contain and the DL's ability to run sideline to sideline.
The Run game is no longer the power handoff up the middle which means that there is a de-emphasis on having hog mollies and hulking ILB's to stop the power runs.
The majority of offensive plays in the contemporary NFL are pass plays
Should the receivers be covered then the nouveau mobile qb takes off running. To be successful the O needs speedy wr's and speedy TEs and Rb's who can run pass routes effectively.
The D then needs speedy defenders to combat the speed behind the offensive thrusts.
DG does not appear to be adapting to the way the NFL has evolved based on his pressers and personnel selections in both FA and the Draft.
One can only hope that the new coaching staff can bring him around ohterwise the losing will continue imo
Quote:
We all loved George Young but sometimes forget that he spent first round picks on Thomas Lewis, Tyrone Wheatley and Cedric Jones in consecutive drafts from 94-96. Not very good.
Young definitely lost his fastball in the '90s, especially when the cap model was implemented.
But GY was one of the best GMs in football in the '80s. So I believe that ends up trumping the last third of his career...
BW,
Add to the fact that Young hated the idea of free agency and the salary cap.
I think DG has to open the check book on a pass rusher and an O Linemen, maybe an ILB or FS.
We need to land 3 quality free agents that are part of the long term plan. Then head to the draft picking best player available. Fill in with B and C level free agents.
Quote:
could have been better off at this point by cutting bait with Eli earlier than they did and going in a different direction?
Yes, that could have forced them to make a questionable QB pick (although that would have just been another bad decision) and not been better off but there are absolutely alternatives that could have made them better off.
I'm saying that it could have been better or worse, marginally.
We would have had an extra what? 7 million in free agency to spend? 10 million? Eli's contract was not the albatross it's made out to be. If they needed that money, they could've and would've been able to find it elsewhere. What's the point of cutting your veteran QB to sign stop gap QB?
Keeping Eli did not prevent them in going in any single direction that you think they should have gone. Even if they drafted Darnold.
They knew they had to find Manning's replacement. It was inevitable. It did not prevent them, IMO, from making any other move. They drafted Barkley, which they could have done with or without Manning. They could have still traded down at 2 for (Nelson) with or without Manning. They could have still taken a QB with Manning.
So what exactly did keeping Manning prevent them from doing, exactly? What would cutting Manning outright upon Dave Gettleman's arrival done for the franchise moving forward?
All god points. I would have thought the savings was more than that though if you cut him but will admit I don't know.
I do believe they invested unwisely around the idea of keeping him though, and would have re-thought the whole thesis if cutting him though (Solder, Barkley) so there is that.
These kinds of org structures do well in businesses or ventures with stable operations/low turnover/low change/low need for public interactions/low competitive intensity
Managing Partners with expertise based power circles ( partners) are a very common in had to competitively distinguish/ fluid/high human capital turn based businesses.
Managing Partners do the investor meetings/face the public and do have certain signing authorities, but the world is full of partnerships where the lead practice or most distinguished practice or the biggest revenue generators have much more power in their power circles than the Managing Partner.
When all goes well, the MP job is kind of just be fair internally, listen to the difference makers, get funds to the winners and be in front of the owners and markets. The meeting and decision dynamics are much more widely shared and Collaborative and Inclusion are the key to morale and motivation ...for more know what they are doing and have proven valid points of view. Orchestrating and incorporating the input of many voices becomes the necessary MP style
When there is a power vacuum (coaches/scouts/lazy owners) the MP has to be more omni present even when stretched thin and in areas beyond their core expertise. Compliance and high wire acts are the key to survival with second guessing second raters all around
My view is the scouting and coaching and backbone competence was not there at the end of the rot everywhere hands off Reese/Ross era. So smarter all in power centers up the game of everyone at the table and the MP fades in relative input.
In addition, when things go badly external to operations voices ( owners) get to meddle on instincts and without data. After all, in a slow group that does not self examine, all ideas are more equal.
When things are stronger the owners get sold solid well prepared ideas/crisp meetings/data backed argumentation and their weirdness/instincts get managed and overwhelmed by earned confidence.
notice how much easier it is to interpret a hierarchy than a loser construct. So much so that we assign hierarchy so we can assert the ton we do not know.
Lastly, there is not any organization or human endeavor that can be assessed by snapshots at their best looking moments/decisions or worst snapshots in time.
Sorry, that's true of every poster, every marriage, every kid raising, every endeavor.
Assessing snapshots is as much about the commentator as the snap.
Assessing any one Giant after the owner fired 3 HC, 1 GM, 1 Chief Scout and the organization fired 6 or more scouts and 30 or more coordinators and coaches in a five year period followed by a pretty wide ranging search and out of prior norm hiring of an experienced, assertive and confident coaching staff isn't going to hit more than the assessments miss. imo
Quote:
In comment 14814706 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
Maybe he didn't like the QB's in 2018.
I feel like you're changing your tune a bit here. I might be misremembering or thinking of someone else, but I feel like you were staunchly of the opinion that the rebuild was happening around Eli and that the QB position could simply be addressed at a later date.
Now, if that wasn't your take, I apologize. And if it was, I definitely can understand how you might have been saying that both with your head and your heart because it seemed like you would have preferred for the rebuild to happen around Eli to potentially extend Eli's career for your own enjoyment.
But if it was you, and you're now saying that the rebuild couldn't begin in earnest until the QB was replaced? Well, I find it a bit convenient coming from the guy who likes to frequently accuse others of moving the goalposts.
It was a little more nuanced than that.
Yes, I thought the rebuild could happen concurrently with keeping Eli around for the end of his contract.
However, I said they should be actively seeking his replacement while doing it, which they were (and did).
Again, it's was never an either/or proposition.
I did not create the narrative of any sort of "Win with Eli" mandate.
Rebuild around Eli while searching for his replacement, yeah, I endorsed that.
Eli Revenge Tour. 10-6.
Sure sounds like "win with Eli" but maybe you can be more clear about when you're speaking from the heart vs. sharing an objective view? Because it feels inconsistent to say that you didn't advocate for making one last run with Eli when you also predicted a 10-6 record, said the media had it out for the Giants for predicting mediocrity, and proclaimed 2019 the "Eli Revenge Tour."
Eli Revenge Tour. Was exclusively about his play. Proving wrong that his skills had fallen off a cliff. Making the doubters eat their words.
10-6 was posted on a season prediction thread, months later, and was offered with no context whatsoever. I just posted "10-6 (which I go into every year believing it is possible, and have explained why, and yes, it is purely for my optimism, hope, and enjoyment).
But those two quotes have gotten a lot of mileage.
So what exactly did keeping Manning prevent them from doing, exactly? What would cutting Manning outright upon Dave Gettleman's arrival done for the franchise moving forward?
It's pretty simple. Eli was no longer capable of winning games after 2017 without pristine conditions. Conditions that are/were impossible to create under a cap model. So we wasted at least a year getting into rebuild mode to accommodate the Eli Sympathy Tour. Valuable football time and resources wasted by men - Mara and DG - we were delusional.
Some of us saw the flaw in that approach; but too many saw virtue in it.
Now here were are, 9 wins and 23 losses later, and the only thing that has changed is the sympathy for Eli has swung over to Gettleman.
The amount of slack that gets cut for this guy is really inexplicable at this point.
By that logic, any GM that doesn't have an immediate improvement is a failure.
Confusing "slack" with patience in letting him do his job have been confused on this topic since Day 1, which is why Gettleman has been under fire since Day 1 (even down to the method in which he was hired)
Its about whether we will go another 9-23 over the next two seasons because of his mistakes and not getting the roster fixed.
By that logic, any GM that doesn't have an immediate improvement is a failure.
Confusing "slack" with patience in letting him do his job have been confused on this topic since Day 1, which is why Gettleman has been under fire since Day 1 (even down to the method in which he was hired)
That's not true. Not all 9-23 teams are created equal.
If the overhaul was underway by jettisoning Eli once DG arrived, not trying to build a team behind drafting a RB #2 in the draft, and not missing on the HC, the 9-23 could have better context.
Instead, DG and Mara went all in on Eli, tried to make chicken salad out of chicken sh-t, stuff a playoff team in a team that wasn't close to being ready to win, and royally screwed up the roster in the short and medium term.
So whatever poor roster/situation he inherited, one could just as easily argue that DG's moves have not discernibly improved that team at all. We are simply back to square one.
DG's one lifeline right now is Jones. That has to work. If not, his tenure will be remembered as a complete disaster.
It is neither fact, not even provable at this point.
Two years of taking a talent-poor team and not seeing immediate results shouldn't be the barometer of what kind of job has been done. We should almost all agree that this year is the pivotal one to use as evaluation.
So let's say we jettisoned Eli, drafted Darnold and still tried to supplememnt the roster with mid-priced FA's hoping they would work out. There's no proof that this alternative is better, and if Darnold doesn't pan out, it is likely worse.
Let's say we pick Chubb. He suffers a season-ending injury like he did in DEN. We're likely not feeling any better.
Let's say we traded down and loaded up on OL, but used a veteran stop-gap QB and don't have a serviceable RB. Even if the OL are solid, we may not seem to be trending up because of poor play in other areas.
What if scenarios don't just go one way.
Let's say we jettisoned eli, and went 6-10 the past two years, does that really make anyone feel better?
It is neither fact, not even provable at this point.
Two years of taking a talent-poor team and not seeing immediate results shouldn't be the barometer of what kind of job has been done. We should almost all agree that this year is the pivotal one to use as evaluation.
What the hell does "fact and provable" have to do with this conversation? Does exactly 16 more games make the evaluation factual for some reason. Of course not.
I think the concept is that there will be more facts available to make an evaluation...just as if there will be even more if you wait 32 more games. The barometer being used really just depends on your temperature of the situation.
Let's say we traded down and loaded up on OL, but used a veteran stop-gap QB and don't have a serviceable RB. Even if the OL are solid, we may not seem to be trending up because of poor play in other areas.
What if scenarios don't just go one way.
Let's say we jettisoned eli, and went 6-10 the past two years, does that really make anyone feel better?
Lets say Giants did one of the above scenarios and lo and behold...we were able to improve the oline and edge moreso with the extra free agent $ and better use of draft picks, added a very good but not generational RB in middle round, and still got DJ.
And maybe we still went 6-10 but things looked much better in the second half of 2019 than they actually played out.
feel any better going into this offseason?
These discussions always start with the premise that the moves were wrong and that the alternatives were correct.
Quote:
is what I've argued against frequently:
Let's say we traded down and loaded up on OL, but used a veteran stop-gap QB and don't have a serviceable RB. Even if the OL are solid, we may not seem to be trending up because of poor play in other areas.
What if scenarios don't just go one way.
Let's say we jettisoned eli, and went 6-10 the past two years, does that really make anyone feel better?
Lets say Giants did one of the above scenarios and lo and behold...we were able to improve the oline and edge moreso with the extra free agent $ and better use of draft picks, added a very good but not generational RB in middle round, and still got DJ.
And maybe we still went 6-10 but things looked much better in the second half of 2019 than they actually played out.
feel any better going into this offseason?
For one, that actually did happen in 2018. The Giants started 0-8, jettisoned the malcontents and dead weight on the O-line, inserted Jamon Brown, and the Giants finished the second half with a respectable 4-4 while Barkley was breaking out as offensive rookie of the year.
So I did feel better going into 2019, actually. Then, after an 0-2 start, they started the Daniel Jones era and wen't 2-0... Then Barkley got hurt and we were relegated to a team that had no defense to speak of but a young QB who was showing lots of promise and a breakout fifth round rookie in Slayton.
So there are positives despite the record.
And if the prudent play in your view is to wait out critical year 3 to evaluate DG, then that is fine.
Just like it is fine to evaluate him right now, even if its a poor evaluation and the feeling is to give him year 3 anyway or tell him to clean out his desk.
Quote:
In comment 14814956 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
is what I've argued against frequently:
Let's say we traded down and loaded up on OL, but used a veteran stop-gap QB and don't have a serviceable RB. Even if the OL are solid, we may not seem to be trending up because of poor play in other areas.
What if scenarios don't just go one way.
Let's say we jettisoned eli, and went 6-10 the past two years, does that really make anyone feel better?
Lets say Giants did one of the above scenarios and lo and behold...we were able to improve the oline and edge moreso with the extra free agent $ and better use of draft picks, added a very good but not generational RB in middle round, and still got DJ.
And maybe we still went 6-10 but things looked much better in the second half of 2019 than they actually played out.
feel any better going into this offseason?
For one, that actually did happen in 2018. The Giants started 0-8, jettisoned the malcontents and dead weight on the O-line, inserted Jamon Brown, and the Giants finished the second half with a respectable 4-4 while Barkley was breaking out as offensive rookie of the year.
So I did feel better going into 2019, actually.
And a lot of other posters might tell you if you looked closer at that respectable 4-4 record that there were still plenty of warning signs of a team not really getting better. Such as the true quality of the wins, who the opposing QBs were, the lack of competitiveness in the losses, etc.
His drafts have been incomplete meaning I don’t know yet what to think of them. He inspires 0 confidence. The Beckham trade was excellent but that’s it. He’s terrible and throwing away the 68th pick in the draft for 0... 0. Should have gotten him canned right away. He could have signed overacted pos Leonard Williams anyway. Awful. Just awful.
What happened after was OBJ got hurt in the first preseason game against Cleveland, and by week five the top 4 WRs are out for the year. MacAdoo was not a good enough coach to keep the team together, and questions about Eli were beginning.
DG traded off a lot of talent, hired a poor head coach, and the results are 9-23.
Personally, I don't like DG as a GM, but his personal moves have been a mixed bag, like almost every other NFL GM. If he got the QB pick right, and Judge turns out to be a good head coach, I think our Falls are going to be much better going forward.
It is neither fact, not even provable at this point.
Two years of taking a talent-poor team and not seeing immediate results shouldn't be the barometer of what kind of job has been done. We should almost all agree that this year is the pivotal one to use as evaluation.
Something is indeed provable. It's the trenches; and DG's fingerprints are ALL over the Oline and Dline. They reflect his vision. And to date, neither has been remotely good.
So if you believe, which I'm sure you do, that having competent trench play is a key piece to success than one can certainly tie the 9-23 record to DG.
But, yes, you are right in this regard. This third year should be make or break.
Saying the DL has "has not been remotely good" is at best overblown and at worst, flat out wrong.
Quote:
many are assuming as fact that DG has built the team the wrong way and the 9-23 is a direct result of his missteps.
It is neither fact, not even provable at this point.
Two years of taking a talent-poor team and not seeing immediate results shouldn't be the barometer of what kind of job has been done. We should almost all agree that this year is the pivotal one to use as evaluation.
Something is indeed provable. It's the trenches; and DG's fingerprints are ALL over the Oline and Dline. They reflect his vision. And to date, neither has been remotely good.
So if you believe, which I'm sure you do, that having competent trench play is a key piece to success than one can certainly tie the 9-23 record to DG.
But, yes, you are right in this regard. This third year should be make or break.
If you had to completely replace both lines nearly 100% in just two offseasons, do you think you could do a competent/successful job of that? Would you sell yourself to an owner that way? Do you think most GM's would/could?
It would require near perfection to work with that kind of precision, and honestly, no competition from the other 31 teams for the finite available players in the draft/free agency.
Saying the DL has "has not been remotely good" is at best overblown and at worst, flat out wrong.
Well, when you aggregate the lack of sacks, the lack of forced fumbles, the poor turnover margin, the poor run defense, the below average pressure stats, etc - over the last two years - it's hard to get out of the bad zone.
Why in the world he didn't just start off with the PR that :
"QB transitions are always tough and hard to judge"
" we are going to try things to improve as fast as we can instead of being patient. Im not afraid to take some risks to get us proud of our NY Giants sooner rather than later"
" If everyone performs like they can we will be competitive, if we have injuries or off years by some guys its going to be harder"
" we are going to concentrate on the draft but we have to have some guys for these young guys to learn from"
everyone knew all that is true. Everyone would have said, Im in favor of some risks. Everyone would have said, yeah, right, the talent is not up to snuff.
Instead he got into debates with a press corp very different from the late 1980's and very different than in North Carolina.
He invited blame and he increased it. Badly serving Mara and Eli and his coaches and the fans
I assume irritability and some loss of judgement is a side effect of some of his treatments and the sword of Damocles hanging over his head.
But...where was Hanlon the last few years until this year? Invisible and ineffective and quite frankly inclined to fight with the media as well. Combativeness to the dumb media works when the team is doing well and is a steep slope down when its not
Saying the DL has "has not been remotely good" is at best overblown and at worst, flat out wrong.
??
The Oline is a mess still and we are on close to life support at the Tackle position. The DLine should not be characterized as good in most aspects.
If you had to completely replace both lines nearly 100% in just two offseasons, do you think you could do a competent/successful job of that? Would you sell yourself to an owner that way? Do you think most GM's would/could?
It would require near perfection to work with that kind of precision, and honestly, no competition from the other 31 teams for the finite available players in the draft/free agency.
Mr. Hog Mollie waltzed into Jints Centralville essentially saying he was here to save the day in the trenches. That was his specialty. Super. Great. Where do I sign? Sounds like we can check that box pretty quickly.
So since it hasn't come to fruition, despite material cap space and high profile trades, the new spin is lack of time?
Come on. We can be on different sides of the aisle here for a lot of things, but it would seem that there is common ground that DG has not lived up to his end of the bargain with restoring the trenches.
Quote:
If you had to completely replace both lines nearly 100% in just two offseasons, do you think you could do a competent/successful job of that? Would you sell yourself to an owner that way? Do you think most GM's would/could?
It would require near perfection to work with that kind of precision, and honestly, no competition from the other 31 teams for the finite available players in the draft/free agency.
Mr. Hog Mollie waltzed into Jints Centralville essentially saying he was here to save the day in the trenches. That was his specialty. Super. Great. Where do I sign? Sounds like we can check that box pretty quickly.
So since it hasn't come to fruition, despite material cap space and high profile trades, the new spin is lack of time?
Come on. We can be on different sides of the aisle here for a lot of things, but it would seem that there is common ground that DG has not lived up to his end of the bargain with restoring the trenches.
He’s rebuilt the OL. But the guys he’s brought in aren’t nearly good enough and he’s going to have to sink more resources into it at both Tackles and Center. The DL, I’ve long maintained, has been overrated on bbi for over a year now. This is a big offseason for DG. If faulty line play continues to plague this team and we stumble to a 5-11 season, I doubt Dave makes it to 2021.
Quote:
In comment 14814950 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
many are assuming as fact that DG has built the team the wrong way and the 9-23 is a direct result of his missteps.
It is neither fact, not even provable at this point.
Two years of taking a talent-poor team and not seeing immediate results shouldn't be the barometer of what kind of job has been done. We should almost all agree that this year is the pivotal one to use as evaluation.
Something is indeed provable. It's the trenches; and DG's fingerprints are ALL over the Oline and Dline. They reflect his vision. And to date, neither has been remotely good.
So if you believe, which I'm sure you do, that having competent trench play is a key piece to success than one can certainly tie the 9-23 record to DG.
But, yes, you are right in this regard. This third year should be make or break.
If you had to completely replace both lines nearly 100% in just two offseasons, do you think you could do a competent/successful job of that? Would you sell yourself to an owner that way? Do you think most GM's would/could?
It would require near perfection to work with that kind of precision, and honestly, no competition from the other 31 teams for the finite available players in the draft/free agency.
I think the fundamental disagreement is pretty well evident in this post. You think it would have taken near perfection to turn around the line, and that may be true if we were expecting it to go from a shitshow to a very good line. But it went from a shitshow to a shitshow with different names. Solder was a bad signing. Omameh was a fucking disaster. Halapio was bad and then got the infamous "don't sleep on Pio" endorsement from DG (and he's already hinting at continuing the Halapio experiment at OC into 2020; hopefully Judge can veto that idea). It's not just that he inherited a bad situation with the OL; the majority of the moves he made to address that bad situation have been just as bad as his predecessor.
So you're right, it would have taken near perfection. And if that's the standard that you think anyone is expecting from him, you'd be right to defend him against that because it would be unrealistic. But I think that's not quite what people are looking for - I think they're looking for some shred of evidence that Mr. Hawg Mawllies is more than just a fucking soundbite machine when it comes to fixing the OL here.
As for the both lines part, if you want to use the DL to somehow give DG a pass on the OL, I think you're being too kind. If you're going to use your top two first round picks of your tenure on a RB and a QB, get the fucking OL right. The defense sucked even with his improved DL anyway. I would have preferred if he had more success on the OL than the DL. I would have preferred if he spent a first, third, and fifth round pick on OL players, and that if he was going to trade for an impending FA, it was an OL instead of a DL. He's using draft resources on the DL that surpass what he's doing for the OL, and his FA moves on the OL have flat-out sucked.
I think the fundamental disagreement is pretty well evident in this post. You think it would have taken near perfection to turn around the line, and that may be true if we were expecting it to go from a shitshow to a very good line. But it went from a shitshow to a shitshow with different names. Solder was a bad signing. Omameh was a fucking disaster. Halapio was bad and then got the infamous "don't sleep on Pio" endorsement from DG (and he's already hinting at continuing the Halapio experiment at OC into 2020; hopefully Judge can veto that idea). It's not just that he inherited a bad situation with the OL; the majority of the moves he made to address that bad situation have been just as bad as his predecessor.
So you're right, it would have taken near perfection. And if that's the standard that you think anyone is expecting from him, you'd be right to defend him against that because it would be unrealistic. But I think that's not quite what people are looking for - I think they're looking for some shred of evidence that Mr. Hawg Mawllies is more than just a fucking soundbite machine when it comes to fixing the OL here.
As for the both lines part, if you want to use the DL to somehow give DG a pass on the OL, I think you're being too kind. If you're going to use your top two first round picks of your tenure on a RB and a QB, get the fucking OL right. The defense sucked even with his improved DL anyway. I would have preferred if he had more success on the OL than the DL. I would have preferred if he spent a first, third, and fifth round pick on OL players, and that if he was going to trade for an impending FA, it was an OL instead of a DL. He's using draft resources on the DL that surpass what he's doing for the OL, and his FA moves on the OL have flat-out sucked.
well said GD
Last year was tougher to judge the line improvement for two reasons:
1. Rookie QB who held onto the ball too long at times.
2. Saquon was hurt a large portion of the season.
That shot show line is better than anything we’ve trotted out there since 2011-12
sacks. Lawrence had a solid rookie season.
The team needs reasonably competent Offensive Tackles.
Rookie qb DID hold onto the ball too long, led to a significant number of fumbles, did it not?
The team needs reasonably competent Offensive Tackles.
'Reasonable competent OT's.'
Wait another 5 years. We'll get there eventually (probably not).
Funniest shit I've read here in a few hours.
The team needs reasonably competent Offensive Tackles.
As a tandem, per PFF, Solder and Remmers were one of the worst duos in the NFL...
And if you are dubious of PFF, which I get, I simply say trust your eyes or just read Sy's reviews from this year. There are pretty damning...
Funniest shit I've read here in a few hours.
That was unreal. But the counter spin here was that's what the GM is "supposed to say". So we're reading to much into it.
When I challenged people to actually listen to that interview where DG says it, and he says it passionately, I got the expected answer...crickets.
Rookie qb DID hold onto the ball too long, led to a significant number of fumbles, did it not?
Of course he held onto it too long. He's a rookie. Lets see if he develops pocket awareness and this GM gives him some Tackle help.
As to 2018, the sacks did go down in second but a lot of it is the Giants had games where they had leads going into 2H/4Q and weren't playing catch up and passing as much. As such, the sack rate declined. Some of it was better oline play but alot wasn't.
Quote:
who got rid of the ball in a panic instant to a brave rookie who held onto it too long.
The team needs reasonably competent Offensive Tackles.
As a tandem, per PFF, Solder and Remmers were one of the worst duos in the NFL...
Quote:
"..Solder’s 57 pressures allowed this season are seven more than any other player, and the 97 combined pressures allowed for the duo is the most in the NFL.
And if you are dubious of PFF, which I get, I simply say trust your eyes or just read Sy's reviews from this year. There are pretty damning...
It's not fact or provable...even in the trenches!
Yeah, that was an interesting theme today. We can't "prove" the OL and DL were poor.
Despite so many statistical measures to the contrary...
Back to the OP's theme though, I just don't see how anybody can review his moves over the past 2 years and say they have faith in him.
So I think he has a trust issue, particularly with fans, and every move should be scrutinized with very little benefit of the doubt given...
If you say it enough times, it's sure to catch on. Keep it up.
If you say it enough times, it's sure to catch on. Keep it up.
huh?
Quote:
It's not fact or provable...even in the trenches!
Yeah, that was an interesting theme today. We can't "prove" the OL and DL were poor.
Despite so many statistical measures to the contrary...
Ummm. I said specifically the DL. If you want to regale the board about Lawrence, Tomlinson and Williams being minus players. Go ahead.
The interesting theme is the constant one here. That the team is bad, that it isn't improving and that Gettleman can't do it. That's actually posed as an absolute here often.
Quote:
"Eli Sympathy Tour"
If you say it enough times, it's sure to catch on. Keep it up.
huh?
And these discussions sure are fruitful when we have a 2/20 poster who came back to the board or created another handle just to weigh in on how bad the GM is.
Hard to take things seriously when a guy is so hard up he creates a dupe account to participate the majority of the time discussing the GM
What am I supposed to take seriously?
You literally created a handle to participate on one topic. Something your previous handle did too.
Are you actually trying to deny that you just jumped on the board, participate in 20+ active threads a day after only signing up 20 days ago?
When a poster seemingly gravitates to one agenda and talking point, why should that opinion be listened to?
And for christ sake, earlier I gave DG some kudos on the Harrison thread.
geez.
Last year was tougher to judge the line improvement for two reasons:
1. Rookie QB who held onto the ball too long at times.
2. Saquon was hurt a large portion of the season.
That shot show line is better than anything we’ve trotted out there since 2011-12
Improved with Jamon Brown, who DG let walk, replacing Omameh, who DG could not possibly have gotten more wrong. With Spencer Pulley replacing Halapio, yet we still got the "don't sleep on Pio" endorsement. With Chad Wheeler - a JR holdover - instead of Mike Remmers, who DG also endorsed in a recent interview. If anything, the OL improved in the second half of 2018 in spite of DG's efforts, not because of them. When he got back to to the business of fixing the OL for 2019, it went back to dogshit.
And the opponents from one half of a season to the next aren't the same, but I think that goes without saying. And you're right, those factors do make judging the OL last year a bit challenging, but we can make it super basic: even if they were fully healthy, would you support bringing back Halapio and Remmers and letting them start at OC and ORT, respectively, in 2020?
If the answer is no, you know damn well that it's not JUST a rookie QB and injured RB that made the OL look bad.
I'm just not sure how any fan can be comfortable with the job that DG has done with the OL so far. Is it just because he says all the right things in press conferences? Because it sure as hell isn't because he has actually built a competent OL here to date.
And for christ sake, earlier I gave DG some kudos on the Harrison thread.
geez.
LOL. "Struggled in a few one-on-none debates""??
I will point out again that you signed up this month as a reincarnation of another handle and you are going to keep scorecards of debates you obviously think you are doing well in?
Let's go to the cards then. What was your previous handle so we can look at the greatness of your body of work?
Being contrary to "plenty of others" basically boils down to the same group over and over again.
But glad you were truthful about not having another handle previously. You just jumped in full bore!
Agree, you're not thinking.
Quote:
The giants gave up 32 sacks in the first 8 games of 2018 but only 16 in the second half and we began winning games. We also had a 1000 yard rusher in 2018, when was the last time we had one?
Last year was tougher to judge the line improvement for two reasons:
1. Rookie QB who held onto the ball too long at times.
2. Saquon was hurt a large portion of the season.
That shot show line is better than anything we’ve trotted out there since 2011-12
Improved with Jamon Brown, who DG let walk, replacing Omameh, who DG could not possibly have gotten more wrong. With Spencer Pulley replacing Halapio, yet we still got the "don't sleep on Pio" endorsement. With Chad Wheeler - a JR holdover - instead of Mike Remmers, who DG also endorsed in a recent interview. If anything, the OL improved in the second half of 2018 in spite of DG's efforts, not because of them. When he got back to to the business of fixing the OL for 2019, it went back to dogshit.
And the opponents from one half of a season to the next aren't the same, but I think that goes without saying. And you're right, those factors do make judging the OL last year a bit challenging, but we can make it super basic: even if they were fully healthy, would you support bringing back Halapio and Remmers and letting them start at OC and ORT, respectively, in 2020?
If the answer is no, you know damn well that it's not JUST a rookie QB and injured RB that made the OL look bad.
I'm just not sure how any fan can be comfortable with the job that DG has done with the OL so far. Is it just because he says all the right things in press conferences? Because it sure as hell isn't because he has actually built a competent OL here to date.
+1 for GD...
Also I don't know who LBH is, but I'm already liking his vibe! Anybody who gets under FMiC's skin is A-OK with me! ;) Welcome to the dark side LBH.
FMiC, before you suggest that I am LBH, I'm not. I haven't been posting much mostly because I am just too busy at the moment. Also because I have gotten bored with the same debate over and over again. Just for the record, however, no matter how much you try to control opinions on this board, you are not having any impact on mine.
Losing your touch perhaps?
Hyperbole. Scouting nfl vet FA is overrated. Anyone can sign the right vet FA. No one can predict injury or compensate for bad coaching. And all these so called horrible, franchise crushing vet fa moves that many here love to lament, only one really had any true negative impact, that being solder, and he may have a bounce back year in him.
Some of you still lose sleep over the Jonathan stewart or omamala signings. Two stop gap vet moves that had little to no impact on the cap. Even ogletree, he’s outta here too with no dead money.
It’s all about the draft the last few years. Dg did fine there.
This franchise was in a dark place early 2018. They hired a bad HC to replace an even worse HC. Mara hires the coaches and there weren’t that many to choose from anyway.
Today, two years later this team has a young qb we all like and a very young roster of ascending talent. It’s also a roster with tons of cap room.
If you can’t see the vast improvements in this team as far as roster building goes, and instead want to focus on wins and losses, be my guest, but i dont think going that route is the best way to judge DGs two year tenure. Like I said, if the giants got lucky in 2-3-5 more games the last two years and the record improved, it wouldn’t change my take on DG but according to some of you this would be a big deal. I think that’s crazy.
Wins and losses during a nuke rebuild are almost secondary. We weren’t winning shit in 2018 no matter how hopeful I may have been they maybe we could sneak to a 9 win season. And 2019 was kids and more kids trying to figure out how to play with men. Moving on, let’s see how this rebuild manifests in 2020. The time is now for DGs draft picks to pan out and lead this team going forward. I think they are more than capable but they need some veteran help, help hopefully coming next month.
For me at least, I know when I am watching a good football team, and when I am watching a bad football team.
You can do all the what ifs you want and dream up scenarios about how the ball may have bounced so that the Giants won more often. It won't make them a better team.
The bottom line is that the Giants are, and have been, a lousy football team, and anybody with any football sense can see how bad they are when watching the Giants play. The Giants don't look like a team that is close to anything except another losing record.
The biggest fallacy is to get zo stuck in that fallacy no balance can be seen or considered
The result is repeating the obvious in an endless loop while blind to the subtle and to time
Now I'm speaking from the angle that DJ is a franchise QB and his fumbles were due to being a rookie combined with getting zero protection from his tackles. Go look at the Mel Kiper McShay thread to say how polarizing this is. QB play is half the battle in the NFL and I believe we have a good one entering his second year.
The biggest fallacy is to get zo stuck in that fallacy no balance can be seen or considered
The result is repeating the obvious in an endless loop while blind to the subtle and to time
Bill, the issue with that is that you are assuming that the results a football team achieves from year to year are independent variables like one coin flip to the next. They are not... Similar, players, coaches, and management (although the Giants have new coaches this year, so that is an independent variable) tend to produce similar results, sometimes trending up, sometimes trending down, sometimes stagnant...
In the Giants case, I think the more apt analogy is the definition of insanity... I.E. Doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result.
I see way too much past is prologue in many posters thinking. I am sure you do as well. Bias like that renders very flawed thinking as well as the impatience that makes judgements based on latest snapshot not a time reasonable conclusion. As an analyst, I am sure you guard against this.
Lastly, I point out that annual roster turnover, continual player development and coaching turnover makes each team and each opponent new enough to reduce the certainty that so many find easy.