But in order for that interpretation of how to play with Barkley to work, the team around him has to be set up for success. Yes, the threat of barkley forces teams to stack up 7, 8, 9 man fronts.
If you can't execute your offense because either the OL stinks or the WRs can't shake coverage, you have still not done your job correctly.
I think a really close comparison for Barkley is Alvin Kamara based on skillset. He is perfect where he plays because the Saints have great things around him. They're prepared to play winning football. If you put Kamara on this team he would probably suck too.
So if the player you drafted is dependent on having a functioning OL and some modicum of offensive talent around him, and you don't have that, you're putting the cherry on the cake before it's baked.
Just as he should gave traded down in this year’s draft. If you’re rebuilding you need quality picks. Not just one.
Exactly. It’s false to say it was Barkley vs Nelson. Trading down was the smart choice with the roster the Giants had but we have to trust Gettleman when he says none of the offers were good. Of course none of the offers were ever any good because he’s never traded down.
boot but, I also agree it wasn't just Barkley vs Nelson. In fact the argument can be made that by taking Barkley,not spending more picks on the Ol snd trading Beckham (which I am fine with, just using as an argument to previous premise), you made it impossible to use Barkley any differently. Our threats on offense became Barkley (and EE) with and aged and slowly becoming a shell Manning. The oline got worse, ELi collapsed further and here we are- SB injured, OL still weak and a struggling QB because his best wideout is a 5th rd 2nd year guy...
Barkley was NOT a guy who was guaranteed 4-5 yards each time he carried at PSU. I watched him in several games.
He would get stuffed multiple times and then rip off an 80 yard TD. He always threatened that every time he touched the ball.
That's what the Giants drafted. I love the player, but if fans think he was drafted to be a guy to consistently get your 4-5 yards, they are wrong. That does not mean he can't be that guy, but that's not why he was drafted that high!!
I just hope he comes back from the injury and can be effective. I think his time of injury hurts the big play potential, and that's his game.
He was drafting Barkley to try and make another run with Eli post the 17 debacle do we not understand... and this mentality has set the franchise back for years.
But in order for that interpretation of how to play with Barkley to work, the team around him has to be set up for success. Yes, the threat of barkley forces teams to stack up 7, 8, 9 man fronts.
If you can't execute your offense because either the OL stinks or the WRs can't shake coverage, you have still not done your job correctly.
I think a really close comparison for Barkley is Alvin Kamara based on skillset. He is perfect where he plays because the Saints have great things around him. They're prepared to play winning football. If you put Kamara on this team he would probably suck too.
So if the player you drafted is dependent on having a functioning OL and some modicum of offensive talent around him, and you don't have that, you're putting the cherry on the cake before it's baked.
I think Kamara is a good comparison in terms of running styple. The comp goes to pieces after that. Kamara was a 3rd rounder which bolsters the positional value argument and he was chosen as the complementary piece to an already established passing attack- he was not the centerpiece. Barkley was chosen at a pick that says "centerpiece." If Barkley was chosen to play the late-Breesian swing pass role, then Jones is supposed to be a taller version of late diminished passing skills Drew Brees, which means we didn't need to spend the 6th pick on him.
He was drafting Barkley to try and make another run with Eli post the 17 debacle do we not understand... and this mentality has set the franchise back for years.
Agreed, and the premise that the alternative was Nelson has never been correct. That they didn't take Chubb was further indication that the franchise had lost direction.
All because they took the most nfl ready and talented player in that draft?
Never mind that Barkley has essentially suffered two season ending injuries in a row now. I wonder if things would be slightly different right now if Barkley is out there playing every week.
So many things have gone wrong with this franchise. So many mistakes. Now we’re gonna zero in on the Barkley pick and use THAT as the seminal moment?
Barkley was the easiest pick this stupid franchise has made since Eli. He’s gotten hurt two straight years. We are undoubtably 1-4 right now maybe even 2-3 and staring at a legit division battle if he’s healthy.
And trading down only works if you get those picks right and don’t trade out of a legendary player. It works and fails both ways.
was fine taking Barkley or Donald. I typically don't want to take a RB with a top five pick for all of the usual reasons, but saw Barkely as a generational and transformational player. I also would have been happy trading down. Cleveland apparently offered #4 and both of their second round picks to move up to #2, and someone else said that Denver was prepared to offer a "king's ransom" for the pick.
All because they took the most nfl ready and talented player in that draft?
Never mind that Barkley has essentially suffered two season ending injuries in a row now. I wonder if things would be slightly different right now if Barkley is out there playing every week.
So many things have gone wrong with this franchise. So many mistakes. Now we’re gonna zero in on the Barkley pick and use THAT as the seminal moment?
Barkley was the easiest pick this stupid franchise has made since Eli. He’s gotten hurt two straight years. We are undoubtably 1-4 right now maybe even 2-3 and staring at a legit division battle if he’s healthy.
And trading down only works if you get those picks right and don’t trade out of a legendary player. It works and fails both ways.
djm -- Colin Lindsay is not making the argument that the Giants were wrong in taking Saquon Barkley.
The Barkley pick was a key moment to analyze the current status
of the franchise. To think its not, its like burying your head in the sand.
Teams that need a major rebuild should not go drafting a RB, albeit a very good RB, with the #2 overall pick. Unless of course the GM knows how to execute a successful rebuild despite doing so.
And after 3 years it's obvious Gettleman doesn't.
No one could be successful under the current regime
of the franchise. To think its not, its like burying your head in the sand.
Teams that need a major rebuild should not go drafting a RB, albeit a very good RB, with the #2 overall pick. Unless of course the GM knows how to execute a successful rebuild despite doing so.
And after 3 years it's obvious Gettleman doesn't.
One thing is certain about this franchise in 2021 -- Dave Gettleman will retire and somebody else will be making Draft day decisions.
If truth be told, I was one of the few BBIers who was more or less pro-Dave Gettleman. Today, it is sad to see that he is not only berated by Giants fans, but he also gets a fair amount of ridicule across the NFL.
In any event, he will retire as gracefully as possible, and someone else will have to start anew.
RE: RE: The Barkley pick was a key moment to analyze the current status
I'm with you about cleaning house. I only count a handful of players I want. Everyone else can play somewhere else.
The smartest move right now is to keep the phone lines wide open and take any draft picks they can get for 75% of this roster. A 7th for Evan Engram: Done. A 6th for Will Hernandez: Done. Future considerations for Kevin Zeitler: Done. A 4th for Leonard Williams: Done.
And the band played on.
RE: RE: RE: The Barkley pick was a key moment to analyze the current status
Partly why the loss of Beckham was huge - and I can't stand the guy and am glad he's not on the team.
With what Barkley does to a D - the vision was having that game-breaker at WR to blow the top off. The Cowboys have it going right now - they can run Zeke, and throw a go route to a 1on1 WR whenever they want.
It works. I realize they haven't won anything, but they are competitive.
Barkley was both the right pick and the wrong pick.
Talent wise he was worth the #2 pick and maybe even more. But getting multiple players for that spot would have brought the team along in a way that it hasn’t yet happened.
RE: Barkley was both the right pick and the wrong pick.
Talent wise he was worth the #2 pick and maybe even more. But getting multiple players for that spot would have brought the team along in a way that it hasn’t yet happened.
BillT - he was the "easy" wrong pick for this team at the time.
was fine taking Barkley or Donald. I typically don't want to take a RB with a top five pick for all of the usual reasons, but saw Barkely as a generational and transformational player. I also would have been happy trading down. Cleveland apparently offered #4 and both of their second round picks to move up to #2, and someone else said that Denver was prepared to offer a "king's ransom" for the pick.
If that Cleveland offer is true, that is a pretty big mistake. That would have given them 4th overall, 33rd and 35th to move back 2 spots.
Barkley was NOT a guy who was guaranteed 4-5 yards each time he carried at PSU. I watched him in several games.
He would get stuffed multiple times and then rip off an 80 yard TD. He always threatened that every time he touched the ball.
That's what the Giants drafted. I love the player, but if fans think he was drafted to be a guy to consistently get your 4-5 yards, they are wrong. That does not mean he can't be that guy, but that's not why he was drafted that high!!
I just hope he comes back from the injury and can be effective. I think his time of injury hurts the big play potential, and that's his game.
And that's the problem with Barkley, actually. That kind of RB does not win you games in the NFL if you use him as anything more than a gadget player. That's why Barry Sanders never won anything.
The pick would’ve returned a player plus extra 2nd round picks.
Think about what the OL was heading into that draft — Solder, Omameh, and Flowers. That’s it.
It’s not even about making the mistake of one more run with Eli. The OL had to be fixed either way. DG has touted “hog mollies” since day 1 and done an absolute shit job acquiring them.
Nice article, but the question was never Barkley vs. Nelson
takes on this board come around every year like clockwork. It's so tiresome.
Unless someone reports this as a fact, it isn't true. You think that if Gettleman was offered the 4 and some 2nd rounders and turned it down, people wouldn't know about that and wouldn't report that? That's a pretty big deal.
that Gettleman simultaneously tried to fix the OL. It wasn't like DG picked SB and then completely forgot about building an offense around him.
The problem is that Solder flopped. Flowers flopped in his try on the right side. Hernandez is nothing to write home about.Omameh flopped. Zeitler regressed. The myriad JAGs brought in as stop gap measures have mostly been horrendous. Thomas has looked like shit so far.
At the other skill positions, Engram is either injured, or not living up to potential. OBJ went from a star to a nutjob who needed jettisoning. Tate is a subpar replacement, and SS is oft injured/concussed.
And the coaching staff underwhelmed to the point of being fired after 2 years.
So in hindsight, SB turned out to be oft injured and stuck in absolute shit offense. Certainly, the argument could be made that the pick could have been better spent elsewhere. But the argument could also be made that the pick of SB was the correct move, but has come to naught because the Giants Braintrust has failed miserably at most every other aspect of building a team.
Gettleman admitted that there was a reasonable offer. Not saying what that was but everyone knew Cleveland wanted to pair mayfield w barkley so it had to be at least the #4 and one of the #2's. The point is you should NEVER fall in love with a player to the point of not even listening to offers and "turn your phone off". That is more than stupid.
takes on this board come around every year like clockwork. It's so tiresome.
Unless someone reports this as a fact, it isn't true. You think that if Gettleman was offered the 4 and some 2nd rounders and turned it down, people wouldn't know about that and wouldn't report that? That's a pretty big deal.
Gettleman and the Maras should have recognised that the team was spent and needed a rebuild. The warning signs were there. In that situation you trade down if there's an offer. Given all the hype around the four QB's, rememebering the Jets had the pick after us, you gotta believe a trade down would have been possible, but it seems Gettleman wasn't interested.
Trading down is something this article doesn't cover.
If "Taking a RB at #2 is the fireable offense" I hear about here...
The only other player with more value? Was the QB Allen.
Barkley is not the problem. The pick did not "set the franchise back years" (LOL).
The article is on target when it talks about getting him in space more. And they should have. Barkley should have been the #1 focus in the passing game and getting him on the outside on short passes. Every game. That should have been the focus.
was fine taking Barkley or Donald. I typically don't want to take a RB with a top five pick for all of the usual reasons, but saw Barkely as a generational and transformational player. I also would have been happy trading down. Cleveland apparently offered #4 and both of their second round picks to move up to #2, and someone else said that Denver was prepared to offer a "king's ransom" for the pick.
This is what they should have done. After the trade, take Nelson with #4 and Nick Chubb with one the the 2's and would have had 2 more 2's to play with. A no brainer.
Never mind that Barkley has essentially suffered two season ending injuries in a row now.
Do you agree or at least acknowledge that part of the reason why people sometimes express reservations about drafting a RB that high is specifically because that position does have a higher tendency to get injured?
I don't think you can ask for a pass on the Barkley debate by using injuries as an excuse when many people who criticize the pick included positional injury risk as part of their opposition to taking a RB at #2.
I do agree about SB being the most talented player in that draft, and for that reason alone, I can understand why so many fans continue to defend the selection. I personally felt (and feel) that a trade down was the better move. With a team that has holes all over the roster, I'd have been trying to trade down in each of the past three drafts , simply because we still need a lot of good players all over the roster as much if not more than needing a handful of great players at the top.
Having said that, I do think after taking SB and DJ in successive years, DG really had to get the OL fixed with young players once and for all this year, so I don't mind staying put this past year as much as the two prior drafts. But the fact that DG has been trying to execute a full tear-down and rebuild while giving away draft picks instead of collecting them is, IMO, a really inefficient inconsistency in his approach.
Perhaps I am not remembering clearly, but I thought the injury concern with a running back was due to wear and tear versus major injuries. I don't know if running backs are significantly more likely to suffer major injuries or not. Yes Barkley's acl has to be considered part of wear and tear, but my point is a lot of players are at risk for an ACL.
The only other player with more value? Was the QB Allen.
Barkley is not the problem. The pick did not "set the franchise back years" (LOL).
The article is on target when it talks about getting him in space more. And they should have. Barkley should have been the #1 focus in the passing game and getting him on the outside on short passes. Every game. That should have been the focus.
Maybe it didn't set the franchise back years, but with the #2 pick, you are certainly hoping to set the franchise up for years. It was a failed opportunity and a complete misread of the state of the franchise at that point.
And you are right, there was maybe no consensus #2 pick. I am sure if the Giants selected Allen people (myself included) would have screamed. Same for Nelson. I liked Darnold a lot, admittedly I was wrong. But here's the thing, no one on this board is paid millions to get these decisions right at critical times for the franchise. DG and crew were paid for this exact task. Right now it looks like there were multiple worth candidates of the #2 spot without a trade down for the Giants given their state in 2018 (Allen and Nelson included). These are things that should have been properly evaluated by the franchise front office.
Being a failed pick. I understand people not agreeing with the way a resource (2nd pick) was used, but even if it were a rule that you don't pick a running back 2nd, every rule has exceptions. Barkley requires the opposing defense to use a lot of resources to contain him, now unfortunately, with a roster with no other real threats that job isn't as difficult.
Being a failed pick. I understand people not agreeing with the way a resource (2nd pick) was used, but even if it were a rule that you don't pick a running back 2nd, every rule has exceptions. Barkley requires the opposing defense to use a lot of resources to contain him, now unfortunately, with a roster with no other real threats that job isn't as difficult.
But if you have a roster with no other real threats and a porous OL which makes the job of shutting down Barkley not difficult, then to me he the "easy" wrong pick at the time.
Good news is we still have him, and if healthy maybe we can deal him to a team that could use his talents moreso while the Giants rebuild properly.
Barkley himself has been, to this point, ineffectual. Even his excellent personal statistics in 2018 (which will probably end up being the best year of his career) didn't help the Giants be better than 5-11 and 16th in the NFL in scoring.
But the bigger problem had less to do with Barkley and more to do with the front office's complete misjudgment of the roster. That was the time to blow everything up, including getting rid of Eli. Drafting Barkley was a sign that they were making another run at lightning in a bottle.
And so here we are going on 3 seasons later. Completely lost.
I didn’t think RB at the 2 made any sense at the time...
You can’t gloss over the positional value argument as if it doesn’t matter. And in Colins write up, that point is also made by the fact they went all the back the 70s to find a guard taken in the top ten. Some positions are more valuable because they are more scarce. It’s really basic supply and demand. In fact, there are plenty of quality RB1s in the second and third rounds every single season. In fact, RB1s have short careers, on average, and they don’t take up that much space on the cap so there isn’t the same need to have them under a rookie deal. In fact, being a top 5 pick means we overpay for Barks, which also can not be ignore and is a big part of positional value. Getty ignored all of this, for whatever reason, and he has proven to wrong in that decision. In fact, Barkley has not changed the success of the Giants.
Regarding Barkley as a player, I think people completely over estimated him. There was all this talk about he was a future “gold jacket” and a “generational player”. Oh yeah? Well not so far, and yeah, I know he had a whale of a rookie campaign. And I know he can score every time he touches the ball. But I also know there were entire games where he disappeared. He doesn’t pass block and for whatever reason he hasn’t been much of a threat as a receiver. And he’s been injured a lot.
Don’t get me wrong, he’s a nice back and he’s exciting and by all accounts he’s a terrific young man. But I don’t think he’s the best RB1 in the NFL and I sure don’t think he’s been a good pick at the overall #2 pick.
The Barks at the 2 argument is taking on a similar flavor as the trade for LW. No one argues that LW isn’t a nice player, it was giving away the draft picks which made no sense. And here, no one argues that Barks isn’t a nice player, just that you don’t use the overall 2 on an RB1 because there are other parts of the value prop which do not compute.
At the end of the day, all these things indicate to me that Getty just doesn’t understand the NFL of today. This isn’t the 1970s NFL. On defense you need to rush the QB and shut down the WR1. On offense you need chunk plays, through the air, QBs are far more pro ready from college and, yeah, kind of like the 70s you need to protect the quarterback. And regardless of where you come down on any point, it is undeniable that Getty has been a nearly unrivaled failure as the Giants GM. The team is terrible and the loan bright spot, is I guess, the highly unlikely possibility that Getty knew more about Jones ability to QB than everyone else in the NFL.
If you think of team building like a fantasy draft, then sure, always draft the most physically talented player.
Except when you don't have the thing that RBs need to do their job.
The argument always seems to go back to "he was the most talented player". Thats not always how teams draft.
Giants fans have intentionally forgotten recent team history just to find a way to justify spending that pick on a RB while the OL and pass rush has been a flaming dumpster fire since 2013.
We all saw the Giants rise with Eli Manning from 05 to 2008 and win with pass rush,, brilliant OL and solid RBs. We chose to forget all of that because...why?
If you can't execute your offense because either the OL stinks or the WRs can't shake coverage, you have still not done your job correctly.
I think a really close comparison for Barkley is Alvin Kamara based on skillset. He is perfect where he plays because the Saints have great things around him. They're prepared to play winning football. If you put Kamara on this team he would probably suck too.
So if the player you drafted is dependent on having a functioning OL and some modicum of offensive talent around him, and you don't have that, you're putting the cherry on the cake before it's baked.
Exactly. It’s false to say it was Barkley vs Nelson. Trading down was the smart choice with the roster the Giants had but we have to trust Gettleman when he says none of the offers were good. Of course none of the offers were ever any good because he’s never traded down.
Dave the fucking moron refused to answer any calls when he was on the clock...
He would get stuffed multiple times and then rip off an 80 yard TD. He always threatened that every time he touched the ball.
That's what the Giants drafted. I love the player, but if fans think he was drafted to be a guy to consistently get your 4-5 yards, they are wrong. That does not mean he can't be that guy, but that's not why he was drafted that high!!
I just hope he comes back from the injury and can be effective. I think his time of injury hurts the big play potential, and that's his game.
If you can't execute your offense because either the OL stinks or the WRs can't shake coverage, you have still not done your job correctly.
I think a really close comparison for Barkley is Alvin Kamara based on skillset. He is perfect where he plays because the Saints have great things around him. They're prepared to play winning football. If you put Kamara on this team he would probably suck too.
So if the player you drafted is dependent on having a functioning OL and some modicum of offensive talent around him, and you don't have that, you're putting the cherry on the cake before it's baked.
Agreed, and the premise that the alternative was Nelson has never been correct. That they didn't take Chubb was further indication that the franchise had lost direction.
Never mind that Barkley has essentially suffered two season ending injuries in a row now. I wonder if things would be slightly different right now if Barkley is out there playing every week.
So many things have gone wrong with this franchise. So many mistakes. Now we’re gonna zero in on the Barkley pick and use THAT as the seminal moment?
Barkley was the easiest pick this stupid franchise has made since Eli. He’s gotten hurt two straight years. We are undoubtably 1-4 right now maybe even 2-3 and staring at a legit division battle if he’s healthy.
And trading down only works if you get those picks right and don’t trade out of a legendary player. It works and fails both ways.
Never mind that Barkley has essentially suffered two season ending injuries in a row now. I wonder if things would be slightly different right now if Barkley is out there playing every week.
So many things have gone wrong with this franchise. So many mistakes. Now we’re gonna zero in on the Barkley pick and use THAT as the seminal moment?
Barkley was the easiest pick this stupid franchise has made since Eli. He’s gotten hurt two straight years. We are undoubtably 1-4 right now maybe even 2-3 and staring at a legit division battle if he’s healthy.
And trading down only works if you get those picks right and don’t trade out of a legendary player. It works and fails both ways.
djm -- Colin Lindsay is not making the argument that the Giants were wrong in taking Saquon Barkley.
Teams that need a major rebuild should not go drafting a RB, albeit a very good RB, with the #2 overall pick. Unless of course the GM knows how to execute a successful rebuild despite doing so.
And after 3 years it's obvious Gettleman doesn't.
Teams that need a major rebuild should not go drafting a RB, albeit a very good RB, with the #2 overall pick. Unless of course the GM knows how to execute a successful rebuild despite doing so.
And after 3 years it's obvious Gettleman doesn't.
One thing is certain about this franchise in 2021 -- Dave Gettleman will retire and somebody else will be making Draft day decisions.
If truth be told, I was one of the few BBIers who was more or less pro-Dave Gettleman. Today, it is sad to see that he is not only berated by Giants fans, but he also gets a fair amount of ridicule across the NFL.
In any event, he will retire as gracefully as possible, and someone else will have to start anew.
One thing is certain about this franchise in 2021 -- Dave Gettleman will retire and somebody else will be making Draft day decisions.
Don't make promises you can't keep M.S.
I'm with you about cleaning house. I only count a handful of players I want. Everyone else can play somewhere else.
The smartest move right now is to keep the phone lines wide open and take any draft picks they can get for 75% of this roster. A 7th for Evan Engram: Done. A 6th for Will Hernandez: Done. Future considerations for Kevin Zeitler: Done. A 4th for Leonard Williams: Done.
And the band played on.
Quote:
One thing is certain about this franchise in 2021 -- Dave Gettleman will retire and somebody else will be making Draft day decisions.
Don't make promises you can't keep M.S.
LBH15 -- Ha! I could sure use a laugh on this cold, wet, rainy New York day!
With what Barkley does to a D - the vision was having that game-breaker at WR to blow the top off. The Cowboys have it going right now - they can run Zeke, and throw a go route to a 1on1 WR whenever they want.
It works. I realize they haven't won anything, but they are competitive.
BillT - he was the "easy" wrong pick for this team at the time.
If that Cleveland offer is true, that is a pretty big mistake. That would have given them 4th overall, 33rd and 35th to move back 2 spots.
He would get stuffed multiple times and then rip off an 80 yard TD. He always threatened that every time he touched the ball.
That's what the Giants drafted. I love the player, but if fans think he was drafted to be a guy to consistently get your 4-5 yards, they are wrong. That does not mean he can't be that guy, but that's not why he was drafted that high!!
I just hope he comes back from the injury and can be effective. I think his time of injury hurts the big play potential, and that's his game.
And that's the problem with Barkley, actually. That kind of RB does not win you games in the NFL if you use him as anything more than a gadget player. That's why Barry Sanders never won anything.
Think about what the OL was heading into that draft — Solder, Omameh, and Flowers. That’s it.
It’s not even about making the mistake of one more run with Eli. The OL had to be fixed either way. DG has touted “hog mollies” since day 1 and done an absolute shit job acquiring them.
I was certainly in the Darnold/Rosen camp, with a slight preference for Rosen.
The positional value argument was to take a QB -- not an OG, at 2nd overall.
Unless someone reports this as a fact, it isn't true. You think that if Gettleman was offered the 4 and some 2nd rounders and turned it down, people wouldn't know about that and wouldn't report that? That's a pretty big deal.
The problem is that Solder flopped. Flowers flopped in his try on the right side. Hernandez is nothing to write home about.Omameh flopped. Zeitler regressed. The myriad JAGs brought in as stop gap measures have mostly been horrendous. Thomas has looked like shit so far.
At the other skill positions, Engram is either injured, or not living up to potential. OBJ went from a star to a nutjob who needed jettisoning. Tate is a subpar replacement, and SS is oft injured/concussed.
And the coaching staff underwhelmed to the point of being fired after 2 years.
So in hindsight, SB turned out to be oft injured and stuck in absolute shit offense. Certainly, the argument could be made that the pick could have been better spent elsewhere. But the argument could also be made that the pick of SB was the correct move, but has come to naught because the Giants Braintrust has failed miserably at most every other aspect of building a team.
In comment 15006114 ryanmkeane said:
Unless someone reports this as a fact, it isn't true. You think that if Gettleman was offered the 4 and some 2nd rounders and turned it down, people wouldn't know about that and wouldn't report that? That's a pretty big deal.
gettleman admits to trade offer - ( New Window )
Trading up for Baker last year instead of picking Deebo Samuel or DK Metcalf knowing that WR was a need comes to mind.
Evan Engram over Ramczyk
Eli Apple over Tunsil
Reese did get dismissed!
Trading down is something this article doesn't cover.
The only other player with more value? Was the QB Allen.
Barkley is not the problem. The pick did not "set the franchise back years" (LOL).
The article is on target when it talks about getting him in space more. And they should have. Barkley should have been the #1 focus in the passing game and getting him on the outside on short passes. Every game. That should have been the focus.
Barkley is an immense talent that will help this team into the future.
Would have loved to hear these same comments during his rookie season. Where were those?
This is what they should have done. After the trade, take Nelson with #4 and Nick Chubb with one the the 2's and would have had 2 more 2's to play with. A no brainer.
Barkley is an immense talent that will help this team into the future.
Would have loved to hear these same comments during his rookie season. Where were those?
I agree with what you've written, but isn't the future a little cloudy given Saquon's knee injury?
Do you agree or at least acknowledge that part of the reason why people sometimes express reservations about drafting a RB that high is specifically because that position does have a higher tendency to get injured?
I don't think you can ask for a pass on the Barkley debate by using injuries as an excuse when many people who criticize the pick included positional injury risk as part of their opposition to taking a RB at #2.
I do agree about SB being the most talented player in that draft, and for that reason alone, I can understand why so many fans continue to defend the selection. I personally felt (and feel) that a trade down was the better move. With a team that has holes all over the roster, I'd have been trying to trade down in each of the past three drafts , simply because we still need a lot of good players all over the roster as much if not more than needing a handful of great players at the top.
Having said that, I do think after taking SB and DJ in successive years, DG really had to get the OL fixed with young players once and for all this year, so I don't mind staying put this past year as much as the two prior drafts. But the fact that DG has been trying to execute a full tear-down and rebuild while giving away draft picks instead of collecting them is, IMO, a really inefficient inconsistency in his approach.
Barkley is an immense talent that will help this team into the future.
Would have loved to hear these same comments during his rookie season. Where were those?
Team had a 5-11 record.
The only other player with more value? Was the QB Allen.
Barkley is not the problem. The pick did not "set the franchise back years" (LOL).
The article is on target when it talks about getting him in space more. And they should have. Barkley should have been the #1 focus in the passing game and getting him on the outside on short passes. Every game. That should have been the focus.
Maybe it didn't set the franchise back years, but with the #2 pick, you are certainly hoping to set the franchise up for years. It was a failed opportunity and a complete misread of the state of the franchise at that point.
And you are right, there was maybe no consensus #2 pick. I am sure if the Giants selected Allen people (myself included) would have screamed. Same for Nelson. I liked Darnold a lot, admittedly I was wrong. But here's the thing, no one on this board is paid millions to get these decisions right at critical times for the franchise. DG and crew were paid for this exact task. Right now it looks like there were multiple worth candidates of the #2 spot without a trade down for the Giants given their state in 2018 (Allen and Nelson included). These are things that should have been properly evaluated by the franchise front office.
But if you have a roster with no other real threats and a porous OL which makes the job of shutting down Barkley not difficult, then to me he the "easy" wrong pick at the time.
Good news is we still have him, and if healthy maybe we can deal him to a team that could use his talents moreso while the Giants rebuild properly.
But the bigger problem had less to do with Barkley and more to do with the front office's complete misjudgment of the roster. That was the time to blow everything up, including getting rid of Eli. Drafting Barkley was a sign that they were making another run at lightning in a bottle.
And so here we are going on 3 seasons later. Completely lost.
Regarding Barkley as a player, I think people completely over estimated him. There was all this talk about he was a future “gold jacket” and a “generational player”. Oh yeah? Well not so far, and yeah, I know he had a whale of a rookie campaign. And I know he can score every time he touches the ball. But I also know there were entire games where he disappeared. He doesn’t pass block and for whatever reason he hasn’t been much of a threat as a receiver. And he’s been injured a lot.
Don’t get me wrong, he’s a nice back and he’s exciting and by all accounts he’s a terrific young man. But I don’t think he’s the best RB1 in the NFL and I sure don’t think he’s been a good pick at the overall #2 pick.
The Barks at the 2 argument is taking on a similar flavor as the trade for LW. No one argues that LW isn’t a nice player, it was giving away the draft picks which made no sense. And here, no one argues that Barks isn’t a nice player, just that you don’t use the overall 2 on an RB1 because there are other parts of the value prop which do not compute.
At the end of the day, all these things indicate to me that Getty just doesn’t understand the NFL of today. This isn’t the 1970s NFL. On defense you need to rush the QB and shut down the WR1. On offense you need chunk plays, through the air, QBs are far more pro ready from college and, yeah, kind of like the 70s you need to protect the quarterback. And regardless of where you come down on any point, it is undeniable that Getty has been a nearly unrivaled failure as the Giants GM. The team is terrible and the loan bright spot, is I guess, the highly unlikely possibility that Getty knew more about Jones ability to QB than everyone else in the NFL.
Except when you don't have the thing that RBs need to do their job.
The argument always seems to go back to "he was the most talented player". Thats not always how teams draft.
Giants fans have intentionally forgotten recent team history just to find a way to justify spending that pick on a RB while the OL and pass rush has been a flaming dumpster fire since 2013.
We all saw the Giants rise with Eli Manning from 05 to 2008 and win with pass rush,, brilliant OL and solid RBs. We chose to forget all of that because...why?