Any thoughts on how Baker would've fared under this coaching staff is pure speculation, but it's difficult to not believe this team wouldn't be better off with a 1st rd talent pick at corner, both now and over the next 2-3 years.
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
Exactly. What is far more likely is that the new staff has connections with Georgia and never would have selected Baker in the first place had they been here last year.
Exactly. What is far more likely is that the new staff has connections with Georgia and never would have selected Baker in the first place had they been here last year.
No doubt. With the new staff involved, they grabbed Thomas @ 4 overall, and his work habits seem to at the very least show hard work and coachability (he is evolving in season) and with the Mr Irrelevant pick they got Tae Crowder - who rather shockingly worked his way into a starting ILB role with a few games of the season's premiere... He's show he can both hit and be pretty damn fluid in coverage...
They have certainly dealt with their share of off the field issues these last several years. A lot of what they touch these days seems to turn to gold...
So curious to keep an eye on this. Maybe Mathieu takes him under his wing and gets him back on track...
I couldn’t have cared less if he stayed on the roster. The only reason this isn’t a bigger story is because the team is in a playoff race.
Non-sense. Judge did not want him back. The reason it isn't a bigger story is that there is no story. If Judge wanted him back, he would have been brought back. He said in his presser that they made their decision and they are happy with it. You have to believe that the Giants did their own investigation and did not like what they saw and that is why he was released.
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
Exactly. What is far more likely is that the new staff has connections with Georgia and never would have selected Baker in the first place had they been here last year.
Any chance the new staff can get connections with the Panthers and get rid of DG?
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I do not like Gettleman whatsoever as a GM, but blaming him for cutting him is stupid. That decision was the correct one and likely made by Judge and John Mara more so than Gettleman.
There's plenty of things to rip Gettleman for, getting rid of Baker to appease the mob is not one.
But
Ge screwed us. He really did. Even if he did not do it. He out himself in a terrible position and broke a lot of fans hearts. I hope he never does anything in the NFL.
lot of articles before and after the draft calling it a great pick, that Baker had significant talent and potential, and was well grounded by his family. The human element of the draft is complex and most all of the teams have made similar errors. Time to move on.
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
When you turn a blind eye to so many positives DG has on his Giants resume, to continue the “Absolute” DG sucks narrative, you lose credibility.
I felt DG was probably done after this season, but a continuation of an upward trend will seal the deal for his return.
I understand opinion based on bias is the flavor of the day, but it is not an effective measure to win your pt. against rational thinking people.
All fair points. Although the rational thinking people should also be interested in seeing this lengthy list of "so many positives DG has on his Giants resume".
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
If we cut everyone that attended underground card games we wouldn’t have an NFL roster. Guy made a really bad decision to attend one with weak security in Miami of all places, but he’s a young guy that clearly isn’t all that bright. Not a bad dude perse, but what did him in was all his immature shit at the facility. We never cut him if he played better last year and all the red flags he continued to show into this offseason. Sucks because listening to him and his lawyer it sounds like he’s extremely grateful and may develop into the player he has potential to be.
someone like Tyreek Hill is allowed in the NFL. Every time I see that guy make a play I get angry. What he did was far more sinister than Ray Rice/Kareem Hunt, there just wasn't a camera on him. Baker should fit in nicely there.
But he was so much of a headache to the team that I'm sure Judge and DG concurred that they did not want to upset the team chemistry they have achieved so far
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
Was he supposed to investigate the proclivity to commit armed robbery before it ever took place?? I really hope that was sarcasm, but I'm fearing it wasn't
Just because unscrupulous witnesses were willing to change their testimony for money doesn't mean they weren't telling the truth in the first place. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of the possible reasons for DG to want nothing to do with Baker after digging into what happened that day and the days leading up to it. So it's ridiculous for anyone to question the decision to release him without knowing any more than what's been reported.
As for whether or not they made the right decision to draft him based on the information they had at the time, all we can truly say is that it was a "gamble" that didn't pay off. There seems to be this assumption that had they done their research on him as a prospect, they never would have drafted him, but that's pure speculation.
A prospect being flagged for off-field or attitude concerns doesn't necessarily mean he is taken off your draft board, it could merely mean he drops in value. This appears to be why Baker (who was the first CB taken in 2019) lasted all the way to the end of round one rather than go much earlier (perhaps in the top ten or fifteen). The word from the Georgia coaches could've been "yeah, he is a piece of work, but if you can get him focused he will be the steal of the draft." So in such a scenario, when you have all this extra draft capital based on previous trades and you've already made two picks in the first round, suddenly you are the team in the best position to take that gamble.
There are unwise bets that pay off and wise bets that fail. Whether or not selecting Baker was a wise decision based on the information they had at the time is (again) pure speculation on our part since we don't know what the information was. Randy Moss, Warren Sapp, and Laremy Tunsil dropped in the draft because of off-field concerns. They paid off for the teams that gambled on them. Lawrence Phillips is an example of someone who didn't. So is DeAndre Baker.
You win some, you lose some. As I've said before, you don't judge a GM by how many they get wrong, you judge them by how many they get right. Gettleman will be judged by the entirety of his decisions in both the draft and free agency, not cherry-picked mistakes.
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
FMiC, I may butt heads with you a bunch but I do agree with you that at the point in which that discussion was happening, there was no point in cutting Baker.
I still don't think it was a great pick in retrospect, and that was where I, personally at least, disagreed with you - he had a reputation that seemed to indicate it was a bit risky, but I will admit I did have a pitchfork out to a degree.
But with all that being a sunk cost at this point, and knowing Baker is cleared, I would have really wanted to see the team bring him back. I hope they sign him off the Chiefs PS to be honest. He was already cut once, it's not like he couldn't be cut again.
Having said that, I'm sure there are internal team dynamics about the way Judge is running the team that might make bringing him back hurt more than help. I hate the "culture" argument by with Judge, the proof is in the pudding with how the team has performed and he deserves the benefit of the doubt. If he doesn't want him back, I trust him, I guess, even though the team needs his talent.
So all in all, I will definitely admit you were partially right in the large overarching argument with everyone who was going against you in that convo -- and if Baker turns into a legit #1 (or #2) CB, I'll admit you were completely right.
Just because unscrupulous witnesses were willing to change their testimony for money doesn't mean they weren't telling the truth in the first place. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of the possible reasons for DG to want nothing to do with Baker after digging into what happened that day and the days leading up to it. So it's ridiculous for anyone to question the decision to release him without knowing any more than what's been reported.
As for whether or not they made the right decision to draft him based on the information they had at the time, all we can truly say is that it was a "gamble" that didn't pay off. There seems to be this assumption that had they done their research on him as a prospect, they never would have drafted him, but that's pure speculation.
A prospect being flagged for off-field or attitude concerns doesn't necessarily mean he is taken off your draft board, it could merely mean he drops in value. This appears to be why Baker (who was the first CB taken in 2019) lasted all the way to the end of round one rather than go much earlier (perhaps in the top ten or fifteen). The word from the Georgia coaches could've been "yeah, he is a piece of work, but if you can get him focused he will be the steal of the draft." So in such a scenario, when you have all this extra draft capital based on previous trades and you've already made two picks in the first round, suddenly you are the team in the best position to take that gamble.
There are unwise bets that pay off and wise bets that fail. Whether or not selecting Baker was a wise decision based on the information they had at the time is (again) pure speculation on our part since we don't know what the information was. Randy Moss, Warren Sapp, and Laremy Tunsil dropped in the draft because of off-field concerns. They paid off for the teams that gambled on them. Lawrence Phillips is an example of someone who didn't. So is DeAndre Baker.
You win some, you lose some. As I've said before, you don't judge a GM by how many they get wrong, you judge them by how many they get right. Gettleman will be judged by the entirety of his decisions in both the draft and free agency, not cherry-picked mistakes.
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
Please tell me that you're joking. How the hell was Gettleman supposed to see this coming? Being late/missing team meetings in college is not a future indicator of armed robbery.
The "Hate DG" crowd can take a small thread and create a sweater
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
FMiC, I may butt heads with you a bunch but I do agree with you that at the point in which that discussion was happening, there was no point in cutting Baker.
I still don't think it was a great pick in retrospect, and that was where I, personally at least, disagreed with you - he had a reputation that seemed to indicate it was a bit risky, but I will admit I did have a pitchfork out to a degree.
But with all that being a sunk cost at this point, and knowing Baker is cleared, I would have really wanted to see the team bring him back. I hope they sign him off the Chiefs PS to be honest. He was already cut once, it's not like he couldn't be cut again.
Having said that, I'm sure there are internal team dynamics about the way Judge is running the team that might make bringing him back hurt more than help. I hate the "culture" argument by with Judge, the proof is in the pudding with how the team has performed and he deserves the benefit of the doubt. If he doesn't want him back, I trust him, I guess, even though the team needs his talent.
So all in all, I will definitely admit you were partially right in the large overarching argument with everyone who was going against you in that convo -- and if Baker turns into a legit #1 (or #2) CB, I'll admit you were completely right.
I don't think I was right. It should just be a general rule in any situation to let the facts come to light (or let the team do its own work) before jumping to conclusions. I just don't get what the immediacy does. Jumping the gun has led to way too many situations needlessly being blown out of proportion.
Seeing it was the offseason made it even that much more needless. Cutting Baker 2 hours after the news broke or 2 weeks later or 2 moths later really shouldn't have any tangible impact, unless there are certain dates that impact a contract or player status.
What seems clear now is that the Giants information concludes that even if Baker isn't criminally responsible, he still isn't wanted on the team. And the net impact of that is a lost pick and a demerit for Gettleman.
The fact that what is essentially a 2nd year former first pick
I seem to remember even Landon Collins getting pissed at him, plus there was some fake tackle in the end zone too. Add this to his overall below average play, and why bring him back?
RE: If I remember correctly, wasn't there some attitude problems too
I seem to remember even Landon Collins getting pissed at him, plus there was some fake tackle in the end zone too. Add this to his overall below average play, and why bring him back?
Landon Collins was gone before Baker came aboard.
RE: If I remember correctly, wasn't there some attitude problems too
I seem to remember even Landon Collins getting pissed at him, plus there was some fake tackle in the end zone too. Add this to his overall below average play, and why bring him back?
This was Janoris Jenkins last year
RE: RE: If I remember correctly, wasn't there some attitude problems too
I seem to remember even Landon Collins getting pissed at him, plus there was some fake tackle in the end zone too. Add this to his overall below average play, and why bring him back?
Landon Collins was gone before Baker came aboard.
I think I am confusing Baker with Eli Apple then. They are basically the same in my mind (I can't fit much in there so I tend to over write things)
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
Was he supposed to investigate the proclivity to commit armed robbery before it ever took place?? I really hope that was sarcasm, but I'm fearing it wasn't
When this baby hits 88 mph, you're going to see some serious sh-t.
The only thing that bothers me- that ever bothered me- about Baker,
is that first round draft picks are supposed to be big and fast, which Baker is not.
I'm disappointed, but not surprised by Baker's performance both on and off the field. Our system for evaluating rookies and veterans has been unsatisfactory for many years.
trying to follow the double negative there - are you sure you meant it the way you wrote it?
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
Quote:
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
Exactly. What is far more likely is that the new staff has connections with Georgia and never would have selected Baker in the first place had they been here last year.
dude, shut up
You were probably part of the mob, STFU.
Exactly. What is far more likely is that the new staff has connections with Georgia and never would have selected Baker in the first place had they been here last year.
No doubt. With the new staff involved, they grabbed Thomas @ 4 overall, and his work habits seem to at the very least show hard work and coachability (he is evolving in season) and with the Mr Irrelevant pick they got Tae Crowder - who rather shockingly worked his way into a starting ILB role with a few games of the season's premiere... He's show he can both hit and be pretty damn fluid in coverage...
I couldn’t have cared less if he stayed on the roster. The only reason this isn’t a bigger story is because the team is in a playoff race.
So curious to keep an eye on this. Maybe Mathieu takes him under his wing and gets him back on track...
Quote:
You were probably part of the mob, STFU.
I couldn’t have cared less if he stayed on the roster. The only reason this isn’t a bigger story is because the team is in a playoff race.
Non-sense. Judge did not want him back. The reason it isn't a bigger story is that there is no story. If Judge wanted him back, he would have been brought back. He said in his presser that they made their decision and they are happy with it. You have to believe that the Giants did their own investigation and did not like what they saw and that is why he was released.
Quote:
In comment 15049429 Knineteen said:
Quote:
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
Exactly. What is far more likely is that the new staff has connections with Georgia and never would have selected Baker in the first place had they been here last year.
Any chance the new staff can get connections with the Panthers and get rid of DG?
I do not like Gettleman whatsoever as a GM, but blaming him for cutting him is stupid. That decision was the correct one and likely made by Judge and John Mara more so than Gettleman.
There's plenty of things to rip Gettleman for, getting rid of Baker to appease the mob is not one.
In your own line of work, do you fire someone and bring them back a few weeks later? It's not going to work out well.
They made the decision to release him knowing that he may beat the case, they accepted it then.
Ha! Loved this!
But
Ge screwed us. He really did. Even if he did not do it. He out himself in a terrible position and broke a lot of fans hearts. I hope he never does anything in the NFL.
When you turn a blind eye to so many positives DG has on his Giants resume, to continue the “Absolute” DG sucks narrative, you lose credibility.
I felt DG was probably done after this season, but a continuation of an upward trend will seal the deal for his return.
I understand opinion based on bias is the flavor of the day, but it is not an effective measure to win your pt. against rational thinking people.
LOL, By far the best post on this thread.
Quote:
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
When you turn a blind eye to so many positives DG has on his Giants resume, to continue the “Absolute” DG sucks narrative, you lose credibility.
I felt DG was probably done after this season, but a continuation of an upward trend will seal the deal for his return.
I understand opinion based on bias is the flavor of the day, but it is not an effective measure to win your pt. against rational thinking people.
Good post, Joe. +1
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
Quote:
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
When you turn a blind eye to so many positives DG has on his Giants resume, to continue the “Absolute” DG sucks narrative, you lose credibility.
I felt DG was probably done after this season, but a continuation of an upward trend will seal the deal for his return.
I understand opinion based on bias is the flavor of the day, but it is not an effective measure to win your pt. against rational thinking people.
All fair points. Although the rational thinking people should also be interested in seeing this lengthy list of "so many positives DG has on his Giants resume".
:- )
Quote:
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
If we cut everyone that attended underground card games we wouldn’t have an NFL roster. Guy made a really bad decision to attend one with weak security in Miami of all places, but he’s a young guy that clearly isn’t all that bright. Not a bad dude perse, but what did him in was all his immature shit at the facility. We never cut him if he played better last year and all the red flags he continued to show into this offseason. Sucks because listening to him and his lawyer it sounds like he’s extremely grateful and may develop into the player he has potential to be.
Quote:
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
Was he supposed to investigate the proclivity to commit armed robbery before it ever took place?? I really hope that was sarcasm, but I'm fearing it wasn't
As for whether or not they made the right decision to draft him based on the information they had at the time, all we can truly say is that it was a "gamble" that didn't pay off. There seems to be this assumption that had they done their research on him as a prospect, they never would have drafted him, but that's pure speculation.
A prospect being flagged for off-field or attitude concerns doesn't necessarily mean he is taken off your draft board, it could merely mean he drops in value. This appears to be why Baker (who was the first CB taken in 2019) lasted all the way to the end of round one rather than go much earlier (perhaps in the top ten or fifteen). The word from the Georgia coaches could've been "yeah, he is a piece of work, but if you can get him focused he will be the steal of the draft." So in such a scenario, when you have all this extra draft capital based on previous trades and you've already made two picks in the first round, suddenly you are the team in the best position to take that gamble.
There are unwise bets that pay off and wise bets that fail. Whether or not selecting Baker was a wise decision based on the information they had at the time is (again) pure speculation on our part since we don't know what the information was. Randy Moss, Warren Sapp, and Laremy Tunsil dropped in the draft because of off-field concerns. They paid off for the teams that gambled on them. Lawrence Phillips is an example of someone who didn't. So is DeAndre Baker.
You win some, you lose some. As I've said before, you don't judge a GM by how many they get wrong, you judge them by how many they get right. Gettleman will be judged by the entirety of his decisions in both the draft and free agency, not cherry-picked mistakes.
Quote:
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
I still don't think it was a great pick in retrospect, and that was where I, personally at least, disagreed with you - he had a reputation that seemed to indicate it was a bit risky, but I will admit I did have a pitchfork out to a degree.
But with all that being a sunk cost at this point, and knowing Baker is cleared, I would have really wanted to see the team bring him back. I hope they sign him off the Chiefs PS to be honest. He was already cut once, it's not like he couldn't be cut again.
Having said that, I'm sure there are internal team dynamics about the way Judge is running the team that might make bringing him back hurt more than help. I hate the "culture" argument by with Judge, the proof is in the pudding with how the team has performed and he deserves the benefit of the doubt. If he doesn't want him back, I trust him, I guess, even though the team needs his talent.
So all in all, I will definitely admit you were partially right in the large overarching argument with everyone who was going against you in that convo -- and if Baker turns into a legit #1 (or #2) CB, I'll admit you were completely right.
As for whether or not they made the right decision to draft him based on the information they had at the time, all we can truly say is that it was a "gamble" that didn't pay off. There seems to be this assumption that had they done their research on him as a prospect, they never would have drafted him, but that's pure speculation.
A prospect being flagged for off-field or attitude concerns doesn't necessarily mean he is taken off your draft board, it could merely mean he drops in value. This appears to be why Baker (who was the first CB taken in 2019) lasted all the way to the end of round one rather than go much earlier (perhaps in the top ten or fifteen). The word from the Georgia coaches could've been "yeah, he is a piece of work, but if you can get him focused he will be the steal of the draft." So in such a scenario, when you have all this extra draft capital based on previous trades and you've already made two picks in the first round, suddenly you are the team in the best position to take that gamble.
There are unwise bets that pay off and wise bets that fail. Whether or not selecting Baker was a wise decision based on the information they had at the time is (again) pure speculation on our part since we don't know what the information was. Randy Moss, Warren Sapp, and Laremy Tunsil dropped in the draft because of off-field concerns. They paid off for the teams that gambled on them. Lawrence Phillips is an example of someone who didn't. So is DeAndre Baker.
You win some, you lose some. As I've said before, you don't judge a GM by how many they get wrong, you judge them by how many they get right. Gettleman will be judged by the entirety of his decisions in both the draft and free agency, not cherry-picked mistakes.
Quote:
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
Please tell me that you're joking. How the hell was Gettleman supposed to see this coming? Being late/missing team meetings in college is not a future indicator of armed robbery.
Quote:
In comment 15049429 Knineteen said:
Quote:
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
FMiC, I may butt heads with you a bunch but I do agree with you that at the point in which that discussion was happening, there was no point in cutting Baker.
I still don't think it was a great pick in retrospect, and that was where I, personally at least, disagreed with you - he had a reputation that seemed to indicate it was a bit risky, but I will admit I did have a pitchfork out to a degree.
But with all that being a sunk cost at this point, and knowing Baker is cleared, I would have really wanted to see the team bring him back. I hope they sign him off the Chiefs PS to be honest. He was already cut once, it's not like he couldn't be cut again.
Having said that, I'm sure there are internal team dynamics about the way Judge is running the team that might make bringing him back hurt more than help. I hate the "culture" argument by with Judge, the proof is in the pudding with how the team has performed and he deserves the benefit of the doubt. If he doesn't want him back, I trust him, I guess, even though the team needs his talent.
So all in all, I will definitely admit you were partially right in the large overarching argument with everyone who was going against you in that convo -- and if Baker turns into a legit #1 (or #2) CB, I'll admit you were completely right.
I don't think I was right. It should just be a general rule in any situation to let the facts come to light (or let the team do its own work) before jumping to conclusions. I just don't get what the immediacy does. Jumping the gun has led to way too many situations needlessly being blown out of proportion.
Seeing it was the offseason made it even that much more needless. Cutting Baker 2 hours after the news broke or 2 weeks later or 2 moths later really shouldn't have any tangible impact, unless there are certain dates that impact a contract or player status.
What seems clear now is that the Giants information concludes that even if Baker isn't criminally responsible, he still isn't wanted on the team. And the net impact of that is a lost pick and a demerit for Gettleman.
Landon Collins was gone before Baker came aboard.
This was Janoris Jenkins last year
Quote:
I seem to remember even Landon Collins getting pissed at him, plus there was some fake tackle in the end zone too. Add this to his overall below average play, and why bring him back?
Landon Collins was gone before Baker came aboard.
I think I am confusing Baker with Eli Apple then. They are basically the same in my mind (I can't fit much in there so I tend to over write things)
Quote:
Between blowing 3 picks on the kid to getting rid of him to appease the mob. Truly an awesome job.
I'm pretty sure if it was just to appease the mob, Baker would have been cut the night of the arrest.
You know, when a bunch of screamer monkeys on BBI called for him to be immediately cut.
I'm genuinely laughing out loud at this. This is such a perfect description.
Quote:
In comment 15049549 JonC said:
Quote:
If it were bogus, I suspect it would've been sniffed out and he'd still be here. Football teams make these decisions with much more info than we have, including private investigators, etc.
One would have thought Dave G would have done this kind of assessment and investigation prior to moving up to grab the kid. Appears not.
Was he supposed to investigate the proclivity to commit armed robbery before it ever took place?? I really hope that was sarcasm, but I'm fearing it wasn't
When this baby hits 88 mph, you're going to see some serious sh-t.
I'm disappointed, but not surprised by Baker's performance both on and off the field. Our system for evaluating rookies and veterans has been unsatisfactory for many years.