|
|
|
| Quote: |
Giants coach Joe Judge said most other NFL players would have missed more than only two games. “Look, Daniel is the last guy that’s going to use anything as an excuse,” Judge, who rarely talks about injuries, told The Michael Kay Show on Monday. What I would say about the injury last year is it was much more serious than maybe people thought on the outside. I would say probably 90 percent of players in the league who would have had that injury, including quarterbacks, would have been on IR for the remainder of the year. That’s just the reality of it. It was much more severe than maybe he allowed people to know or the information that was put out there, and we’re going to protect our players by not disclosing everything about their injuries to be honest with you. He fought through a lot of things. He earned a lot of people’s respect.” |
You’re right. Terps started this shit. He hadn’t posted on the thread at all but was still called out by another poster, but fuck him, it’s his fault. Brilliant analysis of the situation.
Quote:
In comment 15252277 WillVAB said:
Quote:
In comment 15252272 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
And you choose this one? Fuck off.
We hear this shit every year with underperforming players. Next there will be a fluff piece on Thomas playing through two broken ankles last year.
👆
Just an attention whore trying to carve out some space for himself now that even those of us who have been quick to criticize DG are feeling good about the draft.
Attention whore? Why don’t you give the board another lecture about how Omameh and Toilolo are going to ruin the Giants salary cap?
Omameh was a horrific signing - there's no denying that and it DID have negative cap ramifications that lasted for multiple years, including restructuring Rhett Ellison, which resulted in carrying dead money beyond Ellison's retirement, and also restructuring Nate Solder, which presented a less favorable negotiation with Solder this offseason when the Giants were negotiating against Solder's dead money value. Both of those outcomes are undeniable. The net impact of the downstream implications of the Omameh signing is something that is worth discussing - fortunately we find ourselves here on a message board to do exactly that. And even more fortunately, the Giants navigated through that bad signing eventually. But it was still a terrible contract.
Toilolo was a poor signing last year - he was paid too much to play too little and his snap count is clear evidence that he didn't quite fit what the team wanted to do offensively. He seemed like an easy cut this offseason, and - despite the incredibly creative and successful job that DG/KA/KOB did this offseason - I'm still not sure why they didn't just release him outright, especially since Rudolph was one of their primary FA targets. They were in prime position to narrow their TE group to Evan Engram, Kaden Smith, and Kyle Rudolph, leaving open a slot for a cheap 4th TE who might contribute on specials. Keeping Toilolo and guaranteeing any of his money instead of releasing him entirely for free was an error, IMO.
I happen to disagree with this move. And I happen to also believe that there's a good chance that it will create unnecessary dead money on the 2022 cap because of the guaranteed money that they gave Toilolo in the restructure. That dead money won't be especially significant in and of itself, but it will still be emblematic of a front office approach that does still have a blind spot when it comes to those small details and does still treat dead money like it's just the cost of doing business (we still see early outs baked into this year's FA contracts, which which will invite dead money and eliminate comp draft picks if those contracts do not reach maturity), rather than protecting against that liability.
This year, part of the reason for assuming dead money risk was an effort to stretch every dollar to maximize the free agent class - it's hard to argue with that approach if it pays dividends in the standings. But if it doesn't? Then last year's tactic of utilizing roster bonuses instead of signing bonuses to reduce dead money risk will prove to have been the more successful approach.
Still, I don't think I need to apologize to anyone or the board in general for understanding the mechanisms of the cap rather than just pointing to future years and claiming that there was no rain in the forecast. The Giants absolutely borrowed against those future years' flexibility this offseason, and that's not something they had done quite so aggressively before. I'm excited about the players they brought in and the way that they commanded free agency this year, and I also recognize that they assumed a fair bit of risk in the process.
Having said all that, I don't think this has to be binary. I think it's perfectly fair to support the team's overall direction and still be a vocal critic of individual moves as they occur. I know that doesn't necessarily align with the way that many of us view BBI's aisle, but I'm going to give it a shot.
I still maintain that there are moments where even a fan can identify efficiencies that a front office doesn't utilize. I don't know whether that's due to so many moving parts or favors to agents or - as I'm realizing this offseason - the possibility that contracts can be structured in such a fashion as to effectively represent cap room carryover for a fringe player in order to free up space at a later date, as needed (note that I still don't love this approach, as with Toilolo, because cap room can be carried over free and clear of dead money for one year).
Ultimately, here's my take: I realized a while ago that our front office doesn't know everything and they're still figuring it out as they go - it has bothered me tremendously to watch them make mistakes while the team continued to struggle for years now. But I'll also admit that my ego got in the way of my realizing that I also don't know everything and I'm figuring it out as THEY go.
They're doing much better this year, but they're far from a finished product. And I sure as hell don't know everything I'd need to know in order to articulate with certainty every single thing that I wish they'd do instead. I'm going to keep on describing what I think they could have done, and I'm also going to keep on being excited about things that make me happy as a Giants fan.
Care to counter?
Quote:
In comment 15252328 bw in dc said:
Quote:
Because I'm fairly certain he got cleared to play by the medical team. No?
Based on what he looked like and are other option, it's a rock and a hard place.
He got cleared by the medical team in the NFL, you know what that means right? You can't be that naive, unless he was at a reasonable risk of making the injury worse with long term repercussions, they clear you. He clearly was very ineffective because of the injury. I've seen Stafford go out there and catch shit for the same thing.
Some guys are just tougher than others. DJ went out there with a broken collarbone at Duke earlier than anyone expected with normal prognosis. If you suddenly take the mobility away from a young QB and expect him to perform like a seasoned pocket passer with a line that sucks at pass blocking and no skill players, not sure what to tell you.
Then Jones shouldn't have been out there playing if he didn't have the faculties to perform effectively. I've seen other QBs who were hurt but still performed effectively - Favre, Rodgers, Roethliserger, Romo, etc. So someone made a mistake allowing DJ to play. Tough means NOTHING if you are hurting the team. It doesn't get you extra points on the scoreboard.
Despite the horrendous division, we were in the hunt for a division title. So we very likely played the wrong guy for a game or two...
And neither should Eli have been out there against the Packers in Week 2 2007.. He threw like a girl, according to Strahan. And he couldn’t throw it more than 5-10 yards.
And they lost. Blown out. But he earned the team’s respect that day. Including the cynical Strahan. And then Strahan mentioned him in his HOF speech despite only playing with him 3 years.
It matters.
I happen to disagree with this move. And I happen to also believe that there's a good chance that it will create unnecessary dead money on the 2022 cap because of the guaranteed money that they gave Toilolo in the restructure. That dead money won't be especially significant in and of itself, but it will still be emblematic of a front office approach that does still have a blind spot when it comes to those small details and does still treat dead money like it's just the cost of doing business (we still see early outs baked into this year's FA contracts, which which will invite dead money and eliminate comp draft picks if those contracts do not reach maturity), rather than protecting against that liability.
This year, part of the reason for assuming dead money risk was an effort to stretch every dollar to maximize the free agent class - it's hard to argue with that approach if it pays dividends in the standings. But if it doesn't? Then last year's tactic of utilizing roster bonuses instead of signing bonuses to reduce dead money risk will prove to have been the more successful approach.
Still, I don't think I need to apologize to anyone or the board in general for understanding the mechanisms of the cap rather than just pointing to future years and claiming that there was no rain in the forecast. The Giants absolutely borrowed against those future years' flexibility this offseason, and that's not something they had done quite so aggressively before. I'm excited about the players they brought in and the way that they commanded free agency this year, and I also recognize that they assumed a fair bit of risk in the process.
Having said all that, I don't think this has to be binary. I think it's perfectly fair to support the team's overall direction and still be a vocal critic of individual moves as they occur. I know that doesn't necessarily align with the way that many of us view BBI's aisle, but I'm going to give it a shot.
I still maintain that there are moments where even a fan can identify efficiencies that a front office doesn't utilize. I don't know whether that's due to so many moving parts or favors to agents or - as I'm realizing this offseason - the possibility that contracts can be structured in such a fashion as to effectively represent cap room carryover for a fringe player in order to free up space at a later date, as needed (note that I still don't love this approach, as with Toilolo, because cap room can be carried over free and clear of dead money for one year).
There is no dead money for Toilolo next year if the Giants cut him this season. Even after the pay cut they would save $1 million in cap room this year by releasing him. This assumption that he is a roster lock this season is a bit puzzling to me. IMO I think that the Giants will carry 3 TE's, unless Rudolph misses the beginning of the season, with Kaden Smith as the 3rd TE.
I have said this is the year for Jones. Improve or we look at another solution. Be better, especially that we have a lot more weapons and the OL should hopefully improve at a nice level.
I'm not really sure when BBI changed it's opinion on the development of franchise quarterbacks, possibly a few years ago, but basically now, you need to be very good immediately or you're a bust. Perhaps it is the age we live in now. Look around the league. The quarterbacks who have been in this league for 10-12 years are struggled at first. And guess why? Because you are young and likely on a team that isn't good at first. That's the way football works.
I mean, we just had Terps say that Jones "isn't Phil Simms" - and the irony of that statement is that Jones looks a lot more impressive than Simms did, and it isn't really close.
BBI also has this thing now with "30 TD" - I imagine this was started by Terps, in fact I think it was. The irony of that statement is that plenty of QBs that Terps and others would want instead of Daniel Jones have been in the league longer than him, and usually end up in the mid or high 20s in TDs.
There is absolutely zero nuance or room for discussion on this board on how the SITUATION matters when it comes to a franchise QB. Gee - what happened when Eli Manning's OL started to gel finally and we got him some weapons? We went on a really nice run from 2007-2011.
I am in full support of giving Jones this season to prove himself now that he has finally has legit weapons to throw to. If he shits the bed this season the Giants have ample draft capital to move up if needed to get their next QB. If Jones steps up then the Giants are in great shape moving forward.
Yeah, Manning was a clear cut #1 pick. A lot more pure "talent" than Jones. But, if you ask me my actual opinion, Jones has looked like a better NFL quarterback than Eli Manning did through 2 seasons.
And no, I'm not saying Jones is going to become Eli, be as good as Eli at his peak, or two super bowls and MVPs. I'm just saying, he's further along.
Then Jones shouldn't have been out there playing if he didn't have the faculties to perform effectively. I've seen other QBs who were hurt but still performed effectively - Favre, Rodgers, Roethliserger, Romo, etc. So someone made a mistake allowing DJ to play. Tough means NOTHING if you are hurting the team. It doesn't get you extra points on the scoreboard.
Despite the horrendous division, we were in the hunt for a division title. So we very likely played the wrong guy for a game or two...
And neither should Eli have been out there against the Packers in Week 2 2007.. He threw like a girl, according to Strahan. And he couldn’t throw it more than 5-10 yards.
And they lost. Blown out. But he earned the team’s respect that day. Including the cynical Strahan. And then Strahan mentioned him in his HOF speech despite only playing with him 3 years.
It matters.
Not buying the romance in just being tough. You need to perform and win as well, especially if you are the QB. Otherwise, you are hurting the team.
Quote:
I happen to disagree with this move. And I happen to also believe that there's a good chance that it will create unnecessary dead money on the 2022 cap because of the guaranteed money that they gave Toilolo in the restructure. That dead money won't be especially significant in and of itself, but it will still be emblematic of a front office approach that does still have a blind spot when it comes to those small details and does still treat dead money like it's just the cost of doing business (we still see early outs baked into this year's FA contracts, which which will invite dead money and eliminate comp draft picks if those contracts do not reach maturity), rather than protecting against that liability.
This year, part of the reason for assuming dead money risk was an effort to stretch every dollar to maximize the free agent class - it's hard to argue with that approach if it pays dividends in the standings. But if it doesn't? Then last year's tactic of utilizing roster bonuses instead of signing bonuses to reduce dead money risk will prove to have been the more successful approach.
Still, I don't think I need to apologize to anyone or the board in general for understanding the mechanisms of the cap rather than just pointing to future years and claiming that there was no rain in the forecast. The Giants absolutely borrowed against those future years' flexibility this offseason, and that's not something they had done quite so aggressively before. I'm excited about the players they brought in and the way that they commanded free agency this year, and I also recognize that they assumed a fair bit of risk in the process.
Having said all that, I don't think this has to be binary. I think it's perfectly fair to support the team's overall direction and still be a vocal critic of individual moves as they occur. I know that doesn't necessarily align with the way that many of us view BBI's aisle, but I'm going to give it a shot.
I still maintain that there are moments where even a fan can identify efficiencies that a front office doesn't utilize. I don't know whether that's due to so many moving parts or favors to agents or - as I'm realizing this offseason - the possibility that contracts can be structured in such a fashion as to effectively represent cap room carryover for a fringe player in order to free up space at a later date, as needed (note that I still don't love this approach, as with Toilolo, because cap room can be carried over free and clear of dead money for one year).
There is no dead money for Toilolo next year if the Giants cut him this season. Even after the pay cut they would save $1 million in cap room this year by releasing him. This assumption that he is a roster lock this season is a bit puzzling to me. IMO I think that the Giants will carry 3 TE's, unless Rudolph misses the beginning of the season, with Kaden Smith as the 3rd TE.
Cutting Toilolo will carve into operating space for this season, which - as we saw with the dead money purge of 2019 - can often trigger restructures of other contracts in order to stay on track.
It's not just the direct dead money impact of each contract that needs to be considered. It can sometimes be the ripple effect of dead money that causes other moves (that also represent dead money impact themselves) that causes the damage. I realize that this can't always be avoided, and that it's easy for a fan to point out primary, secondary, and tertiary dead money liabilities, but I throw it out there as I see it because if I can identify it, then someone like Kevin Abrams - who many fans consider an astute cap manager - must be able to identify it as well.
As it relates to Toilolo: personally, I will very rarely be in favor of hanging onto vested veterans who will be 3rd or lower on the depth chart at any position. The marginal value of a veteran's contribution in such a minimal role is not worth the assumption of full-season guaranteed money simply for having them make the team. And gift-wrapping enough guaranteed money to a roster-bubble vested veteran that it becomes increasingly likely that they make the final cut is just openly inefficient, IMO.
Quote:
In comment 15252399 bw in dc said:
Then Jones shouldn't have been out there playing if he didn't have the faculties to perform effectively. I've seen other QBs who were hurt but still performed effectively - Favre, Rodgers, Roethliserger, Romo, etc. So someone made a mistake allowing DJ to play. Tough means NOTHING if you are hurting the team. It doesn't get you extra points on the scoreboard.
Despite the horrendous division, we were in the hunt for a division title. So we very likely played the wrong guy for a game or two...
And neither should Eli have been out there against the Packers in Week 2 2007.. He threw like a girl, according to Strahan. And he couldn’t throw it more than 5-10 yards.
And they lost. Blown out. But he earned the team’s respect that day. Including the cynical Strahan. And then Strahan mentioned him in his HOF speech despite only playing with him 3 years.
It matters.
Not buying the romance in just being tough. You need to perform and win as well, especially if you are the QB. Otherwise, you are hurting the team.
That wasn’t the point and you know it.
No shit. He was a 2nd year QB and made a lot of mistakes. Just like every quarterback to ever live save for a few of them.
I am in full support of giving Jones this season to prove himself now that he has finally has legit weapons to throw to. If he shits the bed this season the Giants have ample draft capital to move up if needed to get their next QB. If Jones steps up then the Giants are in great shape moving forward.
This is exactly the part I don't understand. It's like having blinders on. On one hand Eli earned it, but look at the Giant offense Eli's second year, 2005 and compare it to the 2020 Giants. Giants went out and added Plax, McKenzie, to a team with an all pro caliber runningback in Barber, an elite weapon at TE in Shockey, and Amani Toomer. Not saying that to discredit Eli, I'm a huge Eli fan, but from the vantage point of watching Eli grow as a player through the years, Giants offense was put in an impossible situation last year based on the state of the offensive line and skill group, that skill group required Barkley's presence, that is what it our offense was designed around. We traded Beckham, our last #1WR, replaced him with an aging Golden Tate and basically said this is going to be Barkley's team and these other pieces will serve to compliment him. That plan blew up in the Giants face last year, and they pivoted accordingly this offseason.
Man, that is one strong shot of hyperbole!
Jones's rookie season is a BBI myth.
Tough as he is, with all the hard, and all the desire, questions remain about his processing and decisions on the field. Want it bad and try hard and hard work from morning till night just aren’t enough. Sorry, it’s just the way it works. Gotta win. Gotta make big plays. Toughness in the NFL is table stakes. He’s got all the weapons and tools to succeed in the NFL. Let’s fucking go DJ8!
I think it's more a matter of a few posters who don't believe that Jones automatically qualifies as a "developmental quarterback."
Quote:
Herbert was known to be lukewarm on football; ready to walk away at any moment.
Man, that is one strong shot of hyperbole!
Nope. Go back a read if you are capable. Many thought that the kid just didn't care much for football. Many questioned his dedication to the game and his passion as a player. They thought he didn't care. Last year he showed otherwise.
Quote:
who are not willing to develop a quarterback.
I think it's more a matter of a few posters who don't believe that Jones automatically qualifies as a "developmental quarterback."
^^Most idiotic post of the day^^
Trading for Chicago's first rounder put that notion to bed. Either he becomes a productive quarterback for the first time in...ever...or it's good night the lights on the three year mistake.
Not buying the romance in just being tough. You need to perform and win as well, especially if you are the QB. Otherwise, you are hurting the team.
That wasn’t the point and you know it.
I understand your point, but I'm just not buying it.
In the national semis between Ohio State/Clemson, Fields took a brutal, cheap shot from LB Skalski. Skalski rightfully got tossed.
I remember thinking there wasn't any way Fields was going to finish the game. I thought he was so hurt he wouldn't be able to play the rest of the year.
But he dug deep, managed the agony, and threw three more TD passes against Clemson (he finished with six) to lead OSU to a dominant W. That's being tough and still being productive...
Quote:
In comment 15252465 bw in dc said:
Not buying the romance in just being tough. You need to perform and win as well, especially if you are the QB. Otherwise, you are hurting the team.
That wasn’t the point and you know it.
I understand your point, but I'm just not buying it.
In the national semis between Ohio State/Clemson, Fields took a brutal, cheap shot from LB Skalski. Skalski rightfully got tossed.
I remember thinking there wasn't any way Fields was going to finish the game. I thought he was so hurt he wouldn't be able to play the rest of the year.
But he dug deep, managed the agony, and threw three more TD passes against Clemson (he finished with six) to lead OSU to a dominant W. That's being tough and still being productive...
So go root for the Bears. You need a team that makes decisions you can get onboard with.
Quote:
In comment 15252454 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
who are not willing to develop a quarterback.
I think it's more a matter of a few posters who don't believe that Jones automatically qualifies as a "developmental quarterback."
^^Most idiotic post of the day^^
Don't be am ass. It's way too obtuse to label Jones' critics as people who just think a QB should immediately be stellar and never have to develop their skills.
I'd say they just don't think he'll put it together and be elite. It's a common tale that we've seen with dozens of QBs. Why should freaking Daniel Jones of all people be exempt from this concern?
Quote:
In comment 15252379 LeonBright45 said:
Quote:
Herbert was known to be lukewarm on football; ready to walk away at any moment.
Man, that is one strong shot of hyperbole!
Nope. Go back a read if you are capable. Many thought that the kid just didn't care much for football. Many questioned his dedication to the game and his passion as a player. They thought he didn't care. Last year he showed otherwise.
There is a vast chasm between some (not "many") wondering if he was dedicated to football, and it being KNOWN that he was lukewarm.
Some people have wondered if Lawrence is passionate about football, by the way. My guess is they are idiots who work for a potential doormat of a team.
The Giants looked pretty damn good vs. Seattle, then Jones came back and got absolutely demolished vs. the Cards. It was fish in barrel out there.
Love me some Judge, but yikes. If Jones was IR worthy, they got him beat like a bag out there. Maybe McCoy doesn’t get hit like a tee ball all game.
The Giants looked pretty damn good vs. Seattle, then Jones came back and got absolutely demolished vs. the Cards. It was fish in barrel out there.
Love me some Judge, but yikes. If Jones was IR worthy, they got him beat like a bag out there. Maybe McCoy doesn’t get hit like a tee ball all game.
Yeah, Judge nearly makes it sound like the team pulled a Shanahan/RG III.
PFF has been consistently anti Gettleman. Ripped the Barkley pick, crushed the Jones pick, referring to him as a 3rd round qb.
Never thought I’d see the day where PFF liked the Giants QB more than Giants fans did.
Yeah, Judge nearly makes it sound like the team pulled a Shanahan/RG III.
Against both Arizona and Baltimore, Jones was a piñata. The Giants grab one those games and they are in the tournament.
This is one of those things that seems like something good happened, then you give it any amount of thought and you realize something terribly stupid actually occurred.
I'll root for the Giants too - the difference is I don't make shit up to make them seem better than they are.
If Jones played for the Eagles everyone on this board would say he sucks, and be relieved that he is their problem. And that would be a fair take. But because he's here we've had to listen to months of bullshit about how his first two seasons have been something other than terrible...and if you disagree, it makes you a bad fan.
I see it differently. What kind of fan are you when you say things like "Jones is farther along in year 2 than Eli was"? I think that makes you delusional.
I'll be right there rooting for the Giants; I just won't be delusional as I do it.
If Eli Manning played for the Eagles for his first three years, we would have been laughing them out of the building every single game.
You realize that these arguments you create into a vacuum only are for Daniel Jones? And not for any other player in the history of the NFL?
Daniel Jones has been the quarterback for two years. You are the only person on this website who thinks that’s enough time. And to be frank - Joe Judge knows a lot more about football than you do about anything. As does Dave Gettleman, as does John Mara.
Why acknowledging that is sensibility offending, is so bizarre to me.
Why acknowledging that is sensibility offending, is so bizarre to me.
Because there are posters here who think they should be the GM of the team, that’s why
Why acknowledging that is sensibility offending, is so bizarre to me.
Because lots of people spent money on #8 jerseys.
But out of all the communications that I like from Judge, this one just portrays lack of good judgment. They may have likely lost with the backup QB too but they were never going to have a chance with DJ that day.
Hey, rookie HC’s make bad decisions too. And this was one of them...
If he plays well this year, it’ll be a huge leap. It’s not a foregone conclusion.
The days of Eli Manning being available are gone...
2020 - 3 starts with passer rating over league average
In 32 games since they drafted him with the 6th pick overall, the Giants have gotten 7 above average passing performances from Jones.
7/32 = 26.9% of Jones's starts have been above average
Quote:
If Jones delivers a big year, doesn’t turn the ball over a bunch, wins some big games, and the Giants win more games than they lose — it’ll be a huge accomplishment and much improved from his first two years.
Why acknowledging that is sensibility offending, is so bizarre to me.
Because there are posters here who think they should be the GM of the team, that’s why
No one thinks that. Do you always go right for the most absurd interpretation of a position you disagree with?
So we can't use passer rating, we can't use AY/A, we can't use overall W/L record...what can we use to ascertain how well a quarterback is playing? I know a lot of people point to Jones's 24 TD passes as a rookie...why can we use that but not the other stats that take everything else into account?
I mean, we just had Terps say that Jones "isn't Phil Simms" - and the irony of that statement is that Jones looks a lot more impressive than Simms did, and it isn't really close.
Jones looks a lot more impressive than many past QBs who are HOF. Compare his first two years' worth of starts to Joe Montana's. More impressive.
Of course, same could be said of many QBs who started with promise but also equal cause for concern, and never managed to develop their skills and/or diminish their warts enough. Josh Freeman comes to mind.
You act as though being skeptical of Jones' ability to become a consistently winning, elite QB is a slap in the face to the entire concept of QB development. It's not... it's simply considering that he may be among the many young QBs in history who just *don't* develop.
In this wave of red ink, Patrick Omameh’s accelerated dead money was a ripple, consuming 1.5% of the 2019 cap. His cap number the previous year was 1.4%, on a team that allocated nearly 25% to dead money. His cap impact was modestly consequential, but it was a VERY small part of the overall problem.
Omameh was a horrid signing because he stunk. The contract was the least of it
Quote:
In comment 15252538 santacruzom said:
Quote:
In comment 15252454 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
who are not willing to develop a quarterback.
I think it's more a matter of a few posters who don't believe that Jones automatically qualifies as a "developmental quarterback."
^^Most idiotic post of the day^^
Don't be am ass. It's way too obtuse to label Jones' critics as people who just think a QB should immediately be stellar and never have to develop their skills.
I'd say they just don't think he'll put it together and be elite. It's a common tale that we've seen with dozens of QBs. Why should freaking Daniel Jones of all people be exempt from this concern?
I bet you believe every QB will never 'put it together and be elite" until the time actually comes and then you stand up on your chair and scream that you knew he could do it all along. It's truly despicable how some of you berate a young QB. Go root for another team if you see a QB that meets your standards and criteria. I won't miss having to read your bullshit opinions. The coaches and most of the fans are behind Daniel Jones. You miserable bastards should go find a new hobby or rededicate yourself to an old one that made you bitter in life.
Trading for Chicago's first rounder put that notion to bed. Either he becomes a productive quarterback for the first time in...ever...or it's good night the lights on the three year mistake.
At least some of us will enjoy him....
Just saying...~
There are other posters on this site that think Jones is garbage. Some of them do the same thing you do. And you all post so much, and quote each other so much, these threads are unreadable for anyone with a different view. I know this is “Both sides” in your lexicon, but if you can’t see that 80% of these threads are the same posters making the same point on every thread, I don’t know what to tell you.
You are not going to convince Terps that Jones is a good QB. He is not going to convince you Jones is a bust. Yet your back and forth is impossible to see past because you both seem to crave the other’s approval. It’s really fucking boring.
You and Terps are Fox Nexs and MSNBC. The two screaming extremes on the fringes. Unfortunately your ridiculous squabbles are destroying actual discussion for the rest of us.
I’ve said my peace and I am done with this shit. Jones is a third rail topic I no longer want to discuss on this board because intelligent conversation on the topic is dead here.
Quote:
Before this weekend I was worried he'd get both 2021 and 2022 to prove he's something other than what he's shown in five years of college and pro football.
Trading for Chicago's first rounder put that notion to bed. Either he becomes a productive quarterback for the first time in...ever...or it's good night the lights on the three year mistake.
At least some of us will enjoy him....
There's been next to nothing to enjoy to this point. And enjoying bad football doesn't make you a better fan...it's a weird thing to carry as a badge of honor.