2nd time in 3 weeks we saw a team with multipe all-pro players mssing and we lost.. How can the Cowboys have 8 OL that are better than our best OL? How come backup RBs look so good against us and at times better than our 2nd overall pick.. especially when we have invested so heavily in our DL..
Can someone please explain how are we any better than we were 3 years ago? He really needs to go.. Dallas probably has a better OL talent on their practice squad team than we have on starters.. after all these investments..
Now, all of that said... we never did have another guy who we thought was a slam dunk selection for our GM. For those who want to fire DG now I get it but we must decide WHO is a viable replacement. It has to be a realistic selection and someone who is not currently a GM for another team. Not so easy...
Why is the onus on fans to identify candidates to replace Dave Gettleman? As many people have pointed out, the problem isn't so much that Dave Gettleman was hired as GM, it was the process that resulted in that decision that is fundamentally broken.
It is John Mara's responsibility to put a process in place through which they can identify:
a) The strengths and weaknesses of their operations, both on and off the field
b) An identity they hope to cultivate
c) A list of candidates to put the organization on the correct path
Calling Ernie Accorsi and hiring whoever he recommends isn't a process. That's the laziest shit imaginable.
The Wiliams and OBJ trades were not good trades.
I think we need to set aside the OBJ trade because it simply is not being measured properly AND there are some unknowns.
It is my belief that DG was directed to sell OBJ and get as whatever he could for the guy. If you recall, AFTER we gave OBJ his big contract, he started mouthing off that he would prefer to play in Los Angeles. Then, he has a minor injury and sits himself for the month of December.
In my opinion (no evidence), those two things sent John Mara off the deep end and he told DG to get this asshole off of my team. I just gave him the richest contract in Giants' history and he is taking us for granted.
So, lets do the analysis on DG excluding this deal for the reasons I mention above. It actually goes back to an earlier comment I made about John Mara pushing too many buttons.
Gettleman has drafted a collection of talent that other than Slayton and Lawrence, has not translated to good pro football players.
And even slayton has not shown he can beat coverages enough to be a #2 WR.
I think he likely takes summations from his data people, but he trusts his eyes more. It's hard to see data driving the Leonard Williams move or taking a RB so high, I think data would argue against it. Just a gut feeling.
Why is the onus on fans to identify candidates to replace Dave Gettleman? As many people have pointed out, the problem isn't so much that Dave Gettleman was hired as GM, it was the process that resulted in that decision that is fundamentally broken.
Calling Ernie Accorsi and hiring whoever he recommends isn't a process. That's the laziest shit imaginable.
The onus is not on the fans. All I am asking is WHO do the fans here want? Nobody is going to make a hire based upon what BBI says... but I am from the belief that if you do not like the plan, then come up with your own plan... or STFU.
I do not know who the next GM should be, but I like what John Lynch has been doing in San Francisco. I would look for a retired player who somehow has shown to have an eye for talent and has strong leadership qualities.
Quote:
Why is the onus on fans to identify candidates to replace Dave Gettleman? As many people have pointed out, the problem isn't so much that Dave Gettleman was hired as GM, it was the process that resulted in that decision that is fundamentally broken.
Calling Ernie Accorsi and hiring whoever he recommends isn't a process. That's the laziest shit imaginable.
The onus is not on the fans. All I am asking is WHO do the fans here want? Nobody is going to make a hire based upon what BBI says... but I am from the belief that if you do not like the plan, then come up with your own plan... or STFU.
WTF? If we don't have a plan then STFU? What the hell are you talking about? What the hell does a fan's plan (of which there are millions) even mean? And why would anyone take that seriously?
Quote:
Why is the onus on fans to identify candidates to replace Dave Gettleman? As many people have pointed out, the problem isn't so much that Dave Gettleman was hired as GM, it was the process that resulted in that decision that is fundamentally broken.
Calling Ernie Accorsi and hiring whoever he recommends isn't a process. That's the laziest shit imaginable.
The onus is not on the fans. All I am asking is WHO do the fans here want? Nobody is going to make a hire based upon what BBI says... but I am from the belief that if you do not like the plan, then come up with your own plan... or STFU.
I do not know who the next GM should be, but I like what John Lynch has been doing in San Francisco. I would look for a retired player who somehow has shown to have an eye for talent and has strong leadership qualities.
Find his replacement or STFU? Lighten up.
Find his replacement or STFU? Lighten up.
my whole point is we as fans want someone else but have no idea WHO. Reminds me of the time when my wife wanted to just get rid of her car but she did not know what she wanted yet to replace it. I told her she had to keep it until she figured it out because I was not going to be driving her everywhere.
I think it is harder to replace a GM than a head coach because there are fewer qualified candidates. As much as I want a new GM.. I have no idea WHO we SHOULD hire if he was fired at the end of this season.
So, all I am saying is lets back up the fire DG campaign with a list of suitable replacements. I have no idea where to start.
I have no idea and most fans wouldn't know. I do know I want someone who doesn't talk as much. I want someone who sees the whole picture rather than just combine stats and measurables. Someone who is objective enough to make had decisions on 35-36 year old QBs and the rosters around them.
Quote:
Find his replacement or STFU? Lighten up.
my whole point is we as fans want someone else but have no idea WHO. Reminds me of the time when my wife wanted to just get rid of her car but she did not know what she wanted yet to replace it. I told her she had to keep it until she figured it out because I was not going to be driving her everywhere.
I think it is harder to replace a GM than a head coach because there are fewer qualified candidates. As much as I want a new GM.. I have no idea WHO we SHOULD hire if he was fired at the end of this season.
So, all I am saying is lets back up the fire DG campaign with a list of suitable replacements. I have no idea where to start.
Then stop yelling at us to STFU.
Of course its not easy to just find a GM. But when you know the guy you have doesn't work then at least it provides you some comfort that you can do better. Not a guarantee you will find a great GM but fairly certain they should be able to find a better one than Gettleman.
Anyway, when looking over DG's tenure, the bright spots are pretty few and far between. I think we can all agree they consist mostly of:
1) Finding Slayton, who is at the very least a solid role player on a good team, and at beast, has shown the ceiling of a borderline #1/#2 on a functional offense. I think a realistic place he ends up is a solid #2 if this team can turn around.
2) Drafting Lawrence, who is already a good player but has the potential to continue to ascend, although this is partially tainted because he was part of the OBJ trade, which is a mixed bag.
3) Finding Ryan Connelly, which is moot since he's gone.
The thing that's maddening to me about DG is that when he trades away talent, he doesn't seem to have a solid plan in place to replace it. The team he inherited had JPP, OBJ, Vernon, and Snacks. Of those, he oddly only seemed to have a plan to replace the whole created by Snacks.
Many have talked about the failure to remotely fix the OL and the awful plan for the OL this season, which is true, but the lack of investment in pass rushers is even glaringly more obvious to me.
Many applauded the JPP trade at the time but I really don't get what the rationale was there. He wasn't massively overpaid and has produced in Tampa Bay. Again, that production hasn't been replaced. The prevailing thought was that JPP could not play in a 3-4, which I do not think is accurate.
The Vernon for Zeitler trade was at least a decent move that paid off some dividends before Zeitler began to break down, but once again, no plan to replace what Vernon gave us when he was on the field.
As for Flowers, I, like many, was happy when he was cut; having said that, nobody thought to at least try him out at Guard before cutting him? In fairness though, he likely needed a change of scenery to get to where he is today.
I can't speak too much regarding his tenure w the Panthers, and granted they did go 15-1 and reach the Superbowl, but I do recall him trading away talent there - Josh Norman, Steve Smith - but it seems he was able to at least address those roster spots with some reinforcements.
On a second overarching note, taking a shot with Eli was a really stupid decision. McAdoo was right to bench him when he did - the problem was that he played Geno, not Lauletta, which was just as pointless. However, DG was probably hired by the Maras because he was willing to take a shot with Eli. This is where my problem with NYG's ownership is really underscored. This "keep it in the family" approach is asinine and needs to end. The next GM cannot be Abrams. Chris Mara needs to back the fuck off football operations. And they need to STOP. CONSULTING. ACCORSCI. Who gives a fuck what Ernie Accorsci thinks at this time? I can't help but think the Giants limited their GM search because they had a mandate that the new GM had to take a shot with Eli.
As for his drafting, I do not think it's crazy to say they have objectively been terrible.
1) Barkley - this has been discussed ad nauseum, but is a little more nuanced than people who right it off as a terrible decision now. If I'm being perfectly honest here, I absolutely hated the Barkley pick at the time due to not only the fact he was an RB, but the type of RB he was. I watched Penn State a lot and Barkley in particular with jealousy (as I'm a Rutgers fan who was so bummed he decommitted), but Barkley's propensity to dance around the line, get minimal gains on a bunch of plays, then break a big one, was evident in college. That is not the type of RB you take at #2 unless you have a great line.
Having said that, the vast majority of this board wanted Barkley or Darnold. The portion that wanted the two players who would look like the "correct" pick in hindsight (Josh Allen or Nelson) was miniscule. Nelson was a Guard and right or wrong, they don't go at the #2 overall spot, especially when you have the option of the QBs or Barkley. Allen would have been a ballsy, correct call, and kudos to the BBIers who said he'd turn out to be the best of the 4 being considered at #2 that year. I was not one of them and was totally wrong on that.
So that's a long way of saying Barkley was not the right guy to pick, but I still think the alternative would have ended up being Darnold.
2) Jones - Jones is better than he looks this season, but his ceiling is not what the #6 overall pick's ceiling should be, and is actively being lowered by being on this shitty team. If Jones went to a team with a competent O-line and some semblance of NFL caliber skill players, he'd clearly be a solid to good QB. I don't think he has the pocket presence to be a great QB, not to mention he locks onto his WRs too much and obviously turns the ball over at an insane rate. The fumbles are something that IIRC were on his scouting report from Duke, and have not improved at all.
The question is whether some of this issues have been exacerbated and whether Jones change to improve in this areas has been shot (or is actively disintegrating) due to the terrible team around him. The end result is the same though; he has not shown remotely enough to forgo a top QB if the Giants have a shot at one. He also has been bad enough (so far) that replacing him needs to be the #1 priority.
The Giants appear to be headed for a top 3 pick again. If the pick is #1, DG will likely be fired and his replacement is not going to pass up on Lawrence, period. It's not even worth arguing, it's not going to happen.
If it's #2, DG is probably fired, but I wouldn't reach to replace Jones automatically. I think the pick should be S'ua, even if it means keeping Thomas at RT. Thomas hasn't grown into being an LT yet, but again, instead of hinging your hopes that he grows into one on where the (likely fired) DG took Thomas, you need to look at it as a sunk cost, slide Thomas to RT, hope he becomes a lynchpin there, then take S'ua and hope you're solidifed bookends for a long time. Grab a center, maybe bring in some competition for Hernandez, and hope that between another guard, an aging Zeitler, Hernandez, Lemiux, and Gates, you can find 3 competent inside players.
But if the pick is #3 and Fields has another great season, I think the new GM (or DG if god forbid he is still here).
Lawrence is a good player worth of where was picked, but the roster already had Tomlinson and had more pressing needs than DT.
Regardless of what people thought of Baker at the time, he was a bad pick. It's easy for people to say "how could you know he'd be arrested for armed robbery?", but that isn't even the reason I think he was unequivocally a bad pick. He was a bad pick because not only is he off the team (regardless of the reason), he also wasn't very good when he was on the field. Yes, the light bulb may have gone on, but when you couple his on field play with the fact the character concerns fleshed themselves out and he got released, it was a bad pick.
The Wiliams and OBJ trades were not good trades. Some may agree with the timing of getting rid of OBJ, which I can get behind, because big game against Dallas notwithstanding, I do not think he looks like he is physically the same player as he was in his NYG prime. But he'd still be by far the best skill player on this offense and is still a #1 WR in the NFL. He has no chemistry with Mayfield, and keeping him around would have been extremely helpful for Jones development. The return for OBJ was not great. The picks were not used wisely as some were traded for Baker, and Peppers is not a good football player (and was not good in Cleveland). If you wanted to get two firsts for him, they should have gotten a second 1st round pick from someone, not Peppers. Eric has said that there's a chance Lawrence ends up being the best player in that trade, but unless that happens, I think we can chalk that up as a bad move.
The Williams trade is still perplexing to this day. I do not get the rationale behind it.
This turned into a huge rambling post, but I don't get what people are expecting from DG when they say to give him time and believe he can turn it around. He has shown nothing to this point to inspire confidence, and there's this cloud of pseudo-organizational-nepotism around his hire in the first place.
Good Post. Unfortunately the pitch forks, groups and sides have taken over
Look Lawrence Taylor is not on this team any more. Neither is Phil Simms or 2011 Eli Manning or Mark Bavaro. And if they were they would be slow and old.
You just have to go with this for a little while. This team is young ; I guess they are playing hard ; and they need to get better. I guess I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. What other choice do you really have?
You are going to fire Gentleman and get some guy from somewhere who is going to find some mythological players that turn a team that has sucked for 5 years into NE Patriots over night? That is not going to happen.
sign me up for that!
Quote:
He forces good football discussions off the tracks, while adding nothing of substance. I find it hard to believe that anybody could find him a "good read" since he never posts anything of value. All his posts are attacking other posters. If that is what you enjoy, well then you can have him.
Ask Pete if I've attacked him. Ask montana. Ask ryankeane. There are hundreds of posters here that I've never attacked.
But you went to the tried and true "nothing of substance" comment. What is the substance you're looking for? When I provide Gettleman's track record at Carolina and posted the specifics behind his time in Carolina - that's not adding substance? When I provide information from the Combine, that isn't substance??
It isn't that you want substance, you want agreement. You want acceptance that your opinion holds weight. You want to post something about positional value and you don't want to be challenged on it.
And apparently, you want civility. However, whether or not a post has profanity in it doesn't make it civil or not. You've flat out accused me of being a paid shill for the team. Civil?? You take unprovoked potshots at me across a number of threads and say it's OK because it is warranted. Civil?
You don't like that you've been challenged so you say there's nothing being posted "of value". The bottom line is that you've been attacked. Not everyone on the board. You. And thus the exaggeration that the majority of the board is attacked. Hell, lax counsel says I haven't even been on the board for the last 4 weeks, so perception of my posting is pretty damned warped.
Dude, you were called out by two other posters for disappearing with respect to threads regarding state of the franchise, talent, or management - something you were all over in the offseason. You then post a list of threads proving my exact point. Conveniently, you glossed over McL's and giantstock's reply to my point, where they both also called you out. You knew exactly what I meant, you were just too embarrassed to reply.
Also, I would add that opinions that are expressed as if they are fact present the person expressing them as somewhat of an expert. I have trouble connecting the reasoning on fans who have obvious suggestions for a coach, a gm etc who more than likely spend countless hours at their job. That it isn't to say that a fan could never be right about their suggestions, but going back to what I said above the certainty of which that suggestion is expressed considering the experience and background of most fans doesn't seem logical to me anyway.
As for Gettleman, I certainly wouldn't call myself a defender of Gettleman, but more a defender of letting adequate time reveal a better picture before making a hard decision. Considering all logical routes a decision could go on it's way to it's final destination as well as surrounding circumstances. I do not find this to be unreasonable, however if I am missing something feel free to point it out, however only in a honest fashion. Gettleman mocking the analytical question at the Shurmur press conference was hardly worth it as it has caused a great resistance from those that have a passion for analytics. Although I am not sure he was actually mocking analytics, more so mocking those that do not understand analytics, as if analytics has some magical, easy answer for everything. I find that mocking to be accurate if in fact that is what Gettleman was mocking.
I would also like to add the question. How many personnel decisions do we obviously lacked analytical guidance? I personally don't know. It's a fair question to consider. In the end Gettleman should be judged by the roster he constructed with adequate time, and it certainly isn't looking good for him.
Actually, I wish we can go back to the end of the 2017 season. Wish i can go back an read the threads on how this team was going to be so much better with the "inmates" being traded. I like to see ho many people that are vilifying DG now were all on board when he was dismantling the team. Because, if you backed what he did then, this is the result that you reaped!
What's the difference in this team and the one 3 years ago. Those who were crowing about DG's draft were light years better than Reese. Take a look at Greg's post. That 18 and 19 draft ain't looking to rosy now is it?
To your question GT about the process and discussing it, that's the elephant in the room that no one want to admit.
John Mara is just as involved as Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder when it comes down to football operations and decisions. Maybe not to the extent that they do, but is is thoroughly involved. So that "process" is never going to change. Why yo think DG was hired on the first place? He knows the dynamics of the involvement of John and Chris Mara
Absurd, isn't it? The Mara Family has been involved in the NFL for nearly a century, but it's up to fans on a message board to identify GM candidates from a pool of people we can't even begin to fathom, because John Mara is either incapable or unwilling to ever deviate from the line-of-succession that has been in place for 4 decades.
I don't have a recommendation for GM because that's not my job and I'm not privy to any reasonable list of candidates. It's John Mara's job to find the right GM, and it's the GM's job to IMPROVE THE TEAM. Point blank.
Spot on, GoTerps, per usual. The process is broken, and a fresh prospective is needed. Perhaps that's Judge, but we'll see.
Do you need someone else to admit that to know it is true? Honestly, why do you give a a flying fuck if FMiC admits he was wrong about anything?
The fact fact that so many of you give him so much power over you is just silly.
Fucking LET IT GO.
At the end of the year the owners will look at the Giants of the year and decide if DG stays or goes. 3 years for a GM is probably on the short side historically but I think it will be fair in this case. I also think he will be judged on Daniel Jones and the state of the OL....Wait for it. AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
AS much as you all want the pitchforks to come out now, you are premature. I know, you are tired of losing. Me too. But I can read. I know what the people cutting the checks have said.
I am going to weigh in on FMiC issue. I have had a number of differences with the guy over time. I don't have any kind of war with him though. So, he has attacked some points I have made, he is just another asshole on the internet(no offense man, I am one too) I agree with him at times too. I don't get to concerned about it.
In his defense, some of you are just miserable. It feels as if you are mad after every loss and just want to say shitty things about anyone and anything. When emotionally compromised, smart people say dumb things and FMiC crucifies them. Smart people don't like that and attack back.
We are literally YEARS into something that can be boiled down to.
He called me stupid.
He called me stupid first.
Rinse and repeat and it lasts a decade.
Let it go.
Quote:
In comment 15005947 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
And unrelated to the discussion about FMiC's posts - who cares who defends DG and who doesn't (on both sides)? There's no reason to fight with each other about this. On one hand, people are allowed to have opinions even if you disagree with them, but on the other, claiming that people are grabbing for pitchforks when the team has shown 0 improvement during his tenure also doesn't make much sense...
It might be easy for you to say. But how often have you gone back-and-forth with him while he swears at you calling you names all-the-while changing the meaning of your posts.
Fmic swearing/calling you names typically means he is pissed that you have better argument than him. It also signals that he is about to pivot to try and bail himself out.
He is nothing if not predictable.
But yeah, trust me, I've been the target of his ire on many occasions - I just tend to think of it as "well that's how he posts, he does it to everyone".
We do need to focus on how we ended up with DG and Reese. I mentioned this in another post yesterday.
The issue to me is John Mara. He hired both Reese and DG and not only that, he let Acorsi make the selections for him. OR.. he was using Acorsi to provide some credibility to HIS selection making it seem to the fans that a football guy is endorsing the pick.
I believe John Mara is extremely conservative when it comes to selecting the individuals who will be the GM and the coach of this team. Image is a big thing for him apparently.
I used to laugh at Reese in his post draft press conferences when he would often refer to players as "clean". It was as if not having any baggage was a huge deal and at times more important than the on-field upside the player may offer. Now, I feel like that directive came from John Mara.
So, if John continues to push some of these buttons, then we will always have a GM who has some ties to the organization.
Now, all of that said... we never did have another guy who we thought was a slam dunk selection for our GM. For those who want to fire DG now I get it but we must decide WHO is a viable replacement. It has to be a realistic selection and someone who is not currently a GM for another team. Not so easy...
However, at this point, it's very irritating to see people try to blame Reese to give DG a pass. At the end of the day, I'm going to look back at the Reese era a lot more fondly than the DG era.
No matter how much he sucked at the end of his tenure, the Giants won two superbowls under his watch. I really don't get when people say DG has been better than Reese when the Giants record clearly shows he has not been.
Regardless of the state of the team when DG took over, they have not improved AT ALL, and the roster is unequivocally LESS talented.
Quote:
Anyway, when looking over DG's tenure, the bright spots are pretty few and far between. I think we can all agree they consist mostly of:
1) Finding Slayton, who is at the very least a solid role player on a good team, and at beast, has shown the ceiling of a borderline #1/#2 on a functional offense. I think a realistic place he ends up is a solid #2 if this team can turn around.
2) Drafting Lawrence, who is already a good player but has the potential to continue to ascend, although this is partially tainted because he was part of the OBJ trade, which is a mixed
you can add a few more... Bradberry and Martinez for example. Our new kicker is working out well.. lol
But on the flip side of that, Solder, Omameh, the Ogletree trade... bad moves.
Also, I would add that opinions that are expressed as if they are fact present the person expressing them as somewhat of an expert. I have trouble connecting the reasoning on fans who have obvious suggestions for a coach, a gm etc who more than likely spend countless hours at their job. That it isn't to say that a fan could never be right about their suggestions, but going back to what I said above the certainty of which that suggestion is expressed considering the experience and background of most fans doesn't seem logical to me anyway.
Crick from my POV, it's just an internet fan site so the "Default" is already in place that all posts are opinion and the poster is not an expert. That still may not fit your (or others) conversational taste but that is up to each reader.
Quote:
The certainty at which opinions are often expressed on this board leave little room for good conversation. The often used retort to what I just have outlined is, "of course we're all expressing opinions". Well, if that is the case, why not express it that way? To me, how something is expressed is the foundation for the conversation. Opinions that are expressed with absolute certainty with little to zero doubt for any contrary information is quite the one way conversation.
Also, I would add that opinions that are expressed as if they are fact present the person expressing them as somewhat of an expert. I have trouble connecting the reasoning on fans who have obvious suggestions for a coach, a gm etc who more than likely spend countless hours at their job. That it isn't to say that a fan could never be right about their suggestions, but going back to what I said above the certainty of which that suggestion is expressed considering the experience and background of most fans doesn't seem logical to me anyway.
Crick from my POV, it's just an internet fan site so the "Default" is already in place that all posts are opinion and the poster is not an expert. That still may not fit your (or others) conversational taste but that is up to each reader.
I actually appreciate the way you chose to express your POV. I see your POV and do not feel as if you're forcing your opinion on me which bothers me a great deal. To each their own.
Quote:
Only if his OL comes over with him.
The Cowboys line yesterday was an utter disaster, and Elliot ran hard and was productive. Look at Freeman behind this line, then imagine one of the best in the business hitting the hole hard.
At some point it can’t be summarily dismissed that Barkley has gained 37% of his career yards on fewer than 25 plays and something like half his carries have gone for 1 yard or less. He’s got a hole in his game.
Maybe Russian Roulette is the better description, a revolver aimed at the head of the head coach.
Remember all those complaints about Shurmur getting away from Barkley in second halves. Hmmm.....
Quote:
In comment 15006011 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 15005947 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
And unrelated to the discussion about FMiC's posts - who cares who defends DG and who doesn't (on both sides)? There's no reason to fight with each other about this. On one hand, people are allowed to have opinions even if you disagree with them, but on the other, claiming that people are grabbing for pitchforks when the team has shown 0 improvement during his tenure also doesn't make much sense...
It might be easy for you to say. But how often have you gone back-and-forth with him while he swears at you calling you names all-the-while changing the meaning of your posts.
Fmic swearing/calling you names typically means he is pissed that you have better argument than him. It also signals that he is about to pivot to try and bail himself out.
He is nothing if not predictable.
FMiC has cursed me out tons of times. I have no idea why he's so angry all the time to be honest, and he's an incredibly abrasive poster. He's not my favorite at all, but it just seems pointless to go back and forth over things like how much he's been posting on the board.
But yeah, trust me, I've been the target of his ire on many occasions - I just tend to think of it as "well that's how he posts, he does it to everyone".
Why is this acceptable though? This isn't a faceless ESPN message board, it's one meant to foster the free exchange of opinions, generally in regard to the Giants - people literally donate to keep the site running. There are several different thoughts on the Giants, all of which are valid. I've disagreed with posters and vice versa. Same goes for other posters, yet it rarely devolves into the level of discourse brought about by FMiC. There's also some integrity behind the posts. At least stand by your original opinions, without trying to do an about face and wordsmith your prior posts, when called out.
I have my opinions, we all do. Most on the board stand by them, with one notable exception called out multiple times today. Listen, I really liked Darnold. I thought he would be very good. I was completely wrong, and I own that. Maybe he'd be better in another situation I don't know. There are posters who saw his flaws, and I applaud them for that. See, its not hard.
Quote:
In comment 15005947 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
Anyway, when looking over DG's tenure, the bright spots are pretty few and far between. I think we can all agree they consist mostly of:
1) Finding Slayton, who is at the very least a solid role player on a good team, and at beast, has shown the ceiling of a borderline #1/#2 on a functional offense. I think a realistic place he ends up is a solid #2 if this team can turn around.
2) Drafting Lawrence, who is already a good player but has the potential to continue to ascend, although this is partially tainted because he was part of the OBJ trade, which is a mixed
you can add a few more... Bradberry and Martinez for example. Our new kicker is working out well.. lol
Fair enough. My post was definitely not well organized, and I think at the outset I was thinking more about the draft. Bradberry and Martinez were good signings, both of which have worked out better than I anticipated.
But on the flip side of that, Solder, Omameh, the Ogletree trade... bad moves.
Yes, and I would tend to agree with you in there were many bad moves. He did make more than just a couple of moves that worked out. In the end, not enough of them for sure.
On Solder, I am trying to rewind and look at it from the day he made that deal. We were coming off of a season where the consensus was we had the worst OL in football AND we had a left tackle in Flowers who was viewed as the worst in football.
At that moment, the free agent options were not great. Plus, what we do not know is whether any of the other free agents wanted to come here. Solder may have been our third choice. All we know is that we signed Solder.
Solder did not look this bad on film the prior year with the Pats. In my opinion, we were in a position where we had to overpay a guy to HOPEFULLY improve the OL. Sounds like bullshit but I think that is what we were dealing with at that time.
So my question is: why doesn’t Mara essentially have his HC or GM selected based on real information - not interview theatrics- before the search even begins? By real information: real intelligence from leading NFL minds who are encouraged to speak honestly. Mara has access to these people. Is he getting the information and using it properly? I am skeptical he is.
So what I’d like to see is: No short list. No formal interviews. Talk to the right people to find out who the really bright personnel people are to replace DG. Then have an informal meeting with them before the position even becomes open to make sure there is a fit and that you’re not hiring a sociopath. Then announce the hire.
That’s my two cents.
Quote:
I would talk about the process that hired him, and how to improve that. Put a process in place that goes beyond nepotism and cronyism, and you're likely to end up with a better list of candidates.
I have a comment about this. Mara’s statements after hiring Judge left me puzzled, that he was a terrific interview and that got him hired. I realize communication skills are an important part of head coaching but there are a lot of losers out there who can talk well to mask their incompetence.
So my question is: why doesn’t Mara essentially have his HC or GM selected based on real information - not interview theatrics- before the search even begins? By real information: real intelligence from leading NFL minds who are encouraged to speak honestly. Mara has access to these people. Is he getting the information and using it properly? I am skeptical he is.
So what I’d like to see is: No short list. No formal interviews. Talk to the right people to find out who the really bright personnel people are to replace DG. Then have an informal meeting with them before the position even becomes open to make sure there is a fit and that you’re not hiring a sociopath. Then announce the hire.
That’s my two cents.
I think John Mara indicated he had spoken to Belichick about Judge several times, and even before meeting with him.
Just saying, my two cents.
I think John Mara indicated he had spoken to Belichick about Judge several times, and even before meeting with him.
Just saying, my two cents.
I agree in that the interview was likely what put Judge over the top but the guy likely received a heavy endorsement from BB. At this point, I trust BB more than Acorsi when it comes to recommendations. I am sure he provided a similar recommendation to the Titans when they hired their coach....
His brother Chris is the SR VP of Player Personnel since 2012. His nephew Tim McDonnell is the Assistant Director of Player Personnel - yet another Mara whose only qualification for his job is being a Mara. He's worked for the Giants in the football operation since 2013. He reports to Ken Sternfeld who has been the Director of Player Personnel since 2012. See a pattern here? Can you imagine those 3 guys with their track record still employed by any other NFL team?
That's why Gettleman got the job. Because before he left the Giants he worked with all those guys and understands that GM of Giants is a middle management job and where the real power is. Not because Ernie recommended him.
That's why Abrams was going to be the next GM when there was a soft landing for Gettleman. Now that it's going end so ugly for Gettleman John Mara will probably try to find another middle manager to take the heat and occasionally speak to the media while his family continues to run the roster of the football team and pick the coaches.
I think that is a bit extreme Arnie..
Quote:
John Mara will probably try to find another middle manager to take the heat and occasionally speak to the media while his family continues to run the roster of the football team and pick the coaches.
I think that is a bit extreme Arnie..
They definitely pick the coaches, I don’t think that’s even debatable.
How much they are involved in player moves is unknown but I find it highly unlikely that owners in high roles in the org are taking a back seat.
However, we also know that doesn't seem likely to change, at least not materially, no matter what you think and do not know.
So your best hope as a fan who thinks the family is in the way, is to find a better GM that can handle the above dynamic and add more value to the process of running the team than DG has.
Or find another another team to follow.
If the on the field losing starts impacting the finances of the more passive owners, they could force a change.
As for me, I would probably just stop following the NFL as opposed to rooting for another team. I’m not there yet, but an Abrams promotion and more losing could push me over the edge.
We have no idea if the people who are the Giants SR VP PP. The Director of PP and the assistant Director PP are good or bad at their jobs that they've had since 2012?
Well their track record of draft picks and free agent signings is a place to start but if that confuses you how about their won loss record?
I think we all know. Hell they even know.
If the on the field losing starts impacting the finances of the more passive owners, they could force a change.
As for me, I would probably just stop following the NFL as opposed to rooting for another team. I’m not there yet, but an Abrams promotion and more losing could push me over the edge.
Maybe.
And, imv, I think DG will be "retired" if the Giants lose their next two divisional games, and Abrams will be named interim-GM.
Quote:
Whether they are good, bad or indifferent at those roles, poster here have no idea
We have no idea if the people who are the Giants SR VP PP. The Director of PP and the assistant Director PP are good or bad at their jobs that they've had since 2012?
Well their track record of draft picks and free agent signings is a place to start but if that confuses you how about their won loss record?
I think we all know. Hell they even know.
Was I being too nice again?
I got really stop that.
Organization needs a major overhaul.
We have blown so many number 1 picks over the past 8 years that should be the cornerstone of this team
It feels like the late 60’s and 70’s all over again.
It does feel a lot like the 70s again with this team.
I've said repeatedly that Gettleman has made some poor moves. But that he also inherited a team that was in a terrible state.
Are you really saying that the record of a team is the indicator of if a GM is doing well or not?? Funny, because Yankee fans want their GM run out of town.
I said that this year was a critical one in if the team is heading in the right direction. If we miss the playoffs and are at the bottom of the league again - he needs to go, not because of the record but because after three years, we still aren't in a competitive position.
The record of the team over three years isn't a reasonable indicator if a GM is doing well or not?
Anyway, when looking over DG's tenure, the bright spots are pretty few and far between. I think we can all agree they consist mostly of:
1) Finding Slayton, who is at the very least a solid role player on a good team, and at beast, has shown the ceiling of a borderline #1/#2 on a functional offense. I think a realistic place he ends up is a solid #2 if this team can turn around.
2) Drafting Lawrence, who is already a good player but has the potential to continue to ascend, although this is partially tainted because he was part of the OBJ trade, which is a mixed
LOL on the FGBag... Freudian I think...
As far as who supports or defends DG, and who opposes him, I don't really care either. Differing points of view is what makes a good football debate.
It's just that some won't tolerate a different POV, without resorting to aggressive posting (to coin a phrase)
this...
It has to be somebody with some cahones, and enough credibility to back it up.
Anyway, when looking over DG's tenure, the bright spots are pretty few and far between. I think we can all agree they consist mostly of:
1) Finding Slayton, who is at the very least a solid role player on a good team, and at beast, has shown the ceiling of a borderline #1/#2 on a functional offense. I think a realistic place he ends up is a solid #2 if this team can turn around.
2) Drafting Lawrence, who is already a good player but has the potential to continue to ascend, although this is partially tainted because he was part of the OBJ trade, which is a mixed bag.
3) Finding Ryan Connelly, which is moot since he's gone.
The thing that's maddening to me about DG is that when he trades away talent, he doesn't seem to have a solid plan in place to replace it. The team he inherited had JPP, OBJ, Vernon, and Snacks. Of those, he oddly only seemed to have a plan to replace the whole created by Snacks.
Many have talked about the failure to remotely fix the OL and the awful plan for the OL this season, which is true, but the lack of investment in pass rushers is even glaringly more obvious to me.
Many applauded the JPP trade at the time but I really don't get what the rationale was there. He wasn't massively overpaid and has produced in Tampa Bay. Again, that production hasn't been replaced. The prevailing thought was that JPP could not play in a 3-4, which I do not think is accurate.
The Vernon for Zeitler trade was at least a decent move that paid off some dividends before Zeitler began to break down, but once again, no plan to replace what Vernon gave us when he was on the field.
As for Flowers, I, like many, was happy when he was cut; having said that, nobody thought to at least try him out at Guard before cutting him? In fairness though, he likely needed a change of scenery to get to where he is today.
I can't speak too much regarding his tenure w the Panthers, and granted they did go 15-1 and reach the Superbowl, but I do recall him trading away talent there - Josh Norman, Steve Smith - but it seems he was able to at least address those roster spots with some reinforcements.
On a second overarching note, taking a shot with Eli was a really stupid decision. McAdoo was right to bench him when he did - the problem was that he played Geno, not Lauletta, which was just as pointless. However, DG was probably hired by the Maras because he was willing to take a shot with Eli. This is where my problem with NYG's ownership is really underscored. This "keep it in the family" approach is asinine and needs to end. The next GM cannot be Abrams. Chris Mara needs to back the fuck off football operations. And they need to STOP. CONSULTING. ACCORSCI. Who gives a fuck what Ernie Accorsci thinks at this time? I can't help but think the Giants limited their GM search because they had a mandate that the new GM had to take a shot with Eli.
As for his drafting, I do not think it's crazy to say they have objectively been terrible.
1) Barkley - this has been discussed ad nauseum, but is a little more nuanced than people who right it off as a terrible decision now. If I'm being perfectly honest here, I absolutely hated the Barkley pick at the time due to not only the fact he was an RB, but the type of RB he was. I watched Penn State a lot and Barkley in particular with jealousy (as I'm a Rutgers fan who was so bummed he decommitted), but Barkley's propensity to dance around the line, get minimal gains on a bunch of plays, then break a big one, was evident in college. That is not the type of RB you take at #2 unless you have a great line.
Having said that, the vast majority of this board wanted Barkley or Darnold. The portion that wanted the two players who would look like the "correct" pick in hindsight (Josh Allen or Nelson) was miniscule. Nelson was a Guard and right or wrong, they don't go at the #2 overall spot, especially when you have the option of the QBs or Barkley. Allen would have been a ballsy, correct call, and kudos to the BBIers who said he'd turn out to be the best of the 4 being considered at #2 that year. I was not one of them and was totally wrong on that.
So that's a long way of saying Barkley was not the right guy to pick, but I still think the alternative would have ended up being Darnold.
2) Jones - Jones is better than he looks this season, but his ceiling is not what the #6 overall pick's ceiling should be, and is actively being lowered by being on this shitty team. If Jones went to a team with a competent O-line and some semblance of NFL caliber skill players, he'd clearly be a solid to good QB. I don't think he has the pocket presence to be a great QB, not to mention he locks onto his WRs too much and obviously turns the ball over at an insane rate. The fumbles are something that IIRC were on his scouting report from Duke, and have not improved at all.
The question is whether some of this issues have been exacerbated and whether Jones change to improve in this areas has been shot (or is actively disintegrating) due to the terrible team around him. The end result is the same though; he has not shown remotely enough to forgo a top QB if the Giants have a shot at one. He also has been bad enough (so far) that replacing him needs to be the #1 priority.
The Giants appear to be headed for a top 3 pick again. If the pick is #1, DG will likely be fired and his replacement is not going to pass up on Lawrence, period. It's not even worth arguing, it's not going to happen.
If it's #2, DG is probably fired, but I wouldn't reach to replace Jones automatically. I think the pick should be S'ua, even if it means keeping Thomas at RT. Thomas hasn't grown into being an LT yet, but again, instead of hinging your hopes that he grows into one on where the (likely fired) DG took Thomas, you need to look at it as a sunk cost, slide Thomas to RT, hope he becomes a lynchpin there, then take S'ua and hope you're solidifed bookends for a long time. Grab a center, maybe bring in some competition for Hernandez, and hope that between another guard, an aging Zeitler, Hernandez, Lemiux, and Gates, you can find 3 competent inside players.
But if the pick is #3 and Fields has another great season, I think the new GM (or DG if god forbid he is still here).
Lawrence is a good player worth of where was picked, but the roster already had Tomlinson and had more pressing needs than DT.
Regardless of what people thought of Baker at the time, he was a bad pick. It's easy for people to say "how could you know he'd be arrested for armed robbery?", but that isn't even the reason I think he was unequivocally a bad pick. He was a bad pick because not only is he off the team (regardless of the reason), he also wasn't very good when he was on the field. Yes, the light bulb may have gone on, but when you couple his on field play with the fact the character concerns fleshed themselves out and he got released, it was a bad pick.
The Wiliams and OBJ trades were not good trades. Some may agree with the timing of getting rid of OBJ, which I can get behind, because big game against Dallas notwithstanding, I do not think he looks like he is physically the same player as he was in his NYG prime. But he'd still be by far the best skill player on this offense and is still a #1 WR in the NFL. He has no chemistry with Mayfield, and keeping him around would have been extremely helpful for Jones development. The return for OBJ was not great. The picks were not used wisely as some were traded for Baker, and Peppers is not a good football player (and was not good in Cleveland). If you wanted to get two firsts for him, they should have gotten a second 1st round pick from someone, not Peppers. Eric has said that there's a chance Lawrence ends up being the best player in that trade, but unless that happens, I think we can chalk that up as a bad move.
The Williams trade is still perplexing to this day. I do not get the rationale behind it.
This turned into a huge rambling post, but I don't get what people are expecting from DG when they say to give him time and believe he can turn it around. He has shown nothing to this point to inspire confidence, and there's this cloud of pseudo-organizational-nepotism around his hire in the first place.
good post... yes a bit rambling, but I read it all.
I think you will find a lot of agreement from a number of posters, including myself.
Couple of minor points:
I agree that Barkley was a poor fit/timing for the Giants, he needed to go to a team with SB aspirations, with a good line looking for a playmaker to take them over the top. That said, don't discount the taking a RB too high argument either, there is evidence to back up that POV.
The thought on JPP was 2-fold I think. THat he could not play in a 3-4 (dubious), but that his hand and other injuries was going to hamper or continue to hamper his play and he wasn't going to play up to his contract. Apparently this line of thinking was wrong. DG was closer to this situation, and should have had a better handle on it.
Regarding OBJ, many of us thought he should have been traded BEFORE being resigned. The cap dollars invested and lost played a role in holding the team back.