|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Loser: New York Giants I am not too sure what general manager Dave Gettleman is thinking. New York should be focused on a widespread rebuild under dynamic young quarterback Daniel Jones. Instead, the team has some sort of false sense that adding marginal players on big-money contracts can help it contend. The Giants doled out a combined $74-plus million to linebacker Blake Martinez and cornerback James Bradberry. While the latter played well in Carolina, he was vastly overpaid. Meanwhile, Martinez was a replacement level starter during his time with the Green Bay Packers. New York will soon find out that overspending for other teams’ castoffs in free agency is not a winning strategy. |
Because I find it funny that this is what's considered sports journalism and when you quote an article you have to supply a link per BBI rules.
Did that help sport?
No....it did nothin help sport!
In comment 14845539 montanagiant said:
Quote:
if it is garbage, include a link and then tell people not to go to the site?
Because I find it funny that this is what's considered sports journalism and when you quote an article you have to supply a link per BBI rules.
Did that help sport?
No....it did nothin help sport!
Is there a decoder ring included with that post?
In comment 14845539 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 14845538 section125 said:
Quote:
if it is garbage, include a link and then tell people not to go to the site?
Because I find it funny that this is what's considered sports journalism and when you quote an article you have to supply a link per BBI rules.
Did that help sport?
That's why I warned it off. This actually was linked by MSN which I found baffling
His hat completes the pic!
Best way to build a franchise is THROUGH THE DRAFT!!!
Quote:
Yall are just jealous of his genious!
His hat completes the pic!
It really does. He's looks like my nephew when he was thirteen.
I have a few sources I somewhat trust, all the rest I take very lightly.
As to Giants coverage, all too often it becomes apparent rather quickly that many of the sources reporting on our team are not as familiar with the Giants as we are, also too many have an agenda, that goes for some of the positive spinners as well
The polite thing to do is to simply post the message and leave to others the pleasure of shooting the messenger.
Quote:
if it is garbage, include a link and then tell people not to go to the site?
Because I find it funny that this is what's considered sports journalism and when you quote an article you have to supply a link per BBI rules.
Did that help sport?
It's 2020. Anyone can build a website, even in Montana.
You don't have to read it and if you do, you don't have to post it or link to it.
Despite your warnings, I guarantee you just gifted that tool some clicks. Rookie move, MG. Keep the internet garbage that you stumble across to yourself.
However...I find the wording at the end to be pretty funny. The idea that the Giants organization will soon learn something that Vincent Fucking Frank already knows is just *precious*.
Come on. Those guys are scouting the tape like experts. We all know all the scouts use YouTube.
Your sarcasm is precious, but that guy is as much “sports media” as you and your aunt Eleanor
Quote:
continues.
Your sarcasm is precious, but that guy is as much “sports media” as you and your aunt Eleanor
You talking shit about the eminent Sportsnaut now? Fuck you dude.
Quote:
In comment 14845538 section125 said:
Quote:
if it is garbage, include a link and then tell people not to go to the site?
Because I find it funny that this is what's considered sports journalism and when you quote an article you have to supply a link per BBI rules.
Did that help sport?
It's 2020. Anyone can build a website, even in Montana.
You don't have to read it and if you do, you don't have to post it or link to it.
Despite your warnings, I guarantee you just gifted that tool some clicks. Rookie move, MG. Keep the internet garbage that you stumble across to yourself.
Here's an idea....Be an adult and exercise your choice of what to read and what not on BBI
Did it hit a little too close to home?
The reason why I posted this was that this was not found on the dark dregs of the Internet, It was highlighted by MSN on their home page. I found it it funny that this would pass as actual journalism on a major website. That is all
The polite thing to do is to simply post the message and leave to others the pleasure of shooting the messenger.
You're most likely correct
So true.
Quote:
if it is garbage, include a link and then tell people not to go to the site?
So true.
See my 12:36 post which answers this
Did it hit a little too close to home?
Do you mean have I ever posted an online picture from some random sports "journalist" on here as being close to home? No, I haven't weirdo. I actually just took visiting Montana off my bucket list now. Thanks.
Play the long game.
First, it's an analysis/opinion piece. Does this guy do reporting? is he a "journalist" or a guy who likes to write about football on the Internet? There are people in the latter category who do fantastic work, like Colin at GBN, but few people consider them "journalists"? Nor do they usually classify their work as journalism.
Second, I'd never heard of that site until I clicked on this thread. The page design looks professional, but I could put together a site that looks that good in a day with RapidWeaver. Is it a legit news site? Does it interview people, check facts, meet any professional journalism standards? Does it do original reporting or mainly recycle stories first reported elsewhere?
I honestly don't know because if I have ever been on that site before, I don't remember it. There are a bunch of great web sources for sports news, but this one? Never heard of it.
The reason why I posted this was that this was not found on the dark dregs of the Internet, It was highlighted by MSN on their home page. I found it it funny that this would pass as actual journalism on a major website. That is all
The problem is you thinking that this is somehow curated by MSN. It's not. It's based on YOUR web history. You must have enough cookies to indicate that you're not especially selective about where you get your Giants news.
Quote:
In comment 14845539 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 14845538 section125 said:
Quote:
if it is garbage, include a link and then tell people not to go to the site?
Because I find it funny that this is what's considered sports journalism and when you quote an article you have to supply a link per BBI rules.
Did that help sport?
It's 2020. Anyone can build a website, even in Montana.
You don't have to read it and if you do, you don't have to post it or link to it.
Despite your warnings, I guarantee you just gifted that tool some clicks. Rookie move, MG. Keep the internet garbage that you stumble across to yourself.
Here's an idea....Be an adult and exercise your choice of what to read and what not on BBI
Or on the internet in general?
In a not at all shocking twist, your failure to understand how this is ironic seems to be on full display.
I shared that with BBI because this is a Giants board and there's not much else to talk about
You have a choice to not read it
Instead, for something not worth linking IYO you have invested quite a bit into the thread.
Do you not see the asinine irony in that?
Quote:
The only reason the link was provided was that I quoted what he wrote about the Giants. This is BBI policy.
The reason why I posted this was that this was not found on the dark dregs of the Internet, It was highlighted by MSN on their home page. I found it it funny that this would pass as actual journalism on a major website. That is all
The problem is you thinking that this is somehow curated by MSN. It's not. It's based on YOUR web history. You must have enough cookies to indicate that you're not especially selective about where you get your Giants news.
LMAO...You could not be further from the truth with this claim of my cookies causing it.
On MSN's front page there is a box in the upper left that cycles through all the news about politics, sports, crime, etc.... They update the box regularly with new stuff and you have arrows on either side to scroll through the subjects. The ONLY thing that is triggered by cookies is their ads, not the news.
So if you're going to sit here and pretend you know what you're talking about you might want to actually know wtf you're spewing.
Sorta like your moronic comparison of Barkley to Gurley!
Quote:
Did it hit a little too close to home?
Do you mean have I ever posted an online picture from some random sports "journalist" on here as being close to home? No, I haven't weirdo. I actually just took visiting Montana off my bucket list now. Thanks.
I'm sure they will be devastated
That said after spending more timing watching, reading, and analyzing Martinez, I'm changing my tune on that contract.
He looks completely average. 14M is a lot of coin against the cap next year. I appreciate the easy out, but there will be guys making 10M less on one year deals who produce at the same clip next year I suspect.
Play the long game.
The fact we are out on Clowney, and the Bradberry signing, gives me hope DG is finally getting this FA thing. Bradberry is a guy that is going to be worth his contract as long as he start getting hit with injuries , guy can play, and is constantly around the ball. He's the perfect piece to be the "crown jewel" of our FA spending period. Plays a premium position, age and injury history is good, and his stats don't reflect what he puts out on the field.
That said after spending more timing watching, reading, and analyzing Martinez, I'm changing my tune on that contract.
He looks completely average. 14M is a lot of coin against the cap next year. I appreciate the easy out, but there will be guys making 10M less on one year deals who produce at the same clip next year I suspect.
The guy is completely average, he does give you a plus in leadership which has been sorely lacking in our lb corps, although I have hopes Connelly moves into that role as well, seems like the type.
Blake Martinez is 26, we are going to get his best years for the most part, and his contract gives us cap flexibility after next year. Sure his contract is 14 million next year, but after that he looks like a bargain. I think they will really trying to gear up in years 4/5 of the DJ era, which is smart.
I'm sure they will be devastated
At least I get to keep my skin intact and not have to worry about you wanting to cut it off and wear it ya weirdo.
Quote:
I'm sure they will be devastated
At least I get to keep my skin intact and not have to worry about you wanting to cut it off and wear it ya weirdo.
Yeah, that's a really good take from this to come up with. It sounds like you're projecting some odd fantasy you have.
...LOL
Quote:
This guy sure is a doofus.
That said after spending more timing watching, reading, and analyzing Martinez, I'm changing my tune on that contract.
He looks completely average. 14M is a lot of coin against the cap next year. I appreciate the easy out, but there will be guys making 10M less on one year deals who produce at the same clip next year I suspect.
The guy is completely average, he does give you a plus in leadership which has been sorely lacking in our lb corps, although I have hopes Connelly moves into that role as well, seems like the type.
Blake Martinez is 26, we are going to get his best years for the most part, and his contract gives us cap flexibility after next year. Sure his contract is 14 million next year, but after that he looks like a bargain. I think they will really trying to gear up in years 4/5 of the DJ era, which is smart.
I'm starting to fall into this camp also. One thing we know is he can tackle let's just hope he improves on his other aspects. After watching that SF vs GB playoff game and seeing that GB D get demolished in the run does not inspire
You don't have to explain away signing him with platitudes like "tough, smart, easy to cut, a bargain, stabilizing, coach on the field" -- and the other horseshit thrown around the last two years.
I don't find the Martinez story compelling. If he exceeds who he's been, and you get over the 14M next year, then in years 2 and 3 he's a bargain?
Quote:
who fail to understand this UFA crop was unlikely to provide the boost they believed correlated to cap space.
Play the long game.
The fact we are out on Clowney, and the Bradberry signing, gives me hope DG is finally getting this FA thing. Bradberry is a guy that is going to be worth his contract as long as he start getting hit with injuries , guy can play, and is constantly around the ball. He's the perfect piece to be the "crown jewel" of our FA spending period. Plays a premium position, age and injury history is good, and his stats don't reflect what he puts out on the field.
Same here. Pick your spots to incrementally improve the team, frontload the contract(s) so you reach the spending floor, and build the best team you can for 2020 while gearing up for a vital draft. It's going to be this way next offseason as well, unless the impact players they really want are available in UFA.
For example, given the tagged Edge rushers this year, Clowney was the flashiest name available, but also the easiest player to make a big overpay mistake on. So far, no team has made the error, which says a lot about Clowney.