These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
"we had to overpay for ordinary at best talent because there was no one else available" argument has never sat well for me.
JonC has using the proper language, ROI.
The Giants have been paying huge $$$ and the team has remained a basement dweller.
"We had to sign Solder because we had no other choice!"
This is why I don’t want to overspend this offseason on high profile veterans. Sign one of Williams or Tomlinson and some cheap 1 year stop gap type talent. Let’s build from the ground up in the draft. We need to stop relying on the Free Agent market for quick fixes.
Sure we did. Instead of making Solder the highest paid OL in the league and tie up the cap at the present time and in the future, the team could have bitten the bullet and gotten its financial house in order while still sucking.
In the end, what difference did signing Solder, Tate, etc. really make? Maybe one win, possibly two? So what? And worse, they were only temporary "fixes" that never really solved the issue.
RE: Ok, the rational or excuses you keep providing is not resonating
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
It wasn’t a great market for WRs that year. But that’s no excuse to pay Tate that type of money at his age.
A short term move for a vet like Randall Cobb or Danny Amendola could have stemmed the tied to this year, where the Giants will now be in the market again.
yea that's fair. It's also fair to think that they explored those options and those guys didn't want to come here.
I know that's not going to fly with the DG is an idiot how could he over spend crowd, but we don't know who was or wasn't available to sign here. The assumption from fans that drives me a little batty is that there were better and cheaper options just waiting outside mara tech saying "hi we will sign for cheaper"--not that simple.
Carry on.
So you would like to defend Gettleman using a strategy that "there weren't any good players out there or we can't afford it"?
You do realize some teams are actually winning out there, right?
RE: RE: Ok, the rational or excuses you keep providing is not resonating
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
The Giants have been paying huge $$$ and the team has remained a basement dweller.
"We had to sign Solder because we had no other choice!"
That's precisely why I'm hoping they avoid all the top WRs. I think they're going to be significantly overpaid and unlike Bradberry/Martinez, I don't think any of the top trio will outperform their contract. If they go the FA WR route, hopefully its someone with upside that they can get on a 1 yr prove it deal due to the reduced cap this year and the player having questions (e.g C Davis - underperformance, JuJu - off-field stuff).
Outside of QB, WR/ER on rookie deals give you the biggest advantage in cap "savings".
RE: RE: RE: Ok, the rational or excuses you keep providing is not resonating
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
Exactly. If I'm the GM, sometimes the best move is no move. Make the decision to stay lean, get your cap in order, focus on the draft and prospect development, and improving my pro personnel scouting and grading so we're prepared to strike when sound opportunities present themselves.
Under DG, he's spending a ton of money to plug holes poorly. It's no coincidence it's happening every offseason. It's also no coincidence that holes from 2018 REMAIN holes.
Until these processes and decision making are fixed, the Giants will struggle to put results on the football field.
The Giants have been reactive and acting out of desperation for years now. DG certainly but Reese too.
This is why I don’t want to overspend this offseason on high profile veterans. Sign one of Williams or Tomlinson and some cheap 1 year stop gap type talent. Let’s build from the ground up in the draft. We need to stop relying on the Free Agent market for quick fixes.
Exactly. If I'm the GM, sometimes the best move is no move. Make the decision to stay lean, get your cap in order, focus on the draft and prospect development, and improving my pro personnel scouting and grading so we're prepared to strike when sound opportunities present themselves.
Under DG, he's spending a ton of money to plug holes poorly. It's no coincidence it's happening every offseason. It's also no coincidence that holes from 2018 REMAIN holes.
Until these processes and decision making are fixed, the Giants will struggle to put results on the football field.
The Giants have been reactive and acting out of desperation for years now. DG certainly but Reese too.
Absolutely, and it has resulted in one winning season and playoff birth where the team made a fool of itself.
has a weird history here... his FA decisions last year were largely home runs. I bet you a lot of teams are kicking themselves over Bradberry and Martinez. And they really didn't overspend on anyone else last year. But before that, his FA decisions are VERY questionable.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
has a weird history here... his FA decisions last year were largely home runs. I bet you a lot of teams are kicking themselves over Bradberry and Martinez. And they really didn't overspend on anyone else last year. But before that, his FA decisions are VERY questionable.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
Raanan has said that the coaching staff influence played a much larger role in free agency last year. Finding players who could fit the scheme was a big emphasis. That worked well on defense. I do worry how aligned the offensive staff is though for it to have the same impact this year.
The Giants have been paying huge $$$ and the team has remained a basement dweller.
"We had to sign Solder because we had no other choice!"
That's precisely why I'm hoping they avoid all the top WRs. I think they're going to be significantly overpaid and unlike Bradberry/Martinez, I don't think any of the top trio will outperform their contract. If they go the FA WR route, hopefully its someone with upside that they can get on a 1 yr prove it deal due to the reduced cap this year and the player having questions (e.g C Davis - underperformance, JuJu - off-field stuff).
Outside of QB, WR/ER on rookie deals give you the biggest advantage in cap "savings".
Well there is only an advantage if the player is actually a plus player on his rookie deal.
Otherwise you are just plugging holes in the starting roster with basically middling or worse, below avg players like you were trying to defend above.
And the drafting record with this front office has almost as many issues as its free agent record.
has a weird history here... his FA decisions last year were largely home runs. I bet you a lot of teams are kicking themselves over Bradberry and Martinez. And they really didn't overspend on anyone else last year. But before that, his FA decisions are VERY questionable.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
The team is 15-33 during his tenure. They couldn’t even win arguably the worst division in the history of the NFL last year. 6-10 was “an improvement .” He spent the first year and a half trying to patch together a contender around washed up/shell shocked Eli when 85% of the people on this site who aren’t total Giants Shills knew was a disaster. Bringing him back makes no sense. But Mara is stuck in his ways.
has a weird history here... his FA decisions last year were largely home runs. I bet you a lot of teams are kicking themselves over Bradberry and Martinez. And they really didn't overspend on anyone else last year. But before that, his FA decisions are VERY questionable.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
I think his FA track record shows he relies on a lot of input from his coaching staff even before last year. This seems especially true for the 2nd/3rd tier FAs:
Remmers - played for Shurmur in MN
Golden/Mauro/Pierre/Bethea - all Cards
Stewart - obviously he was familiar with him from CAR
Last year:
Bradberry - drafted by DG
Martinez/Fackrell - played for Graham
Ryan - Judge
I don't know how he was in CAR, but I think he's shown a pretty collaborative approach with both Shurmur and Judge here, obviously with better results last year (still early).
Exactly. If I'm the GM, sometimes the best move is no move. Make the decision to stay lean, get your cap in order, focus on the draft and prospect development, and improving my pro personnel scouting and grading so we're prepared to strike when sound opportunities present themselves.
Under DG, he's spending a ton of money to plug holes poorly. It's no coincidence it's happening every offseason. It's also no coincidence that holes from 2018 REMAIN holes.
Until these processes and decision making are fixed, the Giants will struggle to put results on the football field.
Agree with you and Eric. My sense is that until recently, many FA moves were done based on the erroneous belief that they could make another run with Eli. That made them emphasize short term fixes instead of tearing everything down and understanding that they needed to rebuild the entire team.
has a weird history here... his FA decisions last year were largely home runs. I bet you a lot of teams are kicking themselves over Bradberry and Martinez. And they really didn't overspend on anyone else last year. But before that, his FA decisions are VERY questionable.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
Last year was a lot better in terms of FA (the draft is still TBD), so maybe as you surmise, it was because of Judge's influence. I am also surprised that Gettleman didn't retire.
It wasn’t a great market for WRs that year. But that’s no excuse to pay Tate that type of money at his age.
A short term move for a vet like Randall Cobb or Danny Amendola could have stemmed the tied to this year, where the Giants will now be in the market again.
yea that's fair. It's also fair to think that they explored those options and those guys didn't want to come here.
I know that's not going to fly with the DG is an idiot how could he over spend crowd, but we don't know who was or wasn't available to sign here. The assumption from fans that drives me a little batty is that there were better and cheaper options just waiting outside mara tech saying "hi we will sign for cheaper"--not that simple.
Carry on.
So you would like to defend Gettleman using a strategy that "there weren't any good players out there or we can't afford it"?
You do realize some teams are actually winning out there, right?
I really didn't defend anything. I explained the rationale while also saying we'd have been better off not signing Tate and just drafting someone. Didn't happen. Tate was signed. At the expense of anyone else? Maybe maybe not. It is done.
Proactive measures like JonC alluded to? Sure I am all for it. I mean who wouldn't be for that. I tend to think the team has done a better job of stocking the young pipeline of talent here lately, which is as proactive as you can be, but success from that takes time to manifest. Losing the prize draft pick from 18 for all these games hasn't helped. Was expecting slightly better results in 2020, I had em at 7 wins but was cautiously hopeful for 9 and wouldn't have been surprised with 9.
2021 needs to be better. 20 needed to be better. I keep saying that. How many times can I show that I am more in the middle on DG? I can also not condemn or completely obliterate the GM while thinking we need to show improvement.
has a weird history here... his FA decisions last year were largely home runs. I bet you a lot of teams are kicking themselves over Bradberry and Martinez. And they really didn't overspend on anyone else last year. But before that, his FA decisions are VERY questionable.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
What are the “really good decisions from the draft”? He’s drafted high in every round and other than a RB 2nd overall in the 7-10 range league-wide, there are no elite players or any who you think are on track to be top 5 at their respective positions. Lawrence? Solid player taken in the middle of round 1. Slayton was a nice find in the 5th. The rest? A lot of wishing and hoping.
so have others. GMs usually work at the behest of the HC or at least work in concert with the HC.
Tate was a desperate move I have no doubt. We just don't know the whole story and I find it awfully convenient to just use DG as the villain every time a FA move goes south. I don't have a horse in this race. I am not best buddies with DG. I don't care if he's fired tomorrow or here for another decade. I just want to win. I have seen GMs look legendary great for 4-5 years and then turn into a pumpkin the next 4-5 years. Too many to count. Doesn't mean I don't think the GM deserve to be killed or praises in some instances, but I think there are so many mitigating factors, both hidden or even visible, that factor in to a GM's tenure and success rating.
I hold HCs much more accountable for wins and losses, but there can be exceptions. It's just how I look at things in the NFL.
That's fine djm, agree with these basic sentiments.
Just your earlier post clearly was describing nothing other than a traditional "excuse" for Gettleman. And kind of weak one at that with some unknowns as to its basis.
Look forward to hearing DG and Judge kill it next week with their press conference!
so have others. GMs usually work at the behest of the HC or at least work in concert with the HC.
Tate was a desperate move I have no doubt. We just don't know the whole story and I find it awfully convenient to just use DG as the villain every time a FA move goes south.
That is the deal. And he gets all my credit for targeting Bradberry and Martinez too. A couple of the others I can go either way with as to credit, but clearly 2020 was a free agent success for once with this team.
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
Mara said Gettleman had overhauled the player evaluation system and he (Mara) really liked where they were as an organization in that process. So that tells you right there, IMV, that DG still has all of the powers vested in the GM position by Jints Central.
And in the last State of Union presser, Mara basically acted like getting rid of Gettleman wasn't really on his radar.
Mara is a stubborn man who is completely devoted to the "Giants Way" of doing business. Which means the GM still plays an enormous role in building a team.
another instance of "The Giants Way" being used derisively.
That Giants Way has been part of 5 SB appearances and 4 wins. Why do I get the impression that, like in the early days of Daniel Snyder, that bw would rather we do things the "Redskins Way"??
but I've often felt like the "Giants Way" is it's own thing separate from the two eras of winning they've had in my lifetime.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
but I've often felt like the "Giants Way" is it's own thing separate from the two eras of winning they've had in my lifetime.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
but I've often felt like the "Giants Way" is it's own thing separate from the two eras of winning they've had in my lifetime.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
How many teams have successfully transitioned from 1 SB winning coach to the next? I'm sure there's others, but the 2 that stood out are:
One could argue HCs are like QBs and get too long of a leash after a single SB win (or even appearance). Finding a good HC that can motivate the team, maximize players' abilities, and out scheme the opposition isn't easy. For example, Peterson and McCarthy.
but I've often felt like the "Giants Way" is it's own thing separate from the two eras of winning they've had in my lifetime.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
How many teams have successfully transitioned from 1 SB winning coach to the next? I'm sure there's others, but the 2 that stood out are:
One could argue HCs are like QBs and get too long of a leash after a single SB win (or even appearance). Finding a good HC that can motivate the team, maximize players' abilities, and out scheme the opposition isn't easy. For example, Peterson and McCarthy.
And half of BBI couldn't wait to get rid of TC.
Not saying you're wrong, but when you look at the post-winning era head coaching hires, it's pretty bad. McAdoo and Shurmur were really bad hires, and the explanation for hiring those coaches, in hindsight, wasn't the greatest. Especially in Shurmur's case.
Post Parcells, it's bad too. Handley, Reeves, then Fassel.
Looking at the Fassell and Coughlin years from a bird's eye perspective, it's 19 consecutive years of singular moments of brilliance (2007, 2011, 2000) surrounded by real mediocrity or worse.
The Mara's are the Giants they are not separate entities. If one really hates them that much isn't it time to retire your interest in the NY Football Giants?
knocking the Solder signing they day it happened saying "making Nate Solder the highest paid OL in the league is not what winning teams do" or something along those lines. Definitely like 80% of BBI (including me) was happy to get Solder because we thought we NEEDED him with no one else being available)-- not afraid to say I was wrong. I wanted to "win now" and like many others (including Gettleman) didn't realize it just wasn't possible.
but I've often felt like the "Giants Way" is it's own thing separate from the two eras of winning they've had in my lifetime.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
Why is "the Giants Way" derogatory? Why is is separate? It is basically only invoked by one poster here. One who is more of a fan of Bill Parcells than he ever was of the Giants. One who once said the Giants could learn something by imitating the redskins.
To me, the Giants Way is a franchise who exemplifies being a flagship franchise of the league and one that has a rich history of winning and class.
When it is invoked differently, one has to wonder what the fuck people have learned from the team's history.
So they cut him today, but why is there any dead cap hit for the following season? I thought that was only if it’s a post June 1 cut? Link - ( New Window )
I think those tweets are just worded poorly. The 2022 numbers referenced there are implied future cap numbers that are now also cleared with the releases of Tate and Mayo. That's not carry-forward dead money, if I'm reading that correctly (and I can't think of any reason why there would be 2022 dead money from these cuts unless either/both were 6/1 cuts, but it doesn't appear that they were).
with the desperate veteran overpays in UFA, ROI is hard to watch seriously.
This just reinforces my skepticism on Kevin Abrams. He’s the cap guy handing out these bloated deals in conjunction with Dave. He’s the guy many here think is next in line at GM, maybe as early as 2022. Why??
It's possible that Abrams is just miscast as a cap guy.
Because he's sure as hell not especially advantageous as just a cap guy.
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
You just claimed that Tate outperformed his contract and then called someone else dumb?
but I've often felt like the "Giants Way" is it's own thing separate from the two eras of winning they've had in my lifetime.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
Why is "the Giants Way" derogatory? Why is is separate? It is basically only invoked by one poster here. One who is more of a fan of Bill Parcells than he ever was of the Giants. One who once said the Giants could learn something by imitating the redskins.
To me, the Giants Way is a franchise who exemplifies being a flagship franchise of the league and one that has a rich history of winning and class.
When it is invoked differently, one has to wonder what the fuck people have learned from the team's history.
Oh, you're back! Any POV from an analytics standpoint on this roster move?
RE: RE: RE: Ok, the rational or excuses you keep providing is not resonating
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
You just claimed that Tate outperformed his contract and then called someone else dumb?
Oof. Buy a book.
No where on this thread (or any thread for that matter) did I claim Tate outperformed his contract. Try again.
Why is "the Giants Way" derogatory? Why is is separate? It is basically only invoked by one poster here. One who is more of a fan of Bill Parcells than he ever was of the Giants. One who once said the Giants could learn something by imitating the redskins.
To me, the Giants Way is a franchise who exemplifies being a flagship franchise of the league and one that has a rich history of winning and class.
When it is invoked differently, one has to wonder what the fuck people have learned from the team's history.
I'm not here to argue on the side of someone who thinks the Redskins are a model to be emulated, but I do think the "Giants Way" is just some nebulous phrase. To be fair, I feel the same way about the "patriot way". They're not real. The Patriots were irrelevant and valueless before Belichick and Brady. Bob Kraft doesn't know anything about building a winning football team any more than John Mara does. as we've seen, Mara has a hard time even picking a coach that can do the job competently.
We can say they have a rich history of class, and maybe that's so, but there are plenty of stunning blunders in recent years from the Josh Brown fiasco, to how they fired-but-didn't-fire Tom Coughlin, to the Eli Manning/Geno Smith debacle, and what is quickly becoming decade of deeply awful football. I'm not a season ticket holder, but I'm not sure people who were forced to make a choice between paying for PSLs or losing their seats feel about where the Giants rank in class vs the rest of the league either.
to have any success here. Coughlin was one of Wellington's last great strokes. Even against the advice of Accorsi who probably wouldn't have hired him, and might have fired him before he he managed to make 2007 happen.
In shorter terms, the people in charge now who represent the "Giants Way" of doing things haven't had much success.
another instance of "The Giants Way" being used derisively.
That Giants Way has been part of 5 SB appearances and 4 wins. Why do I get the impression that, like in the early days of Daniel Snyder, that bw would rather we do things the "Redskins Way"??
Dave Gettleman is the perfect example of the "Giants Way". A hire based purely on his roots and history with the Giants, not the best man for the job. Which is what we needed instead of this crime of cronyism.
And because of that cronyism we continue to be spin into another dark decade similar to the '70s.
For someone so smart, I continue to be surprised you are too daft to see this...
RE: RE: RE: RE: Ok, the rational or excuses you keep providing is not resonating
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
You just claimed that Tate outperformed his contract and then called someone else dumb?
Oof. Buy a book.
No where on this thread (or any thread for that matter) did I claim Tate outperformed his contract. Try again.
Are you fucking serious? Did you forget whether you were logged in as this handle or broadbandz?
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
JonC has using the proper language, ROI.
The Giants have been paying huge $$$ and the team has remained a basement dweller.
"We had to sign Solder because we had no other choice!"
This is why I don’t want to overspend this offseason on high profile veterans. Sign one of Williams or Tomlinson and some cheap 1 year stop gap type talent. Let’s build from the ground up in the draft. We need to stop relying on the Free Agent market for quick fixes.
Sure we did. Instead of making Solder the highest paid OL in the league and tie up the cap at the present time and in the future, the team could have bitten the bullet and gotten its financial house in order while still sucking.
In the end, what difference did signing Solder, Tate, etc. really make? Maybe one win, possibly two? So what? And worse, they were only temporary "fixes" that never really solved the issue.
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
Quote:
It wasn’t a great market for WRs that year. But that’s no excuse to pay Tate that type of money at his age.
A short term move for a vet like Randall Cobb or Danny Amendola could have stemmed the tied to this year, where the Giants will now be in the market again.
yea that's fair. It's also fair to think that they explored those options and those guys didn't want to come here.
I know that's not going to fly with the DG is an idiot how could he over spend crowd, but we don't know who was or wasn't available to sign here. The assumption from fans that drives me a little batty is that there were better and cheaper options just waiting outside mara tech saying "hi we will sign for cheaper"--not that simple.
Carry on.
So you would like to defend Gettleman using a strategy that "there weren't any good players out there or we can't afford it"?
You do realize some teams are actually winning out there, right?
Quote:
to a better answer.
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
Super job holding your own here giants#1...
JonC has using the proper language, ROI.
The Giants have been paying huge $$$ and the team has remained a basement dweller.
"We had to sign Solder because we had no other choice!"
That's precisely why I'm hoping they avoid all the top WRs. I think they're going to be significantly overpaid and unlike Bradberry/Martinez, I don't think any of the top trio will outperform their contract. If they go the FA WR route, hopefully its someone with upside that they can get on a 1 yr prove it deal due to the reduced cap this year and the player having questions (e.g C Davis - underperformance, JuJu - off-field stuff).
Outside of QB, WR/ER on rookie deals give you the biggest advantage in cap "savings".
Quote:
In comment 15166600 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
to a better answer.
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
Super job holding your own here giants#1...
No problem dup...
Under DG, he's spending a ton of money to plug holes poorly. It's no coincidence it's happening every offseason. It's also no coincidence that holes from 2018 REMAIN holes.
Until these processes and decision making are fixed, the Giants will struggle to put results on the football field.
The Giants have been reactive and acting out of desperation for years now. DG certainly but Reese too.
This is why I don’t want to overspend this offseason on high profile veterans. Sign one of Williams or Tomlinson and some cheap 1 year stop gap type talent. Let’s build from the ground up in the draft. We need to stop relying on the Free Agent market for quick fixes.
Quote:
Exactly. If I'm the GM, sometimes the best move is no move. Make the decision to stay lean, get your cap in order, focus on the draft and prospect development, and improving my pro personnel scouting and grading so we're prepared to strike when sound opportunities present themselves.
Under DG, he's spending a ton of money to plug holes poorly. It's no coincidence it's happening every offseason. It's also no coincidence that holes from 2018 REMAIN holes.
Until these processes and decision making are fixed, the Giants will struggle to put results on the football field.
The Giants have been reactive and acting out of desperation for years now. DG certainly but Reese too.
Absolutely, and it has resulted in one winning season and playoff birth where the team made a fool of itself.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
Raanan has said that the coaching staff influence played a much larger role in free agency last year. Finding players who could fit the scheme was a big emphasis. That worked well on defense. I do worry how aligned the offensive staff is though for it to have the same impact this year.
Quote:
JonC has using the proper language, ROI.
The Giants have been paying huge $$$ and the team has remained a basement dweller.
"We had to sign Solder because we had no other choice!"
That's precisely why I'm hoping they avoid all the top WRs. I think they're going to be significantly overpaid and unlike Bradberry/Martinez, I don't think any of the top trio will outperform their contract. If they go the FA WR route, hopefully its someone with upside that they can get on a 1 yr prove it deal due to the reduced cap this year and the player having questions (e.g C Davis - underperformance, JuJu - off-field stuff).
Outside of QB, WR/ER on rookie deals give you the biggest advantage in cap "savings".
Well there is only an advantage if the player is actually a plus player on his rookie deal.
Otherwise you are just plugging holes in the starting roster with basically middling or worse, below avg players like you were trying to defend above.
And the drafting record with this front office has almost as many issues as its free agent record.
So who do you target in the draft at WR and ER...
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
The team is 15-33 during his tenure. They couldn’t even win arguably the worst division in the history of the NFL last year. 6-10 was “an improvement .” He spent the first year and a half trying to patch together a contender around washed up/shell shocked Eli when 85% of the people on this site who aren’t total Giants Shills knew was a disaster. Bringing him back makes no sense. But Mara is stuck in his ways.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
I think his FA track record shows he relies on a lot of input from his coaching staff even before last year. This seems especially true for the 2nd/3rd tier FAs:
Remmers - played for Shurmur in MN
Golden/Mauro/Pierre/Bethea - all Cards
Stewart - obviously he was familiar with him from CAR
Last year:
Bradberry - drafted by DG
Martinez/Fackrell - played for Graham
Ryan - Judge
I don't know how he was in CAR, but I think he's shown a pretty collaborative approach with both Shurmur and Judge here, obviously with better results last year (still early).
Under DG, he's spending a ton of money to plug holes poorly. It's no coincidence it's happening every offseason. It's also no coincidence that holes from 2018 REMAIN holes.
Until these processes and decision making are fixed, the Giants will struggle to put results on the football field.
Agree with you and Eric. My sense is that until recently, many FA moves were done based on the erroneous belief that they could make another run with Eli. That made them emphasize short term fixes instead of tearing everything down and understanding that they needed to rebuild the entire team.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
Last year was a lot better in terms of FA (the draft is still TBD), so maybe as you surmise, it was because of Judge's influence. I am also surprised that Gettleman didn't retire.
Quote:
In comment 15166374 christian said:
Quote:
It wasn’t a great market for WRs that year. But that’s no excuse to pay Tate that type of money at his age.
A short term move for a vet like Randall Cobb or Danny Amendola could have stemmed the tied to this year, where the Giants will now be in the market again.
yea that's fair. It's also fair to think that they explored those options and those guys didn't want to come here.
I know that's not going to fly with the DG is an idiot how could he over spend crowd, but we don't know who was or wasn't available to sign here. The assumption from fans that drives me a little batty is that there were better and cheaper options just waiting outside mara tech saying "hi we will sign for cheaper"--not that simple.
Carry on.
So you would like to defend Gettleman using a strategy that "there weren't any good players out there or we can't afford it"?
You do realize some teams are actually winning out there, right?
I really didn't defend anything. I explained the rationale while also saying we'd have been better off not signing Tate and just drafting someone. Didn't happen. Tate was signed. At the expense of anyone else? Maybe maybe not. It is done.
Proactive measures like JonC alluded to? Sure I am all for it. I mean who wouldn't be for that. I tend to think the team has done a better job of stocking the young pipeline of talent here lately, which is as proactive as you can be, but success from that takes time to manifest. Losing the prize draft pick from 18 for all these games hasn't helped. Was expecting slightly better results in 2020, I had em at 7 wins but was cautiously hopeful for 9 and wouldn't have been surprised with 9.
2021 needs to be better. 20 needed to be better. I keep saying that. How many times can I show that I am more in the middle on DG? I can also not condemn or completely obliterate the GM while thinking we need to show improvement.
Same thing with the draft. Some really good decisions and some real head-scratchers that hurt.
The real question here is: "Who was the dominate factor in FA decisions last year? Gettleman, Judge, someone else?"
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
What are the “really good decisions from the draft”? He’s drafted high in every round and other than a RB 2nd overall in the 7-10 range league-wide, there are no elite players or any who you think are on track to be top 5 at their respective positions. Lawrence? Solid player taken in the middle of round 1. Slayton was a nice find in the 5th. The rest? A lot of wishing and hoping.
Tate was a desperate move I have no doubt. We just don't know the whole story and I find it awfully convenient to just use DG as the villain every time a FA move goes south. I don't have a horse in this race. I am not best buddies with DG. I don't care if he's fired tomorrow or here for another decade. I just want to win. I have seen GMs look legendary great for 4-5 years and then turn into a pumpkin the next 4-5 years. Too many to count. Doesn't mean I don't think the GM deserve to be killed or praises in some instances, but I think there are so many mitigating factors, both hidden or even visible, that factor in to a GM's tenure and success rating.
I hold HCs much more accountable for wins and losses, but there can be exceptions. It's just how I look at things in the NFL.
Look forward to hearing DG and Judge kill it next week with their press conference!
Tate was a desperate move I have no doubt. We just don't know the whole story and I find it awfully convenient to just use DG as the villain every time a FA move goes south.
That is the deal. And he gets all my credit for targeting Bradberry and Martinez too. A couple of the others I can go either way with as to credit, but clearly 2020 was a free agent success for once with this team.
I'm on record saying multiple times that I'm surprised Gettleman wasn't "retired" this offseason. Some have suggested his powers have been diminished. But I don't think any of us outside the organization know that for sure.
Mara said Gettleman had overhauled the player evaluation system and he (Mara) really liked where they were as an organization in that process. So that tells you right there, IMV, that DG still has all of the powers vested in the GM position by Jints Central.
And in the last State of Union presser, Mara basically acted like getting rid of Gettleman wasn't really on his radar.
Mara is a stubborn man who is completely devoted to the "Giants Way" of doing business. Which means the GM still plays an enormous role in building a team.
I thought for sure the end of this year would be the perfect time to put DG "out to pasture".
There needs to be a new set of eyes on the biggest two player personnel decisions coming up in the next two years - Saquon and DJ.
Of course, if the other prediction I had, that Abrams would take over, would the situation be any different?
That Giants Way has been part of 5 SB appearances and 4 wins. Why do I get the impression that, like in the early days of Daniel Snyder, that bw would rather we do things the "Redskins Way"??
I thought for sure the end of this year would be the perfect time to put DG "out to pasture".
There needs to be a new set of eyes on the biggest two player personnel decisions coming up in the next two years - Saquon and DJ.
Of course, if the other prediction I had, that Abrams would take over, would the situation be any different?
This is an excellent (and disquieting) summary of the current situation.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
+1
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
How many teams have successfully transitioned from 1 SB winning coach to the next? I'm sure there's others, but the 2 that stood out are:
Steelers (Cowher/Tomlin)
Cowboys (Johnson/Switzer)
One could argue HCs are like QBs and get too long of a leash after a single SB win (or even appearance). Finding a good HC that can motivate the team, maximize players' abilities, and out scheme the opposition isn't easy. For example, Peterson and McCarthy.
And half of BBI couldn't wait to get rid of TC.
Quote:
but I've often felt like the "Giants Way" is it's own thing separate from the two eras of winning they've had in my lifetime.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
How many teams have successfully transitioned from 1 SB winning coach to the next? I'm sure there's others, but the 2 that stood out are:
Steelers (Cowher/Tomlin)
Cowboys (Johnson/Switzer)
One could argue HCs are like QBs and get too long of a leash after a single SB win (or even appearance). Finding a good HC that can motivate the team, maximize players' abilities, and out scheme the opposition isn't easy. For example, Peterson and McCarthy.
And half of BBI couldn't wait to get rid of TC.
Not saying you're wrong, but when you look at the post-winning era head coaching hires, it's pretty bad. McAdoo and Shurmur were really bad hires, and the explanation for hiring those coaches, in hindsight, wasn't the greatest. Especially in Shurmur's case.
Post Parcells, it's bad too. Handley, Reeves, then Fassel.
Looking at the Fassell and Coughlin years from a bird's eye perspective, it's 19 consecutive years of singular moments of brilliance (2007, 2011, 2000) surrounded by real mediocrity or worse.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
Why is "the Giants Way" derogatory? Why is is separate? It is basically only invoked by one poster here. One who is more of a fan of Bill Parcells than he ever was of the Giants. One who once said the Giants could learn something by imitating the redskins.
To me, the Giants Way is a franchise who exemplifies being a flagship franchise of the league and one that has a rich history of winning and class.
When it is invoked differently, one has to wonder what the fuck people have learned from the team's history.
Especially when he started trying to claim that he was taking a female fertility drug to help with his own virility.
Good riddance.
Because that rolls over to next year's cap, Denny. And you only get two 6/1 cuts per year. One of them is probably earmarked for Solder already.
Quote:
In comment 15166152 Saquads26 said:
Quote:
Why didn't they just wait?
Just rip the band aid off. Cant have him affect the 2022 cap.
I guess that makes sense, need more money this year. A lot more
And need it sooner than June 1st.
Thanks for playing.
I think those tweets are just worded poorly. The 2022 numbers referenced there are implied future cap numbers that are now also cleared with the releases of Tate and Mayo. That's not carry-forward dead money, if I'm reading that correctly (and I can't think of any reason why there would be 2022 dead money from these cuts unless either/both were 6/1 cuts, but it doesn't appear that they were).
Quote:
with the desperate veteran overpays in UFA, ROI is hard to watch seriously.
This just reinforces my skepticism on Kevin Abrams. He’s the cap guy handing out these bloated deals in conjunction with Dave. He’s the guy many here think is next in line at GM, maybe as early as 2022. Why??
It's possible that Abrams is just miscast as a cap guy.
Because he's sure as hell not especially advantageous as just a cap guy.
It's actually precisely representative of exactly that.
If you would stop gargling long enough to pay attention, you might realize that.
Quote:
to a better answer.
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
You just claimed that Tate outperformed his contract and then called someone else dumb?
Oof. Buy a book.
Quote:
but I've often felt like the "Giants Way" is it's own thing separate from the two eras of winning they've had in my lifetime.
The "giants way" led to the Commissioner having to intervene in the operation of the team and installing an independent GM who saved the franchise.
They won under Parcells. When he was gone, so was the winning. They won under Coughlin. When he was gone, so was the winning. You might argue that management failed Coughlin and Eli and unintentionally helped make their later years worse.
Why is "the Giants Way" derogatory? Why is is separate? It is basically only invoked by one poster here. One who is more of a fan of Bill Parcells than he ever was of the Giants. One who once said the Giants could learn something by imitating the redskins.
To me, the Giants Way is a franchise who exemplifies being a flagship franchise of the league and one that has a rich history of winning and class.
When it is invoked differently, one has to wonder what the fuck people have learned from the team's history.
Oh, you're back! Any POV from an analytics standpoint on this roster move?
Quote:
In comment 15166600 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
to a better answer.
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
You just claimed that Tate outperformed his contract and then called someone else dumb?
Oof. Buy a book.
No where on this thread (or any thread for that matter) did I claim Tate outperformed his contract. Try again.
Why is "the Giants Way" derogatory? Why is is separate? It is basically only invoked by one poster here. One who is more of a fan of Bill Parcells than he ever was of the Giants. One who once said the Giants could learn something by imitating the redskins.
To me, the Giants Way is a franchise who exemplifies being a flagship franchise of the league and one that has a rich history of winning and class.
When it is invoked differently, one has to wonder what the fuck people have learned from the team's history.
I'm not here to argue on the side of someone who thinks the Redskins are a model to be emulated, but I do think the "Giants Way" is just some nebulous phrase. To be fair, I feel the same way about the "patriot way". They're not real. The Patriots were irrelevant and valueless before Belichick and Brady. Bob Kraft doesn't know anything about building a winning football team any more than John Mara does. as we've seen, Mara has a hard time even picking a coach that can do the job competently.
We can say they have a rich history of class, and maybe that's so, but there are plenty of stunning blunders in recent years from the Josh Brown fiasco, to how they fired-but-didn't-fire Tom Coughlin, to the Eli Manning/Geno Smith debacle, and what is quickly becoming decade of deeply awful football. I'm not a season ticket holder, but I'm not sure people who were forced to make a choice between paying for PSLs or losing their seats feel about where the Giants rank in class vs the rest of the league either.
1. Transition from Coughlin
2. Transition from Reese
3. Transition from Eli
He inherited all three of those key figures. His attempts to replace them have been utterly shambolic.
In shorter terms, the people in charge now who represent the "Giants Way" of doing things haven't had much success.
So I do get why someone might feel that way.
That Giants Way has been part of 5 SB appearances and 4 wins. Why do I get the impression that, like in the early days of Daniel Snyder, that bw would rather we do things the "Redskins Way"??
Dave Gettleman is the perfect example of the "Giants Way". A hire based purely on his roots and history with the Giants, not the best man for the job. Which is what we needed instead of this crime of cronyism.
And because of that cronyism we continue to be spin into another dark decade similar to the '70s.
For someone so smart, I continue to be surprised you are too daft to see this...
Quote:
In comment 15166604 giants#1 said:
Quote:
In comment 15166600 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
to a better answer.
These were free agent additions that were not beneficial to the team. And however you care to label them, for the most part a solution still does not exist at those positions two years later.
Unless you care to rethink this or put something compelling in the next post, I think we are done here.
The beats did not report anything misleading.
Yea, I'm definitely done since you've once again affirmed that you're dumber than a doorknob.
You just claimed that Tate outperformed his contract and then called someone else dumb?
Oof. Buy a book.
No where on this thread (or any thread for that matter) did I claim Tate outperformed his contract. Try again.
Are you fucking serious? Did you forget whether you were logged in as this handle or broadbandz?
In comment 15166587 giants#1 said:
Link - ( New Window )