Much ink has been spilled on DG and the problems of the front office but I wanted to focus it on a particular issue that has been a concern of mine. I've highlighted DG's attitude and how it didn't seem to meld with modern organizational psychology. Things like personalizing learning styles and understanding respect is a two way street, hard to get away with expecting everyone to be subservient to you. The more in demand a person is the more power they have these days and it is much easier to stand out in a bad way if you don't operate from this place.
It's been my assertion that because the Giants have refused to even understand how the tide is changing, to evolve the thinking in the building, they also don't even understand how to properly value players. They purge people based on "character" then draft players like Baker. It seems like they are looking for people that say, yes sir, no sir as opposed to actually understanding that these days some people will say that to your face and not follow through.
Sitting in a room with someone, looking them in the eye, cannot be underrated but it took me about 3 seconds of being in a room with Daniel Jones to pick up on what have been serious visible flaws of his personality showing up in his game.
My take from the 2019 town hall:
I had a different take on Daniel Jones completely
NoGainDayne : 6/12/2019 12:31 am : link
I hope he has more confidence on an NFL field than he has in front of crowds with public speaking (quite possible).
He looked like a deer in the headlights, you could feel the nervousness he had, it was palpable. He walked to the wrong chair and had to be pointed in the direction of the right chair.
Lawrence was the captivating guy. The guy the others respected as a rookie. He had a presence. |
Some select DG quotes:
The kid has been well trained. The huge part of this, and I’ve said it before, a big part of this is his make-up.
I made up my mind that I was staying for the game and, frankly, he walked out there and I saw a professional quarterback after the three series that I watched, I saw a professional quarterback. I was in full bloom love.
That’s like a bonus here. This kid is really talented, a really talented football player, and the head makes him more better. |
Notes from tonight's (2019) "Giants Town Hall" event - (
New Window )
And delivered
The Giants did their homework, they're just not going to tell the world what they did in a press conference.
If you are referring to how Eli is mocked as clueless than you are giving credence to the mockers who did that based on facial expressions not to who he actually was. I always stood up for Eli and in those town hall meetings Eli was a star every last one I saw of him. His comedic timing was on point, he seemed prepared and thoughtful. Jones couldn't have looked less like Eli.
I think we can agree we’ve seen people with 0 social skills be NFL All Pros & conversely people who act and sound the part be total busts.
Surely you’re not suggesting there is some personality trait you can notice immediately that determines a players success? You could carve out quite a scouting service for yourself.
I think we can agree we’ve seen people with 0 social skills be NFL All Pros & conversely people who act and sound the part be total busts.
Surely you’re not suggesting there is some personality trait you can notice immediately that determines a players success? You could carve out quite a scouting service for yourself.
You are missing my point. I said I saw flaws in 3 seconds, DG indicated that Jones was a person that displayed the opposite of what I saw. He is someone that very much seems to not have the right makeup to be a QB, yet that is what DG seemed to emphasize. I'm not saying I had the right read 100%, I'm saying why was I able to pick up a different and seemingly more accurate read of his flaws with far less time and resources to scout?
This is more about DG being wrong. It's the same thing with Andrew Thomas where we heard how NFL ready he was. Again, he seems to be short in the mental aspects of the game. What is the Giants FO seeing that makes them so sure of how strong and ready these players are mentally that clearly isn't manifesting on the field?
Short and sweet - what is the issue that needs a remedy?
Short and sweet - what is the issue that needs a remedy?
Jones needs to be funnier.
Short and sweet - what is the issue that needs a remedy?
The Giants don't know how to look at a players personalities and project them for success or customize training patterns that maximize a players success. (Maybe something Judge can improve)
The former I'm asserting won't get fixed without massive changes in the scouting department. The fact that they've identified DG as a good leader of men in this day and age is a glaring red flag that they don't know how to identify the right personality traits to succeed in the modern world.
But that is me
We all know intuitively when someone isn't up to the job. We've worked with them, went to school with them, maybe are even friends with them. I'm not saying Jones is low EQ, but you can be sure teams are taking that into account.
Quote:
And you can predict how someone is going to play?
I think we can agree we’ve seen people with 0 social skills be NFL All Pros & conversely people who act and sound the part be total busts.
Surely you’re not suggesting there is some personality trait you can notice immediately that determines a players success? You could carve out quite a scouting service for yourself.
You are missing my point. I said I saw flaws in 3 seconds, DG indicated that Jones was a person that displayed the opposite of what I saw. He is someone that very much seems to not have the right makeup to be a QB, yet that is what DG seemed to emphasize. I'm not saying I had the right read 100%, I'm saying why was I able to pick up a different and seemingly more accurate read of his flaws with far less time and resources to scout?
This is more about DG being wrong. It's the same thing with Andrew Thomas where we heard how NFL ready he was. Again, he seems to be short in the mental aspects of the game. What is the Giants FO seeing that makes them so sure of how strong and ready these players are mentally that clearly isn't manifesting on the field?
I will definitely agree with your last point. The process they are using to select players isn’t hitting a high %. It is not translating to on the field play for sure. It’s disheartening.
[quote] And you can predict how someone is going to play?
Fans often create narratives about the teams they root for from a myopic perspective
They come up with narratives that seem ridiculous to others, but they truly believe what they are selling, and you rarely will get them to change their opinion.
I m with you, I think it s a ridiculous idea peddling the idea that a professional athlete being uncomfortable with public speaking translates to being uncomfortable on the field of play.
I find the idea that having confidence in your physical and mental acumen during a completion of a sport you excel in is connected to a totally different arena which many find uncomfortable, just really a reach.
[quote] And you can predict how someone is going to play?
Fans often create narratives about the teams they root for from a myopic perspective
They come up with narratives that seem ridiculous to others, but they truly believe what they are selling, and you rarely will get them to change their opinion.
I m with you, I think it s a ridiculous idea peddling the idea that a professional athlete being uncomfortable with public speaking translates to being uncomfortable on the field of play.
I find the idea that having confidence in your physical and mental acumen during a completion of a sport you excel in is connected to a totally different arena which many find uncomfortable, just really a reach.
It's funny how myopic you are being while accusing me of being that. I saw some concerning traits in Jones before he took the field that have absolutely manifested in his on the field play and it's your position that it is ridiculous to think those two things could be connected?
How are you backing up your statement? I know it's hard for people that support DG to understand this but presence and job performance absolutely are connected, especially at a position like QB where you are a leader. People love to eat up everything Joe Judge says in press conferences but then want to undervalue the presence of Jones. The ride or die Giants supporter group really love to selectively apply concepts.
Quote:
In comment 15027499 GiantsRage2007 said:
[quote] And you can predict how someone is going to play?
Fans often create narratives about the teams they root for from a myopic perspective
They come up with narratives that seem ridiculous to others, but they truly believe what they are selling, and you rarely will get them to change their opinion.
I m with you, I think it s a ridiculous idea peddling the idea that a professional athlete being uncomfortable with public speaking translates to being uncomfortable on the field of play.
I find the idea that having confidence in your physical and mental acumen during a completion of a sport you excel in is connected to a totally different arena which many find uncomfortable, just really a reach.
It's funny how myopic you are being while accusing me of being that. I saw some concerning traits in Jones before he took the field that have absolutely manifested in his on the field play and it's your position that it is ridiculous to think those two things could be connected?
How are you backing up your statement? I know it's hard for people that support DG to understand this but presence and job performance absolutely are connected, especially at a position like QB where you are a leader. People love to eat up everything Joe Judge says in press conferences but then want to undervalue the presence of Jones. The ride or die Giants supporter group really love to selectively apply concepts.
I m a fan, no doubt I m myopic at times, although I have often changed my opinions based on arguments to the contrary I have read here.
Nevertheless, The comparison of a kid being uncomfortable with public speaking translating to being a bad quarterback, gotta admit, don’t see it.
Oh, for the record I am not a strong supporter of Gettleman.
That’s about it from me, I’ll sit back and enjoy the show though.
That’s about it from me, I’ll sit back and enjoy the show though.
As usual you don't get it. This is about the way DG sells a pick and as usual he sold the pick in a way that doesn't hold any water.
Just because someone isn't as good of a public speaker doesn't mean they don't have the talent to make up for it. Kyler was an incredible college player, much easier to say hey, this guy might not have some strengths but he has others.
DG talked about Jones as someone who what he had between the ears was what is going to make him successful and i'm raising the point of what exactly did DG see between the ears that made him so confident that a player like Jones who didn't show a fraction of the on field success of Murray would be a star in the NFL meriting the #6 pick?
You never get this about what I'm saying but I'll make the point clearly again. I shouldn't have a better scouting read in 3 seconds than DG does in a whole offseason but my comments and his it certainly looks like mine was closer to the accurate read than his. And again much like with Thomas it's about the way you talk about the scouting that's important. You don't have to talk about how NFL ready Thomas is or how good of a "make-up" Jones has. When his make-up doesn't look very good at all. It's the complete opposite with both those players. Jones has the athletic ability to be in the NFL but has tons of work to do on the mental aspects of his game. Same for Thomas.
As someone else said, if you had some magical ability to judge a player based on them talking in front of a crowd, you'd have a very successful scouting business.
If I wasn't able to provide examples like this you would say I'm just speaking with hindsight. There is no winning with you and mostly you are just bitter that my skepticism about the team and the way that they operate has proven to be a lot more correct than your blind loyalty. So yeah, take your pot shots because there will always be pot shots. You criticize what you can, and when I provide evidence of actually being able to analyze things in different ways than your beloved Giants you find different things to pick at. Congratulations, you know how to complain about everything but Giants management.
And I’m not complaining, I’m enjoying this. It’s really a great read.
As someone else said, if you had some magical ability to judge a player based on them talking in front of a crowd, you'd have a very successful scouting business.
I'm not talking about public speaking, I'm talking about presence, he had a meek and unsure of himself presence even when picking a chair and he seems overwhelmed on the field. Hard to pick a receiver well when you have trouble picking a chair. Those things tie into each other 100%.
People have latched onto the public speaking aspect when EQ is about way more than just public speaking. Joe Montana was a great leader and I bet at no point had any problems selecting a chair to sit in.
And again, I do have some ability to size up people and their emotional intelligence but I'm not claiming any particularly special ability to it. What I am saying is that the Giants seem to be particularly bad at these assessments.
A lot of teams had Jones ranked much lower on their boards despite the obsessive campaign by the Giants to talk about how much other teams liked Jones and the "make-up" touted by DG doesn't really appear to be there with Jones on the field.
And I’m not complaining, I’m enjoying this. It’s really a great read.
If you are counting a lot more people thought I was crazy when I was talking about what a bad choice DG was. Yeah I get that you are a closed minded and generally slow person but some concepts are just harder for people to understand. I'm glad you find it funny, if you are going to be slow it's good to be able to laugh.
I swear BBI is getting dumber.
Quote:
I’m not the only one that thinks this is hysterical. Even people that typically side with you on your rants are quietly laughing.
And I’m not complaining, I’m enjoying this. It’s really a great read.
If you are counting a lot more people thought I was crazy when I was talking about what a bad choice DG was. Yeah I get that you are a closed minded and generally slow person but some concepts are just harder for people to understand. I'm glad you find it funny, if you are going to be slow it's good to be able to laugh.
Keep the insults coming you giant baby. Can’t handle the heat don’t make a shitty thread.
Everyone is laughing at this. Not quite sure you noticed it yet but it will sink in eventually (I hope).
Quote:
In comment 15027672 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
I’m not the only one that thinks this is hysterical. Even people that typically side with you on your rants are quietly laughing.
And I’m not complaining, I’m enjoying this. It’s really a great read.
If you are counting a lot more people thought I was crazy when I was talking about what a bad choice DG was. Yeah I get that you are a closed minded and generally slow person but some concepts are just harder for people to understand. I'm glad you find it funny, if you are going to be slow it's good to be able to laugh.
Keep the insults coming you giant baby. Can’t handle the heat don’t make a shitty thread.
Everyone is laughing at this. Not quite sure you noticed it yet but it will sink in eventually (I hope).
I think there are definitely people on this thread that get it. I'm just making sure you understand how wrong you've been in anything we've gone toe to toe on. You have to understand that right? You won't admit it, that's fine. You can just understand.
People can feel free to think it's dumb, they might not get it. But I'm glad that some do.
EQ is actually almost universally undervalued and undermeasured, it's not unsurprising that people think it's dumb. But people that do good jobs of measuring it and harnessing it have much more successful organizations.
Quote:
In comment 15027672 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
I’m not the only one that thinks this is hysterical. Even people that typically side with you on your rants are quietly laughing.
And I’m not complaining, I’m enjoying this. It’s really a great read.
If you are counting a lot more people thought I was crazy when I was talking about what a bad choice DG was. Yeah I get that you are a closed minded and generally slow person but some concepts are just harder for people to understand. I'm glad you find it funny, if you are going to be slow it's good to be able to laugh.
Keep the insults coming you giant baby. Can’t handle the heat don’t make a shitty thread.
Everyone is laughing at this. Not quite sure you noticed it yet but it will sink in eventually (I hope).
Where are you going with this? Doesn't seem anywhere good but I think you know that.
My alleged compatriots who normally side with me, he apparently knows the inner workings of how they are reacting to this thread. I guess even though they are normally on my side this thread has turned them. Do you think they are just on an email chain with him and they've come to a group consensus about me or he's just getting a bunch of individual text messages about it?
Be careful. This guy has been known to go to the mods with his resume. He may have taken a psychology class one time....
Since the dawn of time, or at least of human history, there have always been plenty of folks who say one thing and do another, often just the opposite, thing.
You can't be as naive as that quote makes you sound.
I think your insight combines IQ with EQ and Cutting Edge Analytical rigor.
I once saw Bill Maher and Anne Coulter in the corner of a Starbucks at the Indianapolis Airport with caps pulled low and heads down avoiding any contact as they had their morning coffee. Obviously, they are unfit for getting money for being on TV.
I once saw Muhammed Ali barely able to stand and hands shaking while he leaned on his wife at the time. He was checking in to Emory University Medical Center Parkinsons Center. And people think he really said "I am the Greatest of all Time? "Im the King of the World". No way this guy had the confidence to get in a boxing ring. Did I use my EQ/IQ/Advanced Powers of Observation as good as you do?
I once saw Paul Newman with his family in a small resturant near Lyme Rock and he only talked to them the whole time. Thats all he could manage. Obviously, no one with EQ screens should give him millions to be in a motion picture and maybe win an Oscar. He could only talk to his family.
I once saw Jim Brown refuse to give an autograph at the LA Airport. Obviously, no one should pay him to be on a team with other people. He couldnt handle it. Matter of basic EQ.
I once saw Bill Russel laughing in an airport lounge. Thats exactly why most NBA teams avoided hiring him. Just not serious enough. Imagine paying a guy happy go lucky and laughing in one setting and imagine how serious you have to be to win 11 NBA Championships and be the Captain and the Player Coach at one time. If most NBA teams had the EQ to never hire him 50 years ago its a clue as to how old fashioned the Giants must be.
I once saw Julie Andrews being just like Julie Andrews in the British Airways lounge before taking the Concorde to NYC. Obviously, Someone successful like Walt Disney would never hire such a misfit for the role of a governess who once was a postulate at a nunnery much less hire her to watch kids of an upscale banker and slide down chimneys with a dirty chimney sweep. So obvious. And if Disney had the EQ to see a person who was charming but flying first class on the most expansive way to go Heathrow to JFK couldnt handle singing to ordinary people back in 1962...shows you how backwards the Giants are. Obviously, another sound example of how your thesis applies.
I once took a red eye from San Francisco to NY and there was a guy who wore his sunglasses the whole way and all through the terminal at JFK when we landed. Anyone with any EQ would never hire Geraldo Rivera to be on the TV news night after night.
I once went to a rally for Bill Clinton in 1992 and he claimed to be running late. But anyone could see that he sent his wife out to start addressing the crowd because he was too shy to even run for office much less be President. That was in 1992. So good EQ based conclusions were available even back then. Notice how far behind the Giants are at making analytically rigorous assumptions?
I once saw Michael Phelps kindly take the time to sign autographs for little kids in the lobby of the hotel he was staying at. How much EQ does it take to know that kind of guy could never much of a competitor?
I once saw Jamie Lee Curtis waiting to pick up her husband at the Four Seasons and it was obvious she did not enjoy the attention of the tourists. Obviously, anyone with any EQ at all could see she couldn't be a comedienne in a movie or anything like that. Be malpractice for studio after studio pay her for that.
I once saw John Glenn reading his notes prior to a speech and he tried to block out everyone else to concentrate. Nevertheless, he politely said thank you and smiled to anyone who walked over to him and said thank you for your service. Obviously not a guy you would ever want to be a fighter pilot or an astronaut or anything. That was maybe the early 80's? Did Jints Central use the equivalent EQ + Powers of Observation back in the 80's? Behind the curve even back then.
These are only some examples of penetrating insights about the capacity of people to fill other roles in life. All it takes is a little EQ and you can avoid all the obvious failures noted above.
I once saw Pope John Paul and he said nothing the whole time it took to cross the floor at St Peters. How could that person ever be Pope? Thats a job where you have to say things. My EQ/IQ based conclusion is that the only possible answer is that the Vatican uses body doubles. Or there are sometimes two Popes at once. Dont you agree?
"I say things that are thoughtful" has to rank right up there with "I am an artist" on the list of things I really don't want to hear coming out of the mouths of people I spend time with...
yeah, I think you should probably get used to it...
Quote:
mind reading, is this what we've come to...
Be careful. This guy has been known to go to the mods with his resume. He may have taken a psychology class one time....
And he once stayed in a Holiday Inn.
I was thinking the same thing. I also have to agree with the other person who posted that Jones does not look nervous at all in the pocket with bodies flying all around him. It is as if he barely notices the rush.... a good and bad thing.
My biggest takeaway from the thread is how the Giants truly need the OP in their scouting department. Every team in the league needs this guy in their organization. To be able to evaluate a football player in just a few minutes OFF of the field is absolutely amazing.
And this thread has EQ in the title... talk about irony...
But as Bill2 observed, it is doubtful anyone responding has that training.
Many are acting like I said I knew everything about Jones in 3 seconds which I did not and further qualified on this thread.
What I did say was if I could see something in 3 seconds why did a FAR deeper dive on Jones yield the conclusion that he he had a makeup you want to gush about and fall in love with?
To your point bill you seem to take this idea and run with it. You preached patience and again that the right people were managing this process and this Andrew Thomas pick right now looks like another disaster. He seems like way too flawed a player to take at #4.
My comments amount presence were boiled down to how someone acts in a press conference.
BB has a presence but he is surly in press conferences. That’s a thing. Kyler Murray might not have the best words but he definitely has a presence and swagger.
Daniel Jones went to Duke and didn’t really even stand out there. Kyler Murray was a stud.
At no point did I say assessments of someone should be made in 3 seconds. I did highlight how often the Giants seem to talk up a player and say they are picking them based on make-up and then they seem to have real problems performing the mental aspects of the game.
All the while they refuse to really change and we get whispers that it’s going to be Abrams even in this horrible season. I don’t want to sit and watch do what again looks like right now a blown pick in Andrew Thomas while we hear they are on top of organizational changes. How many more drafts are we going to wait for them to figure it out?
Some might think I’m pompous of out of touch that’s fine. If but if they don’t really change their processes to figure out better who has the right “make-up” we are going to keep watching terrible football. This isn’t about me thinking I can do the job better sitting here on the outside with far less resources. This is about knowing with the resources the Giants have that they could be doing a way better job if they weren’t so stuck in their old ways.
This seems to be the biggest issue. A lot of us don't think you saw anything of substance in 3 seconds, which is reasonable. We don't feel what you saw correlates with his play on the field. I don't know why someone would be surprised by opposition to this pov, certainly when this pov is communicated so certain.
I very clearly said it that post “this might not translate” but it does look like that he both gets overwhelmed in off the field and on the field situations and those things also do translate.
Again, it’s possible you can coach someone to play more confident. And to an extent the Giants clearly did a better job of that last year. But the point is why take a player like that at 6? What did they see in him that made them feel like this was a good leader for the team?
People are (rightfully) laughing at the assumption that "about" 3 seconds is enough time to form any opinion (given the variability in testing any of the Vowel Q's). And then doubling down on the most tenuous of assumptions. And without realizing the basic variability that any imperfect predictor of ability (you can see any of the basic examinations of testing for ability over the past, say, 60 years).
You might be coming in a little too hot with the 100 percent figure there.
People are (rightfully) laughing at the assumption that "about" 3 seconds is enough time to form any opinion (given the variability in testing any of the Vowel Q's). And then doubling down on the most tenuous of assumptions. And without realizing the basic variability that any imperfect predictor of ability (you can see any of the basic examinations of testing for ability over the past, say, 60 years).
It took 3 seconds for me to see something that looked to be a personality flaw that should have been investigated with a lot more resources. That was the point. I’m not sure what yielded such confidence in the Giants process in the make-up of Jones when his confidence issues could display that strongly in a town hall meeting. I never said that it was the sole way he should be judged and even said in the post it’s possible this doesn’t translate to the field
I very clearly said it that post “this might not translate” but it does look like that he both gets overwhelmed in off the field and on the field situations and those things also do translate.
Again, it’s possible you can coach someone to play more confident. And to an extent the Giants clearly did a better job of that last year. But the point is why take a player like that at 6? What did they see in him that made them feel like this was a good leader for the team?
You are now quadrupling down on the OP?
Really?
Did you watch Thursday's game?
As others have noted, the main subject of EQ in the OP is just incredibly ironic.
I was commenting on the fact that the Giants always seem to emphasize the soft parts as an excuse not to modernize and they seem bad at assessing the soft parts too.
Quote:
Hard to pick a receiver well when you have trouble picking a chair. Those things tie into each other 100%.
You might be coming in a little too hot with the 100 percent figure there.
I wasn’t suggesting that Daniel Jones can’t pick chairs or receivers all the time. But that in moments he seems to have problems with his progressions and in a moment where picking a chair seems hard picking a receiver would be impossible.
Well, I guess we can confirm this.
Listen, we all, at points, make shitty assumptions based on determined outcomes. The sign of good EQ is to realize when called out on the flaw, to acknowledge the flaw, and refine the model.
But Thin Slicing and seeing some important thing via an intuitive mental process requires high level expertise.
So let's say Bill Walsh could evaluate just a few plays by DJ and accurately pronounce yes or no he's a franchise QB....
It would be based on watching Jones play football, not on how he handles a crowded room at a presser.
If the latter was so key...
Joe Judge would have this team at 6-1 instead of 1-6.
I brought up my experience because, I think his lack of presence was an obvious red flag. To go along with other things about Jones and his history especially. Not that isolated factor.
What I am saying is I don’t know how all the inputs of Daniel Jones lead to a conclusion that he had the right makeup.
Not that the process should be me looking at someone for 3 seconds. And it requires a lot of bad faith to think the way you are suggesting. But I get it, it’s the same thing I faced when I questioned DG originally. Many don’t like hearing that the team they love might not be doing the best job.
I wouldn’t want to take a QB in the top 10 that didn’t have presence. Jones in a lot of moments doesn’t look like he has the proper presence, he didn’t look like he did in those moments I saw him. If a QB looks like there are moments they don’t have the presence and strength to lead a team that merits a deeper dive into how often that will be, what it might take to develop and accentuate his strengths more, etc.
I don’t know what in the deeper dive on Jones yielded that he wouldn’t have these types of mental issues but clearly even if he sorts them out we looked to have scouted his make-up and the level of help he needs poorly. He’s had a bad season overall and is definitely one of the reasons we are 1-6.
Pure Luck - ( New Window )
Hilarious to see him continue to defend this insane post. Wow.
By not having NGDs insights the whole team and the coaches elected Jones as a Team Captain...a role one 3 second observation could have clearly shown that he just doesn't have the EQ for.
Their thousands of hours of observation missed this flaw.
Its like the 12 year old who won the National Spelling Bee and afterwards was crying tears of joy for 3 seconds. Clearly more E than EQ. Yet her parents decided to let her go to a private school mistakenly thinking she might have potential in the next 60 years of her life.
I blame Getteman. Not valuing 3 seconds in one slice of life is what leads to bad evaluations of who can do what. He is a NonEQ superspreader.
This is how the Soviet Union will overtake us.
What? There isn't a Soviet Union anymore?
See how the same posters attack me and the good points I make about the Soviet Union?
You think they are going to nail their picks again like they do every year?
There is a poster who for 3 years shows to anyone with the EQ of a dead salamander that needs negative attention at least once a week. And does so by posting aggressively stupid positions and making fun of all who question even a tiny aspect of the post.
Then when he gets negative attention...just "has to" stand up and fight while I insisting he has a righteous cause.
Nothing anyone says gets him to observe himself for 3 seconds it would take to apply some EQ and thereby break out of the self toxic loop.
Your story of how you generated great insight by observing 3 seconds gave me hope you could help this poster?
Would you consider doing that?
I'm not trying to suggest I have the answers just that I'm not sure what process is getting the Giants to gush so much about the mental aspects and preparedness of the games of these players especially when they are getting drafted above where they are being projected.
There is a poster who for 3 years shows to anyone with the EQ of a dead salamander that needs negative attention at least once a week. And does so by posting aggressively stupid positions and making fun of all who question even a tiny aspect of the post.
Then when he gets negative attention...just "has to" stand up and fight while I insisting he has a righteous cause.
Nothing anyone says gets him to observe himself for 3 seconds it would take to apply some EQ and thereby break out of the self toxic loop.
Your story of how you generated great insight by observing 3 seconds gave me hope you could help this poster?
Would you consider doing that?
I also think this is disingenuous, I made fun of Uconn someone who for years has attacked most of my posts, who also took a shot at me before I took one at him. I haven't made fun of everyone who disagreed with me a little on this. Earlier in the thread GiantsRage2007 disagreed with me and came around to agree in a very reasonable way.
NoGainDayne : 11:04 am : link : reply
have always criticized my posts all coming together.
I don't post as often as I used to, and I certainly don't generally get involved in these threads of yours that seemingly appear on a regular basis. And I apologize if this comes across rude because I'm not trying to be rude but instead just a little blunt since you don't seem to be willing to consider any of the criticism directed at you but instead dismiss it out of hand as just "the same cast of characters"
But as someone that isn't a regularly character" as you suggest I'll offer my take. You come across as someone that has a desire to create posts that you hope will wow people with your insight, but most often seem to be more blather than substance. Then when/if criticized instead of even considering any of it, you get defensive and dig in deeper
I have been on this site for about twenty five years and over that span of time there has been a handful of posters that seem to have a desperate need for attention and like clockwork they keep posting threads trying to impress with something only they supposedly understand but are willing to share with the rest of us. You are starting to fall into that category of posters.
If you take nothing else from my post, please just try and take the effort to self reflect a little more about why you so often find yourself in similar debates that go around and around with similar people, on similar topics of discussions.
I appreciate the effort you put into your posts. One thing I learned a long time ago when posting on forums is that before I hit submit on a long or emotional post is to sit back and re-read it and try to look at it objectively. If you find that you never delete rather than post, it could be a red flag that you may want to self edit more strictly.
Quote:
There is exactly the man we need.
There is a poster who for 3 years shows to anyone with the EQ of a dead salamander that needs negative attention at least once a week. And does so by posting aggressively stupid positions and making fun of all who question even a tiny aspect of the post.
Then when he gets negative attention...just "has to" stand up and fight while I insisting he has a righteous cause.
Nothing anyone says gets him to observe himself for 3 seconds it would take to apply some EQ and thereby break out of the self toxic loop.
Your story of how you generated great insight by observing 3 seconds gave me hope you could help this poster?
Would you consider doing that?
I also think this is disingenuous, I made fun of Uconn someone who for years has attacked most of my posts, who also took a shot at me before I took one at him. I haven't made fun of everyone who disagreed with me a little on this. Earlier in the thread GiantsRage2007 disagreed with me and came around to agree in a very reasonable way.
I think Giantsrage2007 agreed with you that the Giants were not drafting well. Not with your EQ argument.
Which is the main point of what I am saying. I clarified this many times. It's about the flawed process the Giants are using and not being sure what about Daniel Jones made them so sure he was ready to lead an NFL team. Not that anyone should ever be assessed in 3 seconds.
Quote:
It’s literally the same cast of characters that
NoGainDayne : 11:04 am : link : reply
have always criticized my posts all coming together.
I don't post as often as I used to, and I certainly don't generally get involved in these threads of yours that seemingly appear on a regular basis. And I apologize if this comes across rude because I'm not trying to be rude but instead just a little blunt since you don't seem to be willing to consider any of the criticism directed at you but instead dismiss it out of hand as just "the same cast of characters"
But as someone that isn't a regularly character" as you suggest I'll offer my take. You come across as someone that has a desire to create posts that you hope will wow people with your insight, but most often seem to be more blather than substance. Then when/if criticized instead of even considering any of it, you get defensive and dig in deeper
I have been on this site for about twenty five years and over that span of time there has been a handful of posters that seem to have a desperate need for attention and like clockwork they keep posting threads trying to impress with something only they supposedly understand but are willing to share with the rest of us. You are starting to fall into that category of posters.
If you take nothing else from my post, please just try and take the effort to self reflect a little more about why you so often find yourself in similar debates that go around and around with similar people, on similar topics of discussions.
I appreciate the effort you put into your posts. One thing I learned a long time ago when posting on forums is that before I hit submit on a long or emotional post is to sit back and re-read it and try to look at it objectively. If you find that you never delete rather than post, it could be a red flag that you may want to self edit more strictly.
I appreciate your candor, will take this in
Quote:
I will definitely agree with your last point. The process they are using to select players isn’t hitting a high %. It is not translating to on the field play for sure. It’s disheartening.
Which is the main point of what I am saying. I clarified this many times. It's about the flawed process the Giants are using and not being sure what about Daniel Jones made them so sure he was ready to lead an NFL team. Not that anyone should ever be assessed in 3 seconds.
Are you serious? You take a partial agreement and say he supports your original post? Really?
Patience, although at its hardest to give, is absolutely essential in watching efforts at the bottom of a drawn out performance cycle...in sports teams and business turnarounds.
Anyone who thought we were ever going to a winning season or do better than an 0-4 start was dreaming those outcomes up and insisting they were reasonable. Those are and never were the yardsticks one would use to "see" if there is progress. I dont know about you but to me the whole season is a better yardstick with a young team where the key is "how much of a core do we have to build on?"
Frankly, I dont yet see an encouraging core. But I most likely never would have seen it after 6 games unless they were playing way above their heads with luck thrown in.
And my summer commentary said exactly that over and over again...and so did many a "realistic" poster (usually then labelled an optimist so they stopped posting. Discouraged away by drivel.
As soon as 2 games came up (as they always should have been expected to) then the cliches returned.
I get it ...all are tired of losing. Doesnt happen because we are tired of losing or all of a sudden.
Watching most sports teams is frustrating. Period. Full Stop. Sometimes lowering ones level of intensity about the process is helpful
This is the post that apparently insulted you. Really? You wrote a self serving piece that BBI was supposed to bow down to and we didn’t.
And this came after you didn’t like my Kyler Murray opinion and how awful his body language was in interviews. Post 2018 season getting ready to draft, pundits and posters talked about how terrible he was in interviews, how wishy washy he was between baseball and football and all the red flags. These are all characteristics people noticed after being in the room with him for 3 seconds or listening to him speak. So I’ll ask again, how’d that turn out? Did the goal post move disqualifying Murray’s negative EQ traits? What will the excuse be?
If you havent noticed most people on this thread have a problem with the way you present information and post with such certainty. There’s a reason why so many of your threads blow up in your face.
Patience, although at its hardest to give, is absolutely essential in watching efforts at the bottom of a drawn out performance cycle...in sports teams and business turnarounds.
Anyone who thought we were ever going to a winning season or do better than an 0-4 start was dreaming those outcomes up and insisting they were reasonable. Those are and never were the yardsticks one would use to "see" if there is progress. I dont know about you but to me the whole season is a better yardstick with a young team where the key is "how much of a core do we have to build on?"
Frankly, I dont yet see an encouraging core. But I most likely never would have seen it after 6 games unless they were playing way above their heads with luck thrown in.
And my summer commentary said exactly that over and over again...and so did many a "realistic" poster (usually then labelled an optimist so they stopped posting. Discouraged away by drivel.
As soon as 2 games came up (as they always should have been expected to) then the cliches returned.
I get it ...all are tired of losing. Doesnt happen because we are tired of losing or all of a sudden.
Watching most sports teams is frustrating. Period. Full Stop. Sometimes lowering ones level of intensity about the process is helpful
I get this and I've been a sports fan for a long time and never felt remotely this way about a team.
It feels like the Giants talk a lot about caring about their fans but that honestly feels like all talk.
At least James Dolan doesn't try to convince anyone that he cares.
It feels like the Giants make a big show of caring and making improvements and don't ever do the real work of improving their processes and it would be nice if they just went full Dolan or made the real changes TBH.
I had a very frustrating interaction in the offseason that I think you are at least tacitly aware of where someone close to the team and front office talked about how stupid anyone was for thinking that Gettleman wasn't the right guy. How much "smarter" Gettleman and all the Giants front office are than fan perception.
I'm just wondering when all this intelligence is going to display on the field and it just honestly feels like the team doesn't mind giving the middle finger to their fan base. Keeping Gettleman, this process where it feels like we are destined for DG or Abrams. It feels like they are putting this internal Giants family before the larger Giants family. And honestly that's coming at a time when the world feels like it's making a lot of choices for a smaller group of people while a larger group of people gets fucked over.
It would be great if it felt like people running the Giants even cared about their fans in ways reflected in their actions not some nice words a few times a year.
Quote:
I just don’t care. You want to hold onto how a GM sells a pick, go right ahead. Don’t care about that stuff personally but if you want to write a puff piece about your self like you did in the OP don’t let me stop you.
This is the post that apparently insulted you. Really? You wrote a self serving piece that BBI was supposed to bow down to and we didn’t.
And this came after you didn’t like my Kyler Murray opinion and how awful his body language was in interviews. Post 2018 season getting ready to draft, pundits and posters talked about how terrible he was in interviews, how wishy washy he was between baseball and football and all the red flags. These are all characteristics people noticed after being in the room with him for 3 seconds or listening to him speak. So I’ll ask again, how’d that turn out? Did the goal post move disqualifying Murray’s negative EQ traits? What will the excuse be?
If you havent noticed most people on this thread have a problem with the way you present information and post with such certainty. There’s a reason why so many of your threads blow up in your face.
Show me "all my threads" that blow up in my face. I've started very few over the years, but please, by all means, show me your evidence.
You’re right man, is me not you. Enjoy your day.
2015 - 2017 - all moves made in those years were for the benefit of Eli. Eli was not being traded, released or cut. So, they had to continue to try to build a winning team around him. That's the Owner's call.
2017 - 2019 - Remnants of Eli still on the roster and now you have to start finishing the tear down.
2020 - Year 1 of rebuild. New HC
The draft part of the process is simple also. The GM does not have final say on draft picks. It's been stated many times, even by Gettleman himself. Draft picks are voted on by committee, with Owner, Chris Mara, GM on the committee.
So stop beating yourself over something you will never figure out because it is not one person making the decisions..
P.S. The Owner is more involved than people think..
Swimming upstream is fine (Look at Terps, everyone disparaged him, but he was right most of the time) but I think Steve's recommendation above is the right one.
Don't stop posting, I appreciate your insight as well of others like McL.
Quote:
It’s literally the same cast of characters that
NoGainDayne : 11:04 am : link : reply
have always criticized my posts all coming together.
I don't post as often as I used to, and I certainly don't generally get involved in these threads of yours that seemingly appear on a regular basis. And I apologize if this comes across rude because I'm not trying to be rude but instead just a little blunt since you don't seem to be willing to consider any of the criticism directed at you but instead dismiss it out of hand as just "the same cast of characters"
But as someone that isn't a regularly character" as you suggest I'll offer my take. You come across as someone that has a desire to create posts that you hope will wow people with your insight, but most often seem to be more blather than substance. Then when/if criticized instead of even considering any of it, you get defensive and dig in deeper
I have been on this site for about twenty five years and over that span of time there has been a handful of posters that seem to have a desperate need for attention and like clockwork they keep posting threads trying to impress with something only they supposedly understand but are willing to share with the rest of us. You are starting to fall into that category of posters.
If you take nothing else from my post, please just try and take the effort to self reflect a little more about why you so often find yourself in similar debates that go around and around with similar people, on similar topics of discussions.
I appreciate the effort you put into your posts. One thing I learned a long time ago when posting on forums is that before I hit submit on a long or emotional post is to sit back and re-read it and try to look at it objectively. If you find that you never delete rather than post, it could be a red flag that you may want to self edit more strictly.
Can’t remember the last time I tried to be “right” on a football topic. I don’t visit this site to persuade others to think like I do, which I think is the problem with this thread. Add on top of it that there’s no way to prove any of these theories and well, you get this. I brought up a legitimate question contesting what was in the OP using an example of Murray who had quite possibly the most supposed red flags and character concerns I’ve ever seen in a #1 overall pick - I never got and answer on it.
Um, Eli's an outlier.
Quote:
Eli says hi.
Um, Eli's an outlier.
For sure. He's easily the dopiest looking slack jawed Gomer Pyle like hayseed to ever win an SB MVP award.
Let alone two of them.
But only a Manning could ever pull that off, right?
And this guy Jones, he's nothing like a Manning...
1) Contrary opinions with supporting facts and reasons are great. No need to rise to anyones defense for a good contrarian post
2) No one should stop posting
3) Everyone should try to be a better poster...especially posters who start threads or who post a lot
3) There is a huge difference between 1-3 and non-sensical posts followed by attacks on everyone who points out the flaws in the opinion.
A grown adult submitted that he could tell based on 3 seconds exposure in a non football setting (before any games had been played as a NYG)/NFL player) that a draftee had a fatal flaw and that this reflects on the GM and the Front Office in General.
Jim, you know this is not contrarian viewpoint.
No one yet knows how Jones will turn out. No one. NFL history is loaded with examples of even HOF QB who needed 2-5 years to show how good they were.
All NFL QB have a wide range of personal strengths and weaknesses that may show up in media events, marriages, comments to the media, after losses and with certain teammates and certain coaches or with fans who bother them in hotel lobby's.
So far we know from many exchanges over 3 seconds long that Jones has media handling presence that is Jeter like.
So far we see great and damaging aspects of his play and do not know how correctable they are via personal or talent on offense or scheme changes. We dont know. No one yet knows for sure well enough to through away the obvious strengths and talent and clues as to his make up.
He aint awkward when he wins.
Meanwhile, we do know from how others have judged us for decades when we have off moments or bad first impressions we did not mean that any give 3 seconds gives no clue as to our future and no clue as to how someone elses future is going to work out. None. As in None.
Every adult knows this is a universal truth about 3 seconds of human observation into 3 seconds of anothers 3 seconds.
I once saw some British folks musicians dressed in Edwardian frilly costumes with haircuts straight out of Thomas Gainsborough portraits of children of nobility singing a sweet melody behind a lead guitar playing a 16th Century madrigal found in monasteries and country faires.
3 seconds of "As Tears Go By" revealed proof that the lead singer would never make half a billion over 50 years playing in your face raunch in between having 9 children by 9000 possible mothers. The madrigal folks lead guitarist would also never make half a billion over fifty years in between 9 arrests for 9000 pounds of illegal drugs.
I once went to the basement of St Marks church in the Village on Tuesday nights when they had 2-3 of the latest talents who signed record deals that month. ( for a dollar admittance fee and $2 for a pitcher of Rolling Rock).
I saw 3 minutes of the third act one Tuesday and from the first song it was awful. Bad sound, out of tune, disjointed drums and guitars badly played and words hard to hear from scruffy amatuers from New Jersey of all places.
Guy literally apologized after the first song while they tried to get the sound mix right. Mumbled something about not being finished the song and still working on where to take the characters he introduced in the song.
We were ready to walk out. If he couldn't talk and hadn't finished the song why waste our time?
Said the only thing he was certain was that he was calling the song "Thunder Road"
3 seconds of EQ said what?
Seriously, I thought this thread would die days ago. I can't believe NGD has defenders.
Its not like this poster is cluttering up a normal thread with his posts and ruining ypur day. I have never understood why posters click on a clearly marked thread where the topic being discussed is apparent and then bitch about what's being talked about.
Bill, hope all is well man! Miss your posts on larger subjects that we used to have on BBI.
Not saying I agree with his post, I don't. But I do agree that he has nailed a point that the Giants are behind in assessing data. And many of his posts tie into that.
That's what I enjoy about BBI though, before NGD, we weren't discussing this at all, but its relevant and I love reading about it.
Its the internet so expecting behavior is not realistic, is it? I mean you see stuff here, would never be said face to face.
So be well man, I always read your stuff too!
Take any losing team over a period of time and you can basically levy any complaint against them and then go "Aha! It's true" and point to the poor record and failed moves as evidence.
Where NGD continually fails is that he posts as if he has added insight. He posts as if he knows what is going on with the team hen he's doing things like trolling LinkedIn and parsing comments from press conferences, or in this case, making some asinine comment from a Town Hall.
It's what he does. And when he's challenged, he gets offended.
Quote:
For the sake of sanity please make this shit stop
Its not like this poster is cluttering up a normal thread with his posts and ruining ypur day. I have never understood why posters click on a clearly marked thread where the topic being discussed is apparent and then bitch about what's being talked about.
I see your point and it's a valid one but my point is that in this case Chopper, it's a weekly thing and the goalposts seem to be always moving with this argument by the OP. it seems to be more about him validating himself than actually anything with the Giants IMO.
Your points should have been said as well. My thoughts include encouraging NGD and good posting in general.
Between us we covered the waterfront
( Are you as historical an artifact as I am to have remember the emergence of Springsteen or the shrouded in innocence images the powers that be thought were necessary to introduce the Beatles and the Stones ( and for that matter all of the early British Invasion) ?
Quote:
In comment 15029972 montanagiant said:
Quote:
For the sake of sanity please make this shit stop
Its not like this poster is cluttering up a normal thread with his posts and ruining ypur day. I have never understood why posters click on a clearly marked thread where the topic being discussed is apparent and then bitch about what's being talked about.
I see your point and it's a valid one but my point is that in this case Chopper, it's a weekly thing and the goalposts seem to be always moving with this argument by the OP. it seems to be more about him validating himself than actually anything with the Giants IMO.
Fair enough, I guess I hadnt noticed that from him. Carry on...just seemed like a curious practice.
That's not the behavior of a normally adjusted person who wants to have discussion on a message board - it is the behavior of a person who wants to be looked at as an expert. Something he's failing to do in his actual argumentation.
Quote:
In comment 15029986 chopperhatch said:
Quote:
In comment 15029972 montanagiant said:
Quote:
For the sake of sanity please make this shit stop
Its not like this poster is cluttering up a normal thread with his posts and ruining ypur day. I have never understood why posters click on a clearly marked thread where the topic being discussed is apparent and then bitch about what's being talked about.
I see your point and it's a valid one but my point is that in this case Chopper, it's a weekly thing and the goalposts seem to be always moving with this argument by the OP. it seems to be more about him validating himself than actually anything with the Giants IMO.
Fair enough, I guess I hadnt noticed that from him. Carry on...just seemed like a curious practice.
No worries Chopper.
That's not the behavior of a normally adjusted person who wants to have discussion on a message board - it is the behavior of a person who wants to be looked at as an expert. Something he's failing to do in his actual argumentation.
It's like Matt in Syracuse all over again
That's not the behavior of a normally adjusted person who wants to have discussion on a message board - it is the behavior of a person who wants to be looked at as an expert. Something he's failing to do in his actual argumentation.
Deeply insecure behavior and the fact he can’t just admit and work to change, but instead doubles down is unfortunately keeps people from unlocking their true potential.
Jason Pierre-Paul – traded, was said to work ethic issues
Prince Amukamara – let go after first contract, rumblings of work ethic issues
David Wilson – highly questioned pick based on team needs and positional value
Justin Pugh – let go after first contract, was said to have attitude problems
Odell Beckham Jr. – signed to a massive second deal, traded for attitude problems within 1 year
Ereck Flowers – attitude and work ethic problems
Eli Apple – attitude and work ethic problems
Evan Engram – team and media questions his drive to succeed
Saquon Barkley – controversial pick due to positional value and need
Daniel Jones – drafted above projection, no demonstrable success as a QB, “make-up” reasons cited
Dexter Lawrence – solid pick but some question about positional value of a 1st round DL without top flight pass rush skills
Deandre Baker – character disaster
Andrew Thomas – drafted above projection, make-up, “NFL readiness” cited
For those counting at home 8/13 first round picks since 2010 who passed our highest levels of personality vetting have been determined to have untenable flaws after spending time in our building. Of the 5 remaining picks 2 were RBs prioritized over other more pressing positional needs. 2 are top 6 picks picked above where they were expected to go who have not remotely played to their draft position. Whatever the Giants think they are scouting to uphold this status as a “high class” organization it appears they are actually finding the opposite and it’s almost comedic the way they keep throwing player after player under the bus as having these problems without acknowledging that the way they manage is at least 50% of that problem.
Kyler Murray and the critique of his public speaking is actually a great deeper dive. Kyler Murray was one of the best college players I have ever seen. The way he led his team, the way they were always in the games. The way he would make plays to win. I was not in any way shape or form saying that issues with confidence or public speaking means you will be bad at any number of vocations or that issues with confidence in one arena would mean they would carry over to something you are more skilled in. You can and should absolutely evaluate how a player carries themselves on the field with more weight than off, while not ignoring off the field. Daniel Jones on field results in no way shape or form merited the #6 pick in the draft. We were sold this bill of goods about how good his makeup was, a makeup so good that you should apparently ignore his lack of on field success. Shouldn’t those off field strengths be on more clear display in a town hall if they exist so clearly to you in your scouting process? Any poster that has read my posts knows I at least arrive with evidence when I’m making claims, even if it is not something they agree with. I wasn’t suggesting that I had a projection for Jones based on 3 seconds, or that was the only variable I was using, the much more important ones were absolutely the fact that he didn’t seem to be a player that elevated his teammates or despite very clear athletic gifts played above lower levels of competition clearly enough. Whatever caused the “full bloom love” is looking extremely questionable right now. Especially because it seems as though the mental parts of DJ’s game are his weak points. That is all I was pointing out, that something we billed as such a big and clear strength, who Jones was off the field, I am struggling to see what exactly they saw in him there. How could we overdraft a player based on their performance to such a degree based on “makeup” and have that actually look like a weakness of his?
And onto Andrew Thomas we go
Gettleman:
Judge:
A certain poster has taken it upon himself on this thread to say I’m overly focused on “being right.” When I suggested that the Giants might be behind in tech and front office personnel to modernize and there was such a strong desire to say I was wrong about this I dug into Github libraries and linkedin resumes because demands of an almost impossible burden of proof existed. I don’t care much about being right, I care about the Giants not slithering away from taking any responsibility and real action for their failures as they always seem to. There isn’t really much accountability on this board, the same people that have said the Giants are figuring this out and anyone that doesn’t believe that is stupid come back here all the time as if today is the day that they are right and people that don’t want to see progress “must be crazy.” We are 1-6 and people talk about how retaining DG or promoting Abrams wouldn’t be so bad. Pitching Judge as some kind of savior. We had this brand new staff that some were calling the best assistants in the league scout Andrew Thomas and tell us he is just the right kind of guy to succeed.
It can’t be stressed enough, that even if Judge is the right guy the Giants organization might be so void of a willingness to hold people accountable for their failures that this won’t get fixed. If your GM (or shadowy ownership group GMs) keep putting rosters on the field with insufficient talent it is absolutely something that might create the “attitude problems” that keeps plaguing our 1st round picks and apparently is all their fault. The Giants organization stinks of a loser mentality and the Giants keep acting like we are heading in the right direction or a few tweaks away from getting fixed. If more people don’t start acknowledging the fact that our real problem could very well be the culture that there is a lot more evidence that this problem pervades than it is fixed, we might just stay trapped in this cycle. The cycle where we bring in a few new people, say everything is getting fixed, or we finally have the right person or the right solution, people keep eating this up. It’s only when there feels like endless slack to screw up that institutions can wallow in ineptitude and rot. And that is fine, that is your prerogative but perhaps antagonizing people that are skeptical of these ongoing claims that we are heading in the right direction could be done with less pride and assurance. Giants pride isn’t a thing anymore and people should stop acting like it is because to some that part is beyond frustrating to behold.
That's two different regimes.
Secondly, the book is still out from Saquon on.
Prior to 2018, what (if anything) have any of those dudes done elsewhere? JPP has been decent, but he was decent here.
All of those picks have their own story as to why they sucked. To try and lump it all into this emotional intelligence schtick is a big time reach.
But this is what you do. Clearly you have no desire to change.
Why do you think all NFL teams spend countless hours interviewing guys, giving psychiatric tests, the Wonderlic, etc....?
This isn't something unique to the Giants.
The league is littered with examples of guys getting shipped out for being malcontents.
We're playing against one of those malcontents tonight.
Quote:
it is that there is mounting evidence that what the Giants identify as good personality traits, the fact that they emphasize that so much as part of their process and then so many of these players actually have personality problems. Or worse mental issues on the field. Maybe that's not something that should be passed off so flippantly as "just not drafting well"
Why do you think all NFL teams spend countless hours interviewing guys, giving psychiatric tests, the Wonderlic, etc....?
This isn't something unique to the Giants.
Yeah I get that and my point is how do we get it so wrong? Are we really doing the things needed to fix that problem?
Basketball on grass. That was his vision. But the trenches deteriorated and he failed.
Gettleman is having to undo that, and so far he's failing, but the verdict is still out.
Culture, while important, is still just a fraction of the total picture. You're putting too much emphasis on it.
Once that gets fixed, success will follow.
I truly believe that, and have for 10 years now.
I agree it's about the OL. But don't you find it strange that we get tons of high picks but we continue to play roster whack a mole? Yeah some positions get better but it's never without others getting worse. The offense was supposed to be good this year and the D struggle and it's the opposite. Don't you think boiling it down to "fixing the OL" might be a huge minimization of the larger forces causing us to have a disappointing OL for almost 10 years?
Basketball on grass. That was his vision. But the trenches deteriorated and he failed.
Gettleman is having to undo that, and so far he's failing, but the verdict is still out.
Culture, while important, is still just a fraction of the total picture. You're putting too much emphasis on it.
This all seems reasonable. Except for the verdict thing.
Quote:
He loved athletic freaks that were boom or bust. They weren't the best "football player" at their position, but were possibly the best athletes...
Basketball on grass. That was his vision. But the trenches deteriorated and he failed.
Gettleman is having to undo that, and so far he's failing, but the verdict is still out.
Culture, while important, is still just a fraction of the total picture. You're putting too much emphasis on it.
This all seems reasonable. Except for the verdict thing.
On the picks themselves. The verdict is still out on the picks. If in 2 or 3 more years these guys are on their way out like all of the Reese guys, then the verdict will be in.
Quote:
In comment 15031757 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
He loved athletic freaks that were boom or bust. They weren't the best "football player" at their position, but were possibly the best athletes...
Basketball on grass. That was his vision. But the trenches deteriorated and he failed.
Gettleman is having to undo that, and so far he's failing, but the verdict is still out.
Culture, while important, is still just a fraction of the total picture. You're putting too much emphasis on it.
This all seems reasonable. Except for the verdict thing.
On the picks themselves. The verdict is still out on the picks. If in 2 or 3 more years these guys are on their way out like all of the Reese guys, then the verdict will be in.
Yes and no.
Yes, the guys he picked deserve some time for everybody to determine their worthiness whether they are still here or not in 2-3 years.
No, its been three years of offseason moves, drafts and transactions and the team is demonstrably no better than when Gettleman arrived. The verdict is mostly certainly in.
But this is what you do. Clearly you have no desire to change.
Why on earth would I have any respect for a person that for years told me I was off base and unqualified to suggest that the Giants had flaws in their technology program and has yet to own up to being mistaken there despite the TEAM being able to own up to this. You want to talk about desire to change, start with yourself. Plenty of posters I have a strong wish to maintain mutual respect for even in disagreement but there are people like you that just don't want to hear anything negative about the team and will lash out against people that carry that message.
Honestly, wouldn't be surprised if you had connections to the team in some way but it's always about how "you don't owe me anything" when I dig on this. Criticize me all you want for this but at least i'm an open book. Your bias bleeds through very clearly and you share no reasoning behind that.
This thread takes the cake though - you went down a convoluted rabbit hole and wanted everyone to join, and once everyone didnt it’s now a simple “how did we get it so wrong”?
And you STILL didn’t answer my question from my very first post.
I'll cop to not always having the most clarity in my writing. But this is how it goes with posters like you. I'm happy to acknowledge flaws, you just want to act like any issues you have are on the people on the other side of you.
At least I have ideas and try to look at things in different ways.
I don't really need your opinion on anything Giants related. Might as well ask someone in the front office or on the PR team.
But I'm done with you now, you keep complaining about this Kyler Murray thing when i've given you responses to it twice one in much greater detail.
I won't make the mistake again of feeling like you want to actually discuss anything. Byeeeeee
So as long as you are amazing the supposed flaws don’t matter - that’s kind of a no shit statement isn’t it? You really just didn’t like the Jones pick, which is completely fine. Many people didn’t/don’t but you feel the need to put all this window dressing on it.
If you took a breather from your self promotion you’d realize people have similar opinions, they just don’t post ad nasueam about it. Notice how there isn’t much being said here?
It is just a matter of time before you will be called a paid shill and have a thread created in your honor to discuss it. That was a fun time for me!!