Meaning we invested the top 4 overall pick last year in Thomas then a third round pick in Peart, then resigned Solder (who should be an upgrade to Fleming as a swing tackle). If they believe in this pretty heavy investment (which I think they do) they are unlikely to invest here again in the top 4-5 rounds.
Now I am speaking of Tackle only. However obviously its more clear of need based on current personell and investment is OG/IOL. This is a different story. We could easily choose a guy we want primarily for OG but has either OT or OC versatility in his game.
However here is the other caveat with that. In recent Giants history (last 30 years plus) they have NEVER went for a guy they want to play primarily as an OG in round 1. They just don't value the position in round 1. This certainly seems like an organization mindset. Could it suddenly change? I doubt it.
Now as a 2nd or 3rd round pick for an OG that is entirely different.
Point being, I am having a hard time seeing them go OL at 11 even if many others feel the guy could be BPA like a Slater or Alijah Vera Tucker. The only guy IMO that could change that calculus a bit would be Sewell. Because he may be in the top tier and far away such glaring great value that you can't ignore at 11. And even with him you might start him year 1 at OG (like Balt did with Ogden) but then slide him over to RT or even LT next year (depending on Thomas/Pearts performance). Giants don't likely take Thomas out of playing OT (barring disaster) but they could conceivably move on from a low 3rd round pick in Peart or have him play swing OT for us (Solders role).
I think that's why so much of the asshat info has been centered on 2 positions only. WR and Edge. We aren't really hearing much on the OGs at all in this spot. Since the Edge (in many peoples estimation here) don't carry that great a grade (mine included) I really hope one of the top WRs drop to us. I'd much rather get the edge where there is better value in round 2 or 3.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
And they know best. Recall the clamoring last year for a C to be drafted, and some losing their minds that the Giants passed on Travis Frederick. Turns out they had faith in Gates, and Gates turned out to be a more than servicable starter.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
I totally agree and have felt that way for a while. I also think that they are content with their edge fallback plans in the event the draft doesn't fall easily their way. I'm still convinced it's going to be WR at #11 and (likely) Edge at #42. I can definitely see RB, DT, and even TE coming into play in the third round and things moving on from there.
I think when we heard "professional TE" by DG the other day, in reference to KR it was not just his leadership and catching ability BUT what he brings all around, including blocking. The Giants issues with the OL can also be extended to our TE's and even our backs which routinely failed in their blocking assignments.
If they feel comfortable with Thomas, Peart and Solder as their top 3 tackles and Gates at Center then one Guard spot is definitely in play for an upgrade.
I think Trey Smith, Aaron Banks and Deonte Brown could all be in play here.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
Also, the talk has been more about adding an OG which doesn't need to be done at #11. I'd expect the watch to begin at #42 but more likely at #74, given the depth of talent available.
To add, WR is the deepest position in draft.....
I have repeated myself....the ideal scenerio....is the 5th QB drops to 11....and trade with NE, Chicago or Washington.
Try to get all 3: WR, IOL and Edge....with extra picks.
As they still need to come away with a Developmental RB.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
I don't think we will have a top 10 unit as currently constructed but there is upside and we really just need to get out of the bottom 5 gutter. An average top 15-20 line will be plenty to get Barkley going and take some pressure off Jones.
We can't keep spending premium picks on Tackles - we've made the investment and they simply need to deliver. The talent at 11 doesn't seem to be there and I'd much rather get a Guard later so we can get a big time player at 11.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
Yep. Which is why I see either WR or Edge at #11. The interesting thing is will it be a, say Landon Dickerson, at #42 or an Aaron Banks at #76/#116?
After months of over speculation on everyones part, though, I BELIEVE they will go WR at 11. Seems to be the most talent at WR OL and CB likely to be available at 11.
Those hoping we have turned the corner put an unbelievable amount of faith in a second-year head coach. But that's where we are at.
To add, WR is the deepest position in draft.....
I have repeated myself....the ideal scenerio....is the 5th QB drops to 11....and trade with NE, Chicago or Washington.
Try to get all 3: WR, IOL and Edge....with extra picks.
As they still need to come away with a Developmental RB.
I would do that, but only if Smith/Waddle are gone at 11. The drop off after them is much greater than the depth at the position can overcome, IMO. It's not a reflection on others not being good; it's just that I prefer to go with great.
Maybe I miss OBJ too much? (Not OBJ personally, but OBJ's performance)
The only thing that matters is how the FO/Coaches feel about it and how the players perform.
They are currently rated the highest....but my feeling is Marshall ends up being the best one. I also love the Minnesota kid.....
Waddle and Smith red flags concern me
I'm convinced the Giants are going DE/OLB/Edge at 11. Then they will attack OL and WR between 2-4.
I'm convinced the Giants are going DE/OLB/Edge at 11. Then they will attack OL and WR between 2-4.
I think this is correct with the proviso it could be Smith at #11 if he's available.
Quote:
fans agree or not, there are whispers that the Giants are far more content with the OL situation that many pundits believe.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
And they know best. Recall the clamoring last year for a C to be drafted, and some losing their minds that the Giants passed on Travis Frederick. Turns out they had faith in Gates, and Gates turned out to be a more than servicable starter.
They do? Have you checked their record the last 4 seasons?
I'm convinced the Giants are going DE/OLB/Edge at 11. Then they will attack OL and WR between 2-4.
The behind the scenes edge talk won't go away.
Quote:
hit it once or twice between 2-4 when there's a ton of depth.
I'm convinced the Giants are going DE/OLB/Edge at 11. Then they will attack OL and WR between 2-4.
The behind the scenes edge talk won't go away.
Biggest holes on the team, Edge x 2, they can address one spot at #11. Get a WR and OG and even hit Edge again in rounds 2-4.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
I agree with this for sure. We just don't know how highly they have Sewell rated. I'd have to think he is one of the top players on their board, that's why I think he could absolutely be our selection if he's still there.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
Not just where, but who. A college OT who projects to OG as a pro (but could play OT in a pinch)? A C/OG who could conceivably play all three IOL spots? Personally, I'd take one of each.
They do? Have you checked their record the last 4 seasons?
Can you tell me what TF their record in '17-'19 has to do with their current OL in '21? To me, the answer is absolutely nothing.
The record that is most relevant right now is 5-3. That's their record the second half of '20, with their current young and developing OL (which includes a recent high 1st rd pick, 2 3rds and a 5th, while adding a returning former 1st rd pick as swing T).
No one is saying we shouldn't draft OL, just preferably not at #11. Our "need" is more competition at IOL, which we can get in the 2nd or 3rd.
Those hoping we have turned the corner put an unbelievable amount of faith in a second-year head coach. But that's where we are at.
Ten years, and counting...
if he's off the board its edge with hopefully a trade down. but the trade down has to actually materialize. we as fans can scream that we should trade down, but who knows. with the fields health news maybe NE and Chicago say nah we're good to stay where we are.
right or wrong i get the impression the giants like the pieces they have on the line and have a staff that is confident they can coach them up. I think they'll add someone in the middle rounds for depth and competition. JJ came from NE where we'd routinely hear about them starting 6th rd rookies at OG and turning those guys into quality players. i'm not saying it will work, but thats my impression of how they look at the roster.
Quote:
In comment 15229492 Harvest Blend said:
Quote:
hit it once or twice between 2-4 when there's a ton of depth.
I'm convinced the Giants are going DE/OLB/Edge at 11. Then they will attack OL and WR between 2-4.
The behind the scenes edge talk won't go away.
Biggest holes on the team, Edge x 2, they can address one spot at #11. Get a WR and OG and even hit Edge again in rounds 2-4.
Hey Jon, if we did not go WR at #11, how would you feel about going WR at #42 (E. Moore), nice consolation prize to all who love Waddle.
Quote:
fans agree or not, there are whispers that the Giants are far more content with the OL situation that many pundits believe.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
Not just where, but who. A college OT who projects to OG as a pro (but could play OT in a pinch)? A C/OG who could conceivably play all three IOL spots? Personally, I'd take one of each.
We know they're looking for an OG, and if he can play OT in a pinch all the better. Depth to bridge them for year and see what their needs are next year.
Everyone seems to agree JJ has input into the draft. What's the sample size for his involvement in our draft? One.
And most people give credit to DG for picking OL. What's the sample size of him as GM of Giants? Three. And we had numerous needs to fill in those 3 drafts (can only address so much).
DG, JJ and the current players have NOTHING to do with the failures of '12-'19. (the DG haters will say he had a lot to do with '19, but he took over a horrible roster with a horrible OL and as he says "Rome wasn't built in a day").
Quote:
In comment 15229457 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
fans agree or not, there are whispers that the Giants are far more content with the OL situation that many pundits believe.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
And they know best. Recall the clamoring last year for a C to be drafted, and some losing their minds that the Giants passed on Travis Frederick. Turns out they had faith in Gates, and Gates turned out to be a more than servicable starter.
They do? Have you checked their record the last 4 seasons?
Garrett's had a pretty good OL record over the years...
Not sure why the Shurmur/MacAdoo years should affect this coaching staff's ability to identify/develop OL talent.
Slater seems like he has pro-bowl talent, but generally speaking I'd rather take a player with a "A" potential at one position, then one with "B+" potential at multiple spots.
There are several interesting names that will be available Day 3:
1. Josh Ball- Marshall- I have written about him before (first hand knowledge by Giants coach Mike Trierer)
2. Dan Moore- Texas A & M (Carson Green gets much draft attention, but I think both Aggies OTs are drafted) Moore had an impressive Pro Day and has a ton of game experience against strong competition (first hand knowledge by Giants coach Sam Coad)
3. Donavaughn Campbell-La Tech- he was a graduate transfer from LSU in 2020 and started at LT. Campbell didn't get a lot of action during his career at LSU (behind drafted guys like Damien Lewis and Saahdiq Charles), but he is massive (6'5" and 350), developing and learning to use his size effectively. He will be a priority UDFA. Don't forget Sale played his 4 years of O Line college football at LSU
Quote:
They do? Have you checked their record the last 4 seasons?
Can you tell me what TF their record in '17-'19 has to do with their current OL in '21? To me, the answer is absolutely nothing.
The record that is most relevant right now is 5-3. That's their record the second half of '20, with their current young and developing OL (which includes a recent high 1st rd pick, 2 3rds and a 5th, while adding a returning former 1st rd pick as swing T).
No one is saying we shouldn't draft OL, just preferably not at #11. Our "need" is more competition at IOL, which we can get in the 2nd or 3rd.
I don't think he meant literal record (i.e. wins-losses). I think he meant the track record with OL.
Everyone seems to agree JJ has input into the draft. What's the sample size for his involvement in our draft? One.
And most people give credit to DG for picking OL. What's the sample size of him as GM of Giants? Three. And we had numerous needs to fill in those 3 drafts (can only address so much).
DG, JJ and the current players have NOTHING to do with the failures of '12-'19. (the DG haters will say he had a lot to do with '19, but he took over a horrible roster with a horrible OL and as he says "Rome wasn't built in a day").
Rome?? Don't recall Gettleman saying at his introductory press conference than an OL was going to take 4 years to come together either.
Bottom line is it HAS to get better otherwise this will be yet another year of the team outside looking in come playoff time...
It's like thinking: "my last gf really screwed me over and you're probably just like her..."
We saw what Dallas has invested in the OL and I really don't think its a good strategy. Just so many top end picks to create a dominant OL only to neglect so much of the roster. They've won 1 playoff game since 2014.
Mid round picks need to hit.
It's like thinking: "my last gf really screwed me over and you're probably just like her..."
Dr D its been 3 years since Solder was given a massive deal by your Girlfriend to begin the stabilization of this OL.
And the clock is still ticking...
Quote:
They do? Have you checked their record the last 4 seasons?
Can you tell me what TF their record in '17-'19 has to do with their current OL in '21? To me, the answer is absolutely nothing.
The record that is most relevant right now is 5-3. That's their record the second half of '20, with their current young and developing OL (which includes a recent high 1st rd pick, 2 3rds and a 5th, while adding a returning former 1st rd pick as swing T).
No one is saying we shouldn't draft OL, just preferably not at #11. Our "need" is more competition at IOL, which we can get in the 2nd or 3rd.
It's relevant to their evaluation of talent on the offensive line. Check out how many times Jones was sacked last season.
I completely agree. If Slater is still on the board I would hope that there is at least some consideration given to him assuming he is the best player available. Thomas and Peart have proven nothing thus far.
Quote:
as if it's relevant, are like someone who has a bad experience with a woman and you hold it against all future women.
It's like thinking: "my last gf really screwed me over and you're probably just like her..."
Dr D its been 3 years since Solder was given a massive deal by your Girlfriend to begin the stabilization of this OL.
And the clock is still ticking...
If the last GM hadn't done such a horrible job, the Solder signing wouldn't have been necessary. There weren't a lot of great options.
You can fault DG for thinking we could compete for playoffs (and signing a FA LT like Solder), while rebuilding. I'm not going to fault him, bc I was hoping the same.
I don't think it's easy turning over an entire shitty roster in 3 years.
Quote:
injuries hit, you can move him to tackle. That's a big plus.
I completely agree. If Slater is still on the board I would hope that there is at least some consideration given to him assuming he is the best player available. Thomas and Peart have proven nothing thus far.
Slayton hasn't played a down in the NFL so I don't see him as a slam dunk either.
There are several interesting names that will be available Day 3:
1. Josh Ball- Marshall- I have written about him before (first hand knowledge by Giants coach Mike Trierer)
2. Dan Moore- Texas A & M (Carson Green gets much draft attention, but I think both Aggies OTs are drafted) Moore had an impressive Pro Day and has a ton of game experience against strong competition (first hand knowledge by Giants coach Sam Coad)
3. Donavaughn Campbell-La Tech- he was a graduate transfer from LSU in 2020 and started at LT. Campbell didn't get a lot of action during his career at LSU (behind drafted guys like Damien Lewis and Saahdiq Charles), but he is massive (6'5" and 350), developing and learning to use his size effectively. He will be a priority UDFA. Don't forget Sale played his 4 years of O Line college football at LSU
Nice list Y28, I would also add D'Ante Smith from East Carolina. He can also play guard which makes him a valuable reserve.
There are several interesting names that will be available Day 3:
1. Josh Ball- Marshall- I have written about him before (first hand knowledge by Giants coach Mike Trierer)
2. Dan Moore- Texas A & M (Carson Green gets much draft attention, but I think both Aggies OTs are drafted) Moore had an impressive Pro Day and has a ton of game experience against strong competition (first hand knowledge by Giants coach Sam Coad)
3. Donavaughn Campbell-La Tech- he was a graduate transfer from LSU in 2020 and started at LT. Campbell didn't get a lot of action during his career at LSU (behind drafted guys like Damien Lewis and Saahdiq Charles), but he is massive (6'5" and 350), developing and learning to use his size effectively. He will be a priority UDFA. Don't forget Sale played his 4 years of O Line college football at LSU
Great info as always Y28. No direct coaching staff connections I know of but Brendan Jaimes played LT at Nebraska and seems an awful lot like Nick Gates (started with him in 2017 and then moved from RT to LT to replace him after he went to NFL). Set the Nebraska school record with 40 straight starts on the OL (Gates started 35), similarly was all big 10 honorable mention 4 straight years, also academic all big 10 and scholor athlete honor roll. Very similar ht/wt/speed profiles and also likely a guard or RT in the NFL. Could very well see him as a day 3 pick even if they select another OL earlier on.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
Right or wrong this certainly seems to be their mindset. Combine that with ownership's value they place on OGs round 1 and I doubt we see an OL round 1 unless he is just a flat out glaring BPA blue chip player like Sewell.
Lemiuex's feet are just not good enough for OG but they can be for OC. I really hope he is not one of our starting OGs next year. A lot of positives in his game but the feet are just not there to play OG at the NFL level IMO.
Peart did flash well though pre-covid and Thomas certainly did in the 2nd half. (Also higher draft pick investments).
To add, WR is the deepest position in draft.....
I have repeated myself....the ideal scenerio....is the 5th QB drops to 11....and trade with NE, Chicago or Washington.
Try to get all 3: WR, IOL and Edge....with extra picks.
As they still need to come away with a Developmental RB.
WR@11 (if one drops), Baker-like trade up using Engram and/or pick to back half round 1 for Oweh/Tryon etc., then OL round at 76.
It definitely seems like this could be the way they are leaning if the draft falls the way they want it to.
Quote:
hit it once or twice between 2-4 when there's a ton of depth.
I'm convinced the Giants are going DE/OLB/Edge at 11. Then they will attack OL and WR between 2-4.
The behind the scenes edge talk won't go away.
Hopefully, Devonta saves us from ourselves then....I get the positional value however, Edge does not make the grade at 11 at all.
Quite possibly. However Giants ownership seems to ascribe to a different line of thinking unfortunately.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
Quote:
In comment 15229503 jeff57 said:
Quote:
They do? Have you checked their record the last 4 seasons?
Can you tell me what TF their record in '17-'19 has to do with their current OL in '21? To me, the answer is absolutely nothing.
The record that is most relevant right now is 5-3. That's their record the second half of '20, with their current young and developing OL (which includes a recent high 1st rd pick, 2 3rds and a 5th, while adding a returning former 1st rd pick as swing T).
No one is saying we shouldn't draft OL, just preferably not at #11. Our "need" is more competition at IOL, which we can get in the 2nd or 3rd.
It's relevant to their evaluation of talent on the offensive line. Check out how many times Jones was sacked last season.
12 sacks came in two games when Jones was severely hobbled (6 sacks against Balt, 6 against Arizona). If you look at the trend when Jones wasn't injured, it's not hard to see the OL was improving and averaged less than 2 sacks per game the second half of the season.
Dal was averaging 2 sacks per game for the 5 games Dak Prescott played.
No one is saying the OL doesn't need to continue to improve, just that we might finally have most of the pieces and need to develop them.
right or wrong i get the impression the giants like the pieces they have on the line and have a staff that is confident they can coach them up. I think they'll add someone in the middle rounds for depth and competition. JJ came from NE where we'd routinely hear about them starting 6th rd rookies at OG and turning those guys into quality players. i'm not saying it will work, but thats my impression of how they look at the roster.
If Judge is hiring Dante Scarnecchia then this plan would have merit. Otherwise, there is NOBODY on this staff - currently - that has the bonafides for OL development that any of us should trust.
This organization has been a complete and utter disaster for a decade picking and developing OLs. And Gettleman has, alas, continued that tradition.
However, we need to solve it. And if we have to spend our first two picks on OL I'm all for that. At some point we have to hit pay dirt and hook some top ones. Next to QB, OL is the most critical position in the NFL right now (on offense) and you just can't have enough.
My point is that Treier and others at Marshall saw all the facts, met with Ball, and gave him a 2nd chance.
None of us know the whole story. But would we do know, is that there have been no more issues with Ball since he was 18.
Judge simply cannot be on board with this. The OL was as bad last year as it has been during this decade of losing. None of last year's three draftees should give any comfort for the upcoming year. To reach for an edge rusher if Slater, Sewell or even frankly Darrisaw or Vera-Tucker are there, would be crazy. Trying to solve the OL with later round guys will give no greater comfort than Peart or Lemieux.
But then again, given the Giants first round drafting strategy of reaching for need over the last six years, you are probably right.
Quote:
but I can totally see Gettleman being enough of a narcissist to say "I spent three picks on the OL last year, it's fixed." There is a lot of projection with these young guys. It better pan out. Don't want to hear excuses about youth, coaching turnover, etc. Its put up or shut up time with the OL.
Judge simply cannot be on board with this. The OL was as bad last year as it has been during this decade of losing. None of last year's three draftees should give any comfort for the upcoming year. To reach for an edge rusher if Slater, Sewell or even frankly Darrisaw or Vera-Tucker are there, would be crazy. Trying to solve the OL with later round guys will give no greater comfort than Peart or Lemieux.
But then again, given the Giants first round drafting strategy of reaching for need over the last six years, you are probably right.
That last statement is dripping with irony.
Quote:
In comment 15229593 Dr. D said:
Quote:
as if it's relevant, are like someone who has a bad experience with a woman and you hold it against all future women.
It's like thinking: "my last gf really screwed me over and you're probably just like her..."
Dr D its been 3 years since Solder was given a massive deal by your Girlfriend to begin the stabilization of this OL.
And the clock is still ticking...
If the last GM hadn't done such a horrible job, the Solder signing wouldn't have been necessary. There weren't a lot of great options.
You can fault DG for thinking we could compete for playoffs (and signing a FA LT like Solder), while rebuilding. I'm not going to fault him, bc I was hoping the same.
I don't think it's easy turning over an entire shitty roster in 3 years.
So now you seem to want to go back to your prior girlfriend and blame them. You just posted not to go back and talk about the past 10 years...which is it Dr D?
Not talking about placing blame, not talking about prior regime, not talking about an entire roster, not talking about just Left Tackle, and we are not talking about what is easy or hard to do as a GM.
Simply talking about this is now the 4th offseason for this GM who made the OL his priority. Every option to improve this OL had to have become available over 4 years' time between trades, FA and Drafts, right? Many attempts have been made to find quality players and yet the team is still sitting here in April 2021 with a substandard OL and question marks at most of the 5 positions.
That is the OL reality with your current girlfriend...
I do think with their day 1 and day 2 picks they will evaluate each OL prospect against their grades (and subsequent rookie year evaluations) of Peart and Thomas both for interior and exterior OL. How that cuts who knows, but if say they have a better grade on Slater than they did Thomas, I think that will bode well for him possibly being selected at #11. Or if there's a guy available in round 2 or 3 who they see as comparable to or better than Peart. And on the flipside I don't see them taking anyone in round 2 or 3 who they'd deem inferior to Peart.
Dr D.'s reference for GMs
He probably has more tape against elite players than anyone else in the draft having played against OSU in years they had both Bosa + Young, playing against PSU's 2 edge rushers this year, Epenesa in 2019, Rashan Gary when he was at Michigan, etc.
We'll see during the draft. They'll take an OL. Where they take him will be enlightening.
I think they take an interior OL within the first 4 rounds. I agree though, they like their tackles, center and probably aren't as down on the guards as some here think, and that includes Hernandez.
Quote:
"girlfriend" shit?
Dr D.'s reference for GMs
It's NOT my reference for GMs.
It's called an analogy. In this case, people (irrationally) letting a past bad experience negatively affect the current and future situation (I've known at least one friend who never got over a bad experience with a girl and it ruined all future relationships)
It's similar to people complaining about the OL sucking for 10 years and not recognizing this OL has NOTHING to do with the OL that sucked from '12-19, i.e., the past.
They have a very young OL (including some recent high draft picks) that showed a lot of improvement the 2nd half of '20. And two of the young players that regressed, did so after getting covid).
As Eric said, it appears the Giants don't think the OL is the big disaster many here seem to continue to think it is. Why is that? Do you really think JJ is just stupid or that he has no power and DG doesn't care about the OL?
Or maybe they think they don't need to use the 11th pick on OL, bc they have most of the pieces that just need to continue to develop and be coached, while adding another piece possibly in the 2nd or 3rd rd. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.
Quote:
They do? Have you checked their record the last 4 seasons?
Can you tell me what TF their record in '17-'19 has to do with their current OL in '21? To me, the answer is absolutely nothing.
The record that is most relevant right now is 5-3. That's their record the second half of '20, with their current young and developing OL (which includes a recent high 1st rd pick, 2 3rds and a 5th, while adding a returning former 1st rd pick as swing T).
No one is saying we shouldn't draft OL, just preferably not at #11. Our "need" is more competition at IOL, which we can get in the 2nd or 3rd.
To be fair, plenty of bad teams have made the mistake of thinking a "hot" 2nd half translates into more hotness the following year. The Giants are not a 10-6 team right now.
Quote:
In comment 15229711 Harvest Blend said:
Quote:
"girlfriend" shit?
Dr D.'s reference for GMs
It's NOT my reference for GMs.
It's called an analogy. In this case, people (irrationally) letting a past bad experience negatively affect the current and future situation (I've known at least one friend who never got over a bad experience with a girl and it ruined all future relationships)
It's similar to people complaining about the OL sucking for 10 years and not recognizing this OL has NOTHING to do with the OL that sucked from '12-19, i.e., the past.
They have a very young OL (including some recent high draft picks) that showed a lot of improvement the 2nd half of '20. And two of the young players that regressed, did so after getting covid).
As Eric said, it appears the Giants don't think the OL is the big disaster many here seem to continue to think it is. Why is that? Do you really think JJ is just stupid or that he has no power and DG doesn't care about the OL?
Or maybe they think they don't need to use the 11th pick on OL, bc they have most of the pieces that just need to continue to develop and be coached, while adding another piece possibly in the 2nd or 3rd rd. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.
Woah... I don't know for a fact what the Giants actually believe. I am merely saying there are enough whispers out there that they are not as concerned about the OL as we are. Could be BS. Could be legit.
I would not be shocked if they took an OL in round one (I posted a thread on Vera-Tucker a few days ago for example).
But my gut is telling me no OL.
Everybody talks about the great Dal OL back in the day, but how many playoff games did they win with that OL stacked with 1st rounders?
And those preaching OL in the first rd, pooh pooh the "shiny toys". It's a team game and if you look at '11, was our OL even close to the best in the league? No, it was good enough. And our D (which included some high picks) and "shiny toys" named Nicks and Cruz had a lot to do with our SB victory.
Unfortunately, in Pugh’s case, he never got to try to play the tackle position he was drafted for - LT - because when Beatty went down and they had a need for Pugh there, they had already drafted Flowers.