I have faith that Jones will answer the doubters and settle his spot as the Giants' long-term QB in Year 3, thanks in no small part to the massive improvements made around him in the lineup. The additions of Kenny Golladay, Kadarius Toney and Kyle Rudolph, along with the return to health of running back Saquon Barkley, mean Jones will be working with the most firepower he's ever had at his disposal. Don't be swayed too much by Jones' lackluster TD-to-INT ratio (11:10) last season; the fact that he completed 62.5 percent of his passes despite working with pass catchers who had a hard time hanging on to the ball (the Giants ranked 12th in the NFL with 30 drops, per Pro Football Focus) is a good sign. I think the former top-10 pick has a chance to put up 20 TDs and complete over 64 percent of his passes in 2021.
Gil is 89.
Isn't the magic number 30? And by magic - I mean the subjective total certain blowhards beat into the board all winter?
Hey, I was right about Eli, and I'm right about Jones.
I'm not going to be hung up on a specific TD number necessarily (maybe he goes 20 and 5 and adds a bunch of rushing TDs). But I am hoping Jones is an above-average passer and TD producer. I also don't think Jones is ever going to be a great protector of the football relative to peers.
Anything less and we're banning you.
A reasonable target if he plays full season would seem more like 25-27 or so passing touchdowns, and maybe a few more running touchdowns.
The Offense needs to gel and keep up
350 would have been tied for 24th last year. Add in the extra game 350 would be 26th.
Uh, sorry, but that would be a massive disappointment. We are not going to have a winning record or a playoff berth if Jones only gets to 20 TD passes. NFW.
If the OL Gettleman and Judge are betting on is competent and the receivers stay health, Jones, if he's indeed a franchise QB, should blow by 30 TDs.
Gil should be Brandt. And his age is noted to put his comments in perspective.
This year I expect Giants will be significantly better at the position.
We've seen this very franchise foster and nurture QB careers that respectively went from bad to good seemingly overnight, 3 times now over the last 40 years. Yet every time I conjure up the proof, I get yelled at lol. The saintly and exalted Eli Manning....thou shall not mention that this guy was public enemy #1 around here BEFORE he ever won a playoff game. And he was considered a flat out slob after that rookie year.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
*Even though the 1932 NFL Championship Game was played on an 80 yard field, at the Chicago Stadium, the ball was moved back 20 yards once the offense crossed midfield, simulating a regular 100 yard field.
-World Series Champions: New York Yankees
-Stanley Cup Champions: Toronto Maple Leafs
-Pop Standards include: Night and Day, I've Got the World on a String and Smoke Gets in Your Eyes.
-The Big Movies included Shanghai Express, The Sign of the Cross and The Kid From Spain
-Price of a postage stamp in 1932: 3 cents
-US Life Expectancy: Males: 61.0 years, Females: 63.5 years
The World Population was ~ 2,164,000,000
-Al Capone's Cadillac was seized by the government in 1932 and later used as Franklin Roosevelt's limousine
-The winter of 1932 was so cold that Niagara Falls froze completely solid.
We've seen this very franchise foster and nurture QB careers that respectively went from bad to good seemingly overnight, 3 times now over the last 40 years. Yet every time I conjure up the proof, I get yelled at lol. The saintly and exalted Eli Manning....thou shall not mention that this guy was public enemy #1 around here BEFORE he ever won a playoff game. And he was considered a flat out slob after that rookie year.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry all did in some particular year in their career?
I like his chances to improve too, but hope there is something more compelling you have than just that.
Eli was ranked 25th in 2007. 18th in 2006. 23rd in 2005. The team's record was 29-19 during that span. The team also scored points. Why? Because the passing game, while a bit hit or miss due to being very aggressive and "read-centric" if memory serves, was also highly effective.
We will know whether Jones is the solution soon enough and it won't come in the form of stats.
Because those are different people who played in different systems with different coaches at a different time. If Jones makes a leap similar to any of theirs, it won't have anything to do with him playing under similar conditions.
Likewise, I'd he doesn't make a leap a LA Danny Kannell or Dave Brown, it won't be because he fell victim to some system that failed them.
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
We've seen this very franchise foster and nurture QB careers that respectively went from bad to good seemingly overnight, 3 times now over the last 40 years. Yet every time I conjure up the proof, I get yelled at lol. The saintly and exalted Eli Manning....thou shall not mention that this guy was public enemy #1 around here BEFORE he ever won a playoff game. And he was considered a flat out slob after that rookie year.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry all did in some particular year in their career?
I like his chances to improve too, but hope there is something more compelling you have than just that.
Uh, no...I am just conjuring up examples because so many here insist on parroting the claims that QBs cannot improve from bad to good early in their career.
It doesn't have to be compelling. It can just be the truth.
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
We've seen this very franchise foster and nurture QB careers that respectively went from bad to good seemingly overnight, 3 times now over the last 40 years. Yet every time I conjure up the proof, I get yelled at lol. The saintly and exalted Eli Manning....thou shall not mention that this guy was public enemy #1 around here BEFORE he ever won a playoff game. And he was considered a flat out slob after that rookie year.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry all did in some particular year in their career?
I like his chances to improve too, but hope there is something more compelling you have than just that.
Why are you willfully putting words in his mouth? Did he say that “Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry did”? He did not say that. I’m guessing that you know what his point is but you’re twisting it intentionally for some reason. Maybe you’re just argumentative?
Quote:
In comment 15308025 djm said:
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
We've seen this very franchise foster and nurture QB careers that respectively went from bad to good seemingly overnight, 3 times now over the last 40 years. Yet every time I conjure up the proof, I get yelled at lol. The saintly and exalted Eli Manning....thou shall not mention that this guy was public enemy #1 around here BEFORE he ever won a playoff game. And he was considered a flat out slob after that rookie year.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry all did in some particular year in their career?
I like his chances to improve too, but hope there is something more compelling you have than just that.
Uh, no...I am just conjuring up examples because so many here insist on parroting the claims that QBs cannot improve from bad to good early in their career.
It doesn't have to be compelling. It can just be the truth.
So many on the site say young QBs cannot improve from bad to good? That doesn't seem like an accurate rep.
Would seem that a predominate number of QBs that are good actually went from bad to good. All over different time frames of course but that is not atypical.
Quote:
In comment 15308025 djm said:
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
We've seen this very franchise foster and nurture QB careers that respectively went from bad to good seemingly overnight, 3 times now over the last 40 years. Yet every time I conjure up the proof, I get yelled at lol. The saintly and exalted Eli Manning....thou shall not mention that this guy was public enemy #1 around here BEFORE he ever won a playoff game. And he was considered a flat out slob after that rookie year.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry all did in some particular year in their career?
I like his chances to improve too, but hope there is something more compelling you have than just that.
Why are you willfully putting words in his mouth? Did he say that “Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry did”? He did not say that. I’m guessing that you know what his point is but you’re twisting it intentionally for some reason. Maybe you’re just argumentative?
Happens all the time. Even I am guilty of this even if I cannot recall doing so, I am sure I do.
We have covered all the bases with Jones and year 3. There are plenty of examples detailing every type of QB developmental curve. Same with regression curves. And everything in between. That's why no one knows fuck all. Even Gil Brandt, an absolute boss of a scout, has been wrong before. George Young drafted Simms and Hoss. Then drafted Brown. Accorsi was public enemy#1 around here then moved joined forces with Coughlin and drafts Eli.
There isn't a more confounding position in all of sports than QB. Safe assumption it literally keeps GMs up at night.
Jones NEEDS to play better. We all know this. We don't need to debate about it. There's reasons the Giants are sticking with him:
--He's been in the room for 2 years now. He's been with Judge for a full year now. They like what they see.
--He's cheap.
--There wasn't a better and relatively easy to find option to be had this past off-season.
It's not complicated. Just reasons why.
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
Because those are different people who played in different systems with different coaches at a different time. If Jones makes a leap similar to any of theirs, it won't have anything to do with him playing under similar conditions.
Likewise, I'd he doesn't make a leap a LA Danny Kannell or Dave Brown, it won't be because he fell victim to some system that failed them.
That is correct. Jones is not connected to these guys from the NYG past in any way, and using them as examples to suggest a projection (good or bad) is not at all relevant.
Quote:
In comment 15308025 djm said:
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
Because those are different people who played in different systems with different coaches at a different time. If Jones makes a leap similar to any of theirs, it won't have anything to do with him playing under similar conditions.
Likewise, I'd he doesn't make a leap a LA Danny Kannell or Dave Brown, it won't be because he fell victim to some system that failed them.
That is correct. Jones is not connected to these guys from the NYG past in any way, and using them as examples to suggest a projection (good or bad) is not at all relevant.
My God I wasn't trying to connect them. MErely pointing out examples.
It's not relevant to point out the number of QBs who were getting laughed at one year and then hoisting trophies the next? How is that not relevant? All we have is history to go on. And history shows that Daniel Jones can in fact improve and become a good or even great player this 3rd season. It's completely relevant, even more due to the countless debates BBI finds itself in where a number of people insist that Jones is a finished product.
Have you been on BBI the last 2 years?
Quote:
In comment 15308025 djm said:
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
We've seen this very franchise foster and nurture QB careers that respectively went from bad to good seemingly overnight, 3 times now over the last 40 years. Yet every time I conjure up the proof, I get yelled at lol. The saintly and exalted Eli Manning....thou shall not mention that this guy was public enemy #1 around here BEFORE he ever won a playoff game. And he was considered a flat out slob after that rookie year.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry all did in some particular year in their career?
I like his chances to improve too, but hope there is something more compelling you have than just that.
Uh, no...I am just conjuring up examples because so many here insist on parroting the claims that QBs cannot improve from bad to good early in their career.
It doesn't have to be compelling. It can just be the truth.
I don't think anyone here believes Jones (or any other player) can't improve but "we caught lightning in a bottle 2, 3, 4, decades ago so obviously it's going to happen again now" isn't a compelling argument.
Also the leashes given then were muuuuuuuch longer than Jones is going to get. Which is why this year is so critical. The Giants, and the league in general, isn't going to be giving guys 5+ years to develop like they may have in the past.
Quote:
In comment 15308030 NYGgolfer said:
Quote:
In comment 15308025 djm said:
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
We've seen this very franchise foster and nurture QB careers that respectively went from bad to good seemingly overnight, 3 times now over the last 40 years. Yet every time I conjure up the proof, I get yelled at lol. The saintly and exalted Eli Manning....thou shall not mention that this guy was public enemy #1 around here BEFORE he ever won a playoff game. And he was considered a flat out slob after that rookie year.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry all did in some particular year in their career?
I like his chances to improve too, but hope there is something more compelling you have than just that.
Uh, no...I am just conjuring up examples because so many here insist on parroting the claims that QBs cannot improve from bad to good early in their career.
It doesn't have to be compelling. It can just be the truth.
I don't think anyone here believes Jones (or any other player) can't improve but "we caught lightning in a bottle 2, 3, 4, decades ago so obviously it's going to happen again now" isn't a compelling argument.
Also the leashes given then were muuuuuuuch longer than Jones is going to get. Which is why this year is so critical. The Giants, and the league in general, isn't going to be giving guys 5+ years to develop like they may have in the past.
Plenty of people here don't think Jones can improve or improve enough. That's fine, hey they could be right why the hell not, but some seem to actually be insulted by any belief in Jones. That's why I conjure up history.
No worries though, as you are only getting upset. Was only pointing out in my view they are not relevant nor compelling reasons as to why Jones will improve. I think he will improve but due to other reasons.
You can have the last word.
Season probably comes down to a few games where Jones will have to play big if the Giants are going to be a playoff team.
- Over the past 5 seasons, 61 teams have made the playoffs (making the playoffs being the proxy for winning)
- The average offensive yards breakdown:
5860 Total Yards | 3880 Pass Yards | 1980 Rush Yards
- The average offensive TDs scored:
29 Passing TDs | 16 Rushing TDs | 45 Total TDs
- Pro-rated over a 17 game season
6225 | 4123 | 2101 | 30 | 17 | 48
- Pro-rated over a 17 game season
6225 | 4123 | 2101 | 30 | 17 | 48
I think this is very possible. If you prorate DJ's rookie numbers (3027 yds and 24 TDs in 12 GS) over 17 games, you get 4288 yards and 34 TDs.
Of course he has stay healthy to play 17. But as others have said, just win, baby.
FACT
Apparently we cannot draw any comparisons to Eli. They are not allowed.
FACT
I generally agree and I think it's great that someone like Gil believes in DJ. But I question the prediction of 20 TDs in '21. DJ already (in '19) threw for more TDs (24) in fewer games (12), with FAR less talent at WR/TE.
I believe that Brandt is expecting a high yards/completion given all the targets. Not that he did not mention Engram.
Gil Brandt was the Vice President of Player Personnel for the Cowboys from 1960 to 1989. Seven year after joining the expansion franchise, Dallas went off on a streak of 20 consecutive winning seasons. Appeared in five Super Bowls and won two.
I will always remember him for 1974. The Giants lost their first six games of the year and were suckered into trading the first and second rounders to Dallas for backup QB Craig Morton.
As usual, the trade didn’t go well for the Giants and became a legendary coup for the Cowboys. Morton was destroyed on a weekly basis behind the Giants’ shoddy offensive line. He was booed mercilessly and regularly.
Meanwhile, in Dallas, the eventual first-round selection the Giants surrendered in exchange for Morton, Maryland defensive lineman Randy White, was embarking on his Hall of Fame career.
Gil, a recent Hall of Famer, still works up an entire draft board each year and is a frequent co-host on the Sirius NFL Radio channel.
So much so that they actually were happy when Joe Pisarcik was the starter. Probably only for a game or two, but still...
The 427 points/5695 yards they scored would have put the Giants at 12th and 20th in 2020.
It's a vastly different league.
That said, getting to 12th/20th in the league would be a massive improvement for the Giants.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
Which posters said Jones can't improve?
There is certainly concern whether he can improve, but the conventional wisdom seems to be that Jones now has sufficient resources in place. And now it's up to him to deliver.
There is certainly concern whether he can improve, but the conventional wisdom seems to be that Jones now has sufficient resources in place. And now it's up to him to deliver.
I also find these takes weird. I’m not sure why acknowledging Jones has a long way to go, is such a sensitive view.
The challenge is going to be winning 10-11 games if the offense only has 24 passing TDs in 17 games (1.4/game).
Looking at 2020 as a guide, the lowest points scored with a .500 or better record was 372, or 23.25 per game. That works out to 395 points across 17 games.
If DJ only throws 24 TDs (and assuming he remains healthy, that should represent nearly all of the Giants' passing scores, barring maybe 1-2 gadget passing scores during the season), that's only 168 points (including the PAT as well). That leaves 227 more points just to get to what we should realistically consider the minimum for a chance at a winning record.
Gano kicked 31 FGs last year - let's call that 2 per game, and extrapolate that out to 34 for 2021. So that's 102 points. Although you'd have to think that having an offense that scores more TDs might theoretically involve turning some of those FGs into TDs, but let's also assume that some stalled drives turn into FG opportunities to keep the number relatively flat. Either way, Gano had the 6th most FGs in the league last year, hard to see that increasing too much this year.
That leaves 125 points that still need to be scored. Since we're including PATs in with TDs, we can simply divide this number by 7, which translates into either 17 or 18 TDs, depending on rarer scores, like 2-point conversions and safeties.
Unless you think this team is going to score 17+ TDs on the ground (and/or on specials and defense), we're almost definitely going to need more than 24 passing TDs from DJ in order to be a winning team.
I think 28+ passing TDs is going to be the number DJ needs to hit, and even that is going to require good scoring contributions from the running game, and a very solid, consistent performance from the defense.
How does it help Jones (or any quarterback in the history of football) to put them in situations where the defense knows what's coming?
Even if Jones can be really good it's questionable whether he's in a situation where that can possibly be displayed.
Unless of course Brandt still thinks the NFL is on a 12-game schedule like when he first started working in the NFL in the 1950s...
Even to my untrained eye, it s kind of obvious Jones is more talented than that threesome
And aligns pretty well with the numbers I pulled for playoff teams over the last 5 years. You’ve got to score 48 TDs in a 17 game season to hit the 5 year playoff average.
If Jones represents 20 passing TDs and you want to get into the playoffs, you’re basically asking the running game to be best in the NFL.
How does it help Jones (or any quarterback in the history of football) to put them in situations where the defense knows what's coming?
Even if Jones can be really good it's questionable whether he's in a situation where that can possibly be displayed.
Let’s all pretend we don’t get why this is a bogus analysis. I mean it shouldn’t be mentioned that we had no Barkley and the OL was full of rookies and first year starters or that this year could be totally different in both regards. Good job Terps. Excellent analysis.
Quote:
Garrett's an issue too. The Giants were fourth in the league in runs on early downs in the first half. They wanted to establish the run. The three teams in front of them were Baltimore (have Lamar), New England (have Cam), and Tennessee (have Henry). You can guess the result: Giants were last in the NFL in average 3rd down distance to go: 7.9.
How does it help Jones (or any quarterback in the history of football) to put them in situations where the defense knows what's coming?
Even if Jones can be really good it's questionable whether he's in a situation where that can possibly be displayed.
Let’s all pretend we don’t get why this is a bogus analysis. I mean it shouldn’t be mentioned that we had no Barkley and the OL was full of rookies and first year starters or that this year could be totally different in both regards. Good job Terps. Excellent analysis.
I think you would be pretty good at pretending when it comes to the Giants...
Let’s all pretend we don’t get why this is a bogus analysis. I mean it shouldn’t be mentioned that we had no Barkley and the OL was full of rookies and first year starters or that this year could be totally different in both regards. Good job Terps. Excellent analysis.
Wouldn’t the loss of Barkley and the youth on the line be good reasons to avoid what Terps described?
I think you might have just accidentally agreed with him.
And I concluded that Jones needed to produce 30+ total TDs, combining passing and rushing. I think I may have projected 3+ rushing scores for DJ.
Of course I was criticized by the usual suspects for daring to apply reasonable math to reach that conclusion. When I asked those usual suspects what they thought were reasonable numbers Jones needed to hit, they quickly disappeared into their usual escape hatches due to mathphobia.
It was pointed out that assigning specific stats that needed to be reached for the team to win was ridiculous. And you and Terps said quite openly that if Jones doesn't hit at least 30 TD's he's not doing a good enough job and the team will likely suffer.
And yet, just two years ago in 2019, only 4 QB's had 30+TD's with one of them being Winston. My recollection is there were more than 4 playoff teams that season.
Trying to argue that specific stat thresholds have to be hit is asinine. That's not mathphobia - it is arguing against yet another fabricated dig you were trying to make at Jones.
I got nothing to add except my own thoughts on DJ: He showed a lot his rookie season, but took a step back last fall. And I know some of you find this cliché or stupid, but I really think this is his sink or swim season. And I'm tired of the excuses with him; no QB has perfect conditions around him. What makes QBs great is their ability to rise above whatever deficiencies surround them & make plays regardless. He was drafted #6th overall. This isn't a Kent Graham like draft pick. When you're drafted that high, I expect an elite QB.
He has been one of the most successful NFL Executives in its history. He also was a huge driving force in modernizing and innovating the NFL draft and talent scouting. He is revered as an excellent judge of talent by virtually everyone but Jerry Jones
He has been one of the most successful NFL Executives in its history. He also was a huge driving force in modernizing and innovating the NFL draft and talent scouting. He is revered as an excellent judge of talent by virtually everyone but Jerry Jones
The age thing is weird. Him being 89 should work in his benefit no, seeing that he's been watching/evaluating football since I like Ike was a popular slogan? He's seen a helluva lot more football than me. Unless people are implying that he's senile or something, which I can't speak to because I have no idea if that's what they're alluding to/he's lost his fastball on football in general.
Quote:
In comment 15308032 santacruzom said:
Quote:
In comment 15308025 djm said:
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
Because those are different people who played in different systems with different coaches at a different time. If Jones makes a leap similar to any of theirs, it won't have anything to do with him playing under similar conditions.
Likewise, I'd he doesn't make a leap a LA Danny Kannell or Dave Brown, it won't be because he fell victim to some system that failed them.
That is correct. Jones is not connected to these guys from the NYG past in any way, and using them as examples to suggest a projection (good or bad) is not at all relevant.
My God I wasn't trying to connect them. MErely pointing out examples.
It's not relevant to point out the number of QBs who were getting laughed at one year and then hoisting trophies the next? How is that not relevant? All we have is history to go on. And history shows that Daniel Jones can in fact improve and become a good or even great player this 3rd season. It's completely relevant, even more due to the countless debates BBI finds itself in where a number of people insist that Jones is a finished product.
Have you been on BBI the last 2 years?
Wasn't part of the "selling point" on him getting drafted 6th overall that he was a finished product or at least as close to one as a college player entering the NFL can be?
Correct. Yet, my Fat friend in Charlotte ignores that. In fact, I believe the TD totals in two of the last three years support my position of 30 as a reasonable benchmark.
Roeth had 34, but Pitt missed the playoffs at 9-6-1. And Houston made the playoffs with Watson having 26 TD passes and 5 rushing TDs. So combined he had 30+.
Quote:
last season. And 13 QBs had a TD% mark of 5.3 or better and 11 of them made the playoffs.
Correct. Yet, my Fat friend in Charlotte ignores that. In fact, I believe the TD totals in two of the last three years support my position of 30 as a reasonable benchmark.
While it doesn't have to be hard and fast, 30 is certainly a much more reasonable benchmark than 20.
Of all the QBs that started at least 14 games last year, only 3 thru less than 20 touchdowns - Teddy Bridgewater, Daniel Jones and Cam Newton.
Never forget...run the ball, stop the run and rush the passer
The bad OL will impact Jones and Barkley so the overall record won't be good.
He's won 3 SBs in that 5 years and only 1 of the 3 happened in a year with 30+ TDs. The other 2 were close but no cigar.
As I said above, if you prorate the 24 over 17 games, you get 34.
I don’t see why DJ can't hit 30, but if it's less and we win 11 games and go to playoffs, I'll be happy as pig in shit.
He's won 3 SBs in that 5 years and only 1 of the 3 happened in a year with 30+ TDs. The other 2 were close but no cigar.
Brady has thrown 28 or more TDs in 10 of the last 12 years. Prorate those to a 17-game season and its basically the benchmark being discussed.
Only Brady has been doing it basically every year...
The bad OL will impact Jones and Barkley so the overall record won't be good.
I’m patient, but I’m certainly not waiting that long for them to fix the OL. Heck, there’s a decent chance I could be dead by then.
Quote:
Even if Jones can be really good it's questionable whether he's in a situation where that can possibly be displayed.
Let’s all pretend we don’t get why this is a bogus analysis. I mean it shouldn’t be mentioned that we had no Barkley and the OL was full of rookies and first year starters or that this year could be totally different in both regards. Good job Terps. Excellent analysis.
Wouldn’t the loss of Barkley and the youth on the line be good reasons to avoid what Terps described?
I think you might have just accidentally agreed with him.
Except, of course, that the alternative would be to throw the ball a lot more behind a line that couldn’t pass block and WRs who couldn’t get separation. Scheme/play calling doesn’t matter much when your talent can’t execute anything consistently.
Quote:
Supposed to indicate something?
He has been one of the most successful NFL Executives in its history. He also was a huge driving force in modernizing and innovating the NFL draft and talent scouting. He is revered as an excellent judge of talent by virtually everyone but Jerry Jones
The age thing is weird. Him being 89 should work in his benefit no, seeing that he's been watching/evaluating football since I like Ike was a popular slogan? He's seen a helluva lot more football than me. Unless people are implying that he's senile or something, which I can't speak to because I have no idea if that's what they're alluding to/he's lost his fastball on football in general.
Exactly what I thought. I don't understand why anyone would shit on Gil Brandt due to his age, it's a plus IMO.
Keep in mind no 16 game starter threw fewer than 24 last year.
Brandt’s basically framing an upside for Jones as the least productive in the category?
That’s not a good thing.
Every QB who didn’t throw 20 TDs last year either missed a bunch of games or lost their job.
Quote:
In comment 15308025 djm said:
Quote:
to bring up Eli's 2004-2005 leap or the leap Simms took in 1984 or even the leap Kerry Collins took from 99 to 2000.
We've seen this very franchise foster and nurture QB careers that respectively went from bad to good seemingly overnight, 3 times now over the last 40 years. Yet every time I conjure up the proof, I get yelled at lol. The saintly and exalted Eli Manning....thou shall not mention that this guy was public enemy #1 around here BEFORE he ever won a playoff game. And he was considered a flat out slob after that rookie year.
But Daniel Jones is the worst QB in the NFL and there's just no way in hell he improves year 3.
Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry all did in some particular year in their career?
I like his chances to improve too, but hope there is something more compelling you have than just that.
Why are you willfully putting words in his mouth? Did he say that “Daniel Jones is going to improve because Eli, Phil and Kerry did”? He did not say that. I’m guessing that you know what his point is but you’re twisting it intentionally for some reason. Maybe you’re just argumentative?
Maybe it would have read differently if he hadn't said, "Yet every time I conjure up the proof."
Quote:
Let’s all pretend we don’t get why this is a bogus analysis. I mean it shouldn’t be mentioned that we had no Barkley and the OL was full of rookies and first year starters or that this year could be totally different in both regards. Good job Terps. Excellent analysis.
Maybe part of the concern is that we have an offensive coordinator who saw fit to run so frequently in early downs... despite not having a great running game?
He has been one of the most successful NFL Executives in its history. He also was a huge driving force in modernizing and innovating the NFL draft and talent scouting. He is revered as an excellent judge of talent by virtually everyone but Jerry Jones
Just very happy to see Gil still so sharp at that age. I very much doubt that I will be as fortunate. He is a pleasure to listen to on the Sirius NFL channel. In his second mock he had Ojulari at 24 and Toney at 25.
I know nothing specific about the health of John Madden, except that five years ago he had a number of surgeries, including one on his heart. He is 85. I haven't heard anything from him for quite a few years, but I may have missed him.
Quote:
In comment 15308221 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Let’s all pretend we don’t get why this is a bogus analysis. I mean it shouldn’t be mentioned that we had no Barkley and the OL was full of rookies and first year starters or that this year could be totally different in both regards. Good job Terps. Excellent analysis.
Maybe part of the concern is that we have an offensive coordinator who saw fit to run so frequently in early downs... despite not having a great running game?
As I mentioned above, the alternative would be to throw the ball a lot more behind a line that couldn’t pass block and WRs who couldn’t get separation. Scheme/play calling doesn’t matter much when your talent can’t execute anything consistently.
But it's not that he needs to meet the threshold to be successful. It's if he wins, he will have been successful, and he would have likely met the threshold.
Winning is the only thing and you guys seem to be getting distracted by shiny things.
Quote:
2 of the last 5 years.
He's won 3 SBs in that 5 years and only 1 of the 3 happened in a year with 30+ TDs. The other 2 were close but no cigar.
Brady has thrown 28 or more TDs in 10 of the last 12 years. Prorate those to a 17-game season and its basically the benchmark being discussed.
Only Brady has been doing it basically every year...
I thought the magical benchmark was 30 in 16 games. So, you're saying retrospectively the magical benchmark was 28 in 16?
ok
As I've pointed out a couple times, DJ threw 24 in 12 games (which is a rate > 28 in 16 and > 30 in 17), as a rookie, with MUCH less talent at WR/TE (and I believe an OL that was worse than this years OL will become).
Like Gil, I believe in DJ, but I think he'll get closer to 30 TDs than 20 and if we win, I won't give a shit about the exact number.
But it's not that he needs to meet the threshold to be successful. It's if he wins, he will have been successful, and he would have likely met the threshold.
Winning is the only thing and you guys seem to be getting distracted by shiny things.
This is exactly on point. Creation of some "benchmark" by several posters who all seemingly fall on the same side of being critical of Jones reeks of justification to try and set a standard that if it isn't met, they will continue the narrative that Jones sucks. But the W/L record at this point will be the standard. If the team doesn't win, I doubt Jones makes it to a second contract.
Context matters and that's why setting hard totals to meet is foolish. Let's say the RB's get 15 TD's or more - surely some of those come at Jones expense. When we are literally 2 years removed from only having 4 QB's throw for 30 or more TD's, I'm not sure why that is the standard or why people even have wasted time going through calculations to say it should be the way Jones is judged. At this point in his career, he'll be judged on if the team wins since they've built the team around him to win.
The math just seems like a way for one particular group to slap each other on the back to act like they understand "math" while the rest of the board is confused by numerical manipulation. Eerily similar to analytic discussions in the past
Quote:
The Giants need to win and Jones needs to be integral to that winning for him to be seen as successful. A retrospective look at the stats of QB's who did lead their teams to winning seasons showed that in many, if not most, cases they reached some sort of threshold for whatever (you decide the metric and threshold based upon your own personal whimsy).
But it's not that he needs to meet the threshold to be successful. It's if he wins, he will have been successful, and he would have likely met the threshold.
Winning is the only thing and you guys seem to be getting distracted by shiny things.
This is exactly on point. Creation of some "benchmark" by several posters who all seemingly fall on the same side of being critical of Jones reeks of justification to try and set a standard that if it isn't met, they will continue the narrative that Jones sucks. But the W/L record at this point will be the standard. If the team doesn't win, I doubt Jones makes it to a second contract.
Context matters and that's why setting hard totals to meet is foolish. Let's say the RB's get 15 TD's or more - surely some of those come at Jones expense. When we are literally 2 years removed from only having 4 QB's throw for 30 or more TD's, I'm not sure why that is the standard or why people even have wasted time going through calculations to say it should be the way Jones is judged. At this point in his career, he'll be judged on if the team wins since they've built the team around him to win.
The math just seems like a way for one particular group to slap each other on the back to act like they understand "math" while the rest of the board is confused by numerical manipulation. Eerily similar to analytic discussions in the past
Growing up and into the ‘90s and early 2000s, It was MOSTLY about winning, imv. My contention today is that it’s a FF world and much of the rationale is based on that, imo.
And lots of folks, including me, have posted about what those reasonable benchmarks are in their minds so don't paint a picture that everybody writes the same thing to feed your "magic" reference. Some put more specifics or conviction in their statements and some give a zip code like me. But so what? Its a fan board. Couching them all together under one exact solitary figure sounds convenient, but only if you are trying to drum up an argument.
The bottom of the line is Gil Brandt is bottom feeding to suggest 20 is reasonable for DJ. That goes for those on BBI too.
And fans of the Giants are likely kidding themselves that the offense will good enough to get to the playoffs if 20 is the mark as well.
That doesn't mean that fans still can't objectively (or even irrationally for that matter) question Jones' talents or if he is the right guy for the QB job. More than one conversation can be had regarding the players and the team.
And if you can't see that, then you just can't see...
Quote:
In comment 15308471 Bill L said:
Quote:
The Giants need to win and Jones needs to be integral to that winning for him to be seen as successful. A retrospective look at the stats of QB's who did lead their teams to winning seasons showed that in many, if not most, cases they reached some sort of threshold for whatever (you decide the metric and threshold based upon your own personal whimsy).
But it's not that he needs to meet the threshold to be successful. It's if he wins, he will have been successful, and he would have likely met the threshold.
Winning is the only thing and you guys seem to be getting distracted by shiny things.
This is exactly on point. Creation of some "benchmark" by several posters who all seemingly fall on the same side of being critical of Jones reeks of justification to try and set a standard that if it isn't met, they will continue the narrative that Jones sucks. But the W/L record at this point will be the standard. If the team doesn't win, I doubt Jones makes it to a second contract.
Context matters and that's why setting hard totals to meet is foolish. Let's say the RB's get 15 TD's or more - surely some of those come at Jones expense. When we are literally 2 years removed from only having 4 QB's throw for 30 or more TD's, I'm not sure why that is the standard or why people even have wasted time going through calculations to say it should be the way Jones is judged. At this point in his career, he'll be judged on if the team wins since they've built the team around him to win.
The math just seems like a way for one particular group to slap each other on the back to act like they understand "math" while the rest of the board is confused by numerical manipulation. Eerily similar to analytic discussions in the past
Growing up and into the ‘90s and early 2000s, It was MOSTLY about winning, imv. My contention today is that it’s a FF world and much of the rationale is based on that, imo.
I think there's some merit to that - quite a bit, actually.
But I also think there's a recognition that the game itself has fundamentally changed in a way that requires that you be able to score in order to win. The 2000 Ravens are an anomaly, and one that happened 21 years ago anyway.
Looking only at QBs who fit the description of winners with less than prolific stats, Troy Aikman's pedestrian passing TD totals would either be much higher today, or the Cowboys' SB count would be lower. 20 TDs doesn't get you into the playoffs anymore, let alone a Lombardi Trophy.
Gil's 20 TD projection feels like it's either outdated relative to current NFL trends, or he's simply not factoring for 17 games (which would also be outdated, in a sense). Either way, it's not hard to do the math - you need about 400 points to be a viable playoff team anymore. 20 TDs barely gets you a third of the way there.
Quote:
The Giants need to win and Jones needs to be integral to that winning for him to be seen as successful. A retrospective look at the stats of QB's who did lead their teams to winning seasons showed that in many, if not most, cases they reached some sort of threshold for whatever (you decide the metric and threshold based upon your own personal whimsy).
But it's not that he needs to meet the threshold to be successful. It's if he wins, he will have been successful, and he would have likely met the threshold.
Winning is the only thing and you guys seem to be getting distracted by shiny things.
This is exactly on point. Creation of some "benchmark" by several posters who all seemingly fall on the same side of being critical of Jones reeks of justification to try and set a standard that if it isn't met, they will continue the narrative that Jones sucks. But the W/L record at this point will be the standard. If the team doesn't win, I doubt Jones makes it to a second contract.
Context matters and that's why setting hard totals to meet is foolish. Let's say the RB's get 15 TD's or more - surely some of those come at Jones expense. When we are literally 2 years removed from only having 4 QB's throw for 30 or more TD's, I'm not sure why that is the standard or why people even have wasted time going through calculations to say it should be the way Jones is judged. At this point in his career, he'll be judged on if the team wins since they've built the team around him to win.
The math just seems like a way for one particular group to slap each other on the back to act like they understand "math" while the rest of the board is confused by numerical manipulation. Eerily similar to analytic discussions in the past
The argument that because 30 TDs was a unicorn number 2 years ago so it's going to be one still doesn't hold much weight. All sports evolve. Look at baseball, HRs and Ks skyrocketed with players buying into the analytics and things like launch angle and spin rate. And I know your very familiar with F1 and it always seems like the pole time at any given track from one year is barely good enough for p5 the next.
Especially with the extra game why is out of the realm of credulity to believe 30 TDs will become a league benchmark?
Quote:
The Giants need to win and Jones needs to be integral to that winning for him to be seen as successful. A retrospective look at the stats of QB's who did lead their teams to winning seasons showed that in many, if not most, cases they reached some sort of threshold for whatever (you decide the metric and threshold based upon your own personal whimsy).
But it's not that he needs to meet the threshold to be successful. It's if he wins, he will have been successful, and he would have likely met the threshold.
Winning is the only thing and you guys seem to be getting distracted by shiny things.
This is exactly on point. Creation of some "benchmark" by several posters who all seemingly fall on the same side of being critical of Jones reeks of justification to try and set a standard that if it isn't met, they will continue the narrative that Jones sucks. But the W/L record at this point will be the standard. If the team doesn't win, I doubt Jones makes it to a second contract.
Context matters and that's why setting hard totals to meet is foolish. Let's say the RB's get 15 TD's or more - surely some of those come at Jones expense. When we are literally 2 years removed from only having 4 QB's throw for 30 or more TD's, I'm not sure why that is the standard or why people even have wasted time going through calculations to say it should be the way Jones is judged. At this point in his career, he'll be judged on if the team wins since they've built the team around him to win.
The math just seems like a way for one particular group to slap each other on the back to act like they understand "math" while the rest of the board is confused by numerical manipulation. Eerily similar to analytic discussions in the past
I understand what you're getting at, though I don't necessarily agree with your position.
Do you genuinely feel like this team (or any NFL team) can realistically be playoff caliber if their starting QB only throws 20 TDs over the course of 17 games?
It's not intended to be advanced math to suggest that based on recent history, teams need X amount of points to be more likely to earn a playoff berth, and that getting only 20 passing TDs leaves a bit of a shortfall on the calculations.
Unless you think that this defense is 2000 Ravens caliber even in this era of offensive explosion, in which case, the conversation is really going to turn into "are you cool with Daniel Jones being the 2021 version of Trent Dilfer?"
The throughline works though - Dilfer was drafted 6th overall also.
The liklihood of a team making the playoffs with the QB throwing 20TD's is probably low, but context matters. Above, I said what if RB's account for 15 TD's? What if Jones throws 35 TD's but 25 INT's? What if we see the D shutting down the opposition so Judge/Garrett implement a scheme to focus on TOP and ball control, especially later in games?
To Fiddy's point above, benchmarks are more important to fans interested in fantasy football than they really are for gauging success. The 30 TD's was basically a number created by a couple of Jones biggest critics saying he needs to hit that (at a minimum), to be the QB going forward. There was a whole thread wanting to pin posters down on what TD total was necessary - and again, to serve what purpose?
Covered all this the day after the Super Bowl...
Lesson from 2020 - Offense Wins Games - ( New Window )
The liklihood of a team making the playoffs with the QB throwing 20TD's is probably low, but context matters. Above, I said what if RB's account for 15 TD's? What if Jones throws 35 TD's but 25 INT's? What if we see the D shutting down the opposition so Judge/Garrett implement a scheme to focus on TOP and ball control, especially later in games?
To Fiddy's point above, benchmarks are more important to fans interested in fantasy football than they really are for gauging success. The 30 TD's was basically a number created by a couple of Jones biggest critics saying he needs to hit that (at a minimum), to be the QB going forward. There was a whole thread wanting to pin posters down on what TD total was necessary - and again, to serve what purpose?
If Jones throws 20 TDs and the running game accounts for another 15 TDs, the defense and special teams better come up with another 10+ TDs (even with Gano being a top 5 K), which is insanely unlikely.
It really is just about working backwards from established scoring benchmarks for playoff teams and figuring out who accounts for the remainder based on the contribution from each scoring area. Passing TDs should represent the majority of any team's TDs based on the way the game is played today. To be successful with a different regression is just so incredibly difficult to pull off and requires such phenomenal contributions from other areas that it becomes impossible to consider the QB anything other than a liability in that scenario.
I can't speak for everyone, but from my perspective only, when I say that DJ needs to get to at least 28 passing TDs this season (and it might as well be 30, given the extra game), it's not because I give two shits about the back of his football card. It's because I don't see a realistic path toward us being a winning team if he doesn't do it.
Of course it greatly improves the teams chances to make the playoffs if a certain scoring threshold is reached, but it doesn't guarantee it, so I'm not sure why going through the exercise is even meaningful.
The last two seasons, two of the top passing TD QB's were Watson and Winston. I really don't care where the TD's come from or if we score a shitload of them and lose. I want to see the W's come.
Its was harmless football thread going thru the motions, just like many of them do. Are you looking for strict purpose (and truth, justice and the American way) when you click and post into a BBI thread? Not every comment needs to be examined for some hidden evil agenda.
The thread evolved into that conversation on its own. Mostly because there were some who had no trouble throwing out a reasonable expectation on DJ and the offense, and another set of posters who were hell-bent on not doing so. The reasons for not doing so seem to gyrate into things like "it serves no purpose" or "winning is the more important thing".
But I guess its just too hard to say around (fill in the blank number) TD passes and call it a day...
This exercise is a genuine attempt to take QB results of the last three years and look for patterns in output that might dictate wins. Since the QB position is the most important position and the rules are the most QB friendly ever, it makes perfect sense to estimate what Jones likely needs to produce to put us in the best position to win. Sure, there are other factors that might come into play - the defense plays lights out, SB runs wild, we got numerous special teams TDs, etc - but the most likely result is our season will hinge on the play of Jones.
Why that is so hard to accept continues to be a head scratcher.
Just a reminder for the umpteenth time, Jones was the 6th overall pick. And with that comes added responsibility to do deliver more. That should be everyone's exptectations.
This exercise is a genuine attempt to take QB results of the last three years and look for patterns in output that might dictate wins. Since the QB position is the most important position and the rules are the most QB friendly ever, it makes perfect sense to estimate what Jones likely needs to produce to put us in the best position to win. Sure, there are other factors that might come into play - the defense plays lights out, SB runs wild, we got numerous special teams TDs, etc - but the most likely result is our season will hinge on the play of Jones.
Why that is so hard to accept continues to be a head scratcher.
Just a reminder for the umpteenth time, Jones was the 6th overall pick. And with that comes added responsibility to do deliver more. That should be everyone's exptectations.
The 6th pick thing is true. Know what else is true? The Giants drafted their QB in round one and didn't have to trade a king's ransom for that pick. They didn't have to trade anything, actually. Know how common that is? It's not very common in case you were wondering. Quite uncommon actually. Funny how that nugget get's overlooked by so many. We're talking the 6th pick here. Not pick 1. Not 4 picks. One pick. 6th.
Just when you thought the bar couldn't sink lower...
Just when you thought the bar couldn't sink lower...
Who the fuck said that? Go back to bed.
Oh, I am sorry, facts annoy you when they aren't shitty doom and gloom facts. Too bad.
Right. All DG had to do was ensure that the team he had to rebuild didn't do anything crazy, like win any more than 5 games or so...
Oh, I am sorry, facts annoy you when they aren't shitty doom and gloom facts. Too bad.
So Gettleman deserves credit not only for overdrafting Jones, but for not trading up for him? Incredible.
What are shitty doom and gloom facts, anyway? Facts are facts. I invite you to go to Pro Football Reference and look at the Giants' game logs since they drafted Daniel Jones. You'll find many facts there.
Why does it even matter where he was picked? Tom Brady was the 6th rounder. If he fell apart in 2001 the Pats are moving on and finding a better QB in 2002. If Jones was a 2nd rounder are we sitting here today saying "well, he can be just average and not win shit since he was a 2nd rounder" --of course we aren't.
Jones needs to play well because the starting QB of an NFL franchise, one that is looking to turn things around. 6th? 19th? It shouldn't fucking matter. The Giants are holding Jones to a high standard that reflects being a starting QB.
And yes, if Jones IS the good, DG should be credited with getting a good QB without trading up. Tough shit if you don't like it.
Quote:
because people love to mention where he was picked. And it's the same cast of characters. What's odd is these same folks never mention that DG got the QB he wanted without trading up, something that is quite rare.
Right. All DG had to do was ensure that the team he had to rebuild didn't do anything crazy, like win any more than 5 games or so...
huh? nice pivot. not pertinent at all but any time you can shit on DG you do you.
Sorry for injecting good feelings into this thread. ONe that the OP intended to be somewhat hopeful.
Why does it even matter where he was picked? Tom Brady was the 6th rounder. If he fell apart in 2001 the Pats are moving on and finding a better QB in 2002. If Jones was a 2nd rounder are we sitting here today saying "well, he can be just average and not win shit since he was a 2nd rounder" --of course we aren't.
Jones needs to play well because the starting QB of an NFL franchise, one that is looking to turn things around. 6th? 19th? It shouldn't fucking matter. The Giants are holding Jones to a high standard that reflects being a starting QB.
And yes, if Jones IS the good, DG should be credited with getting a good QB without trading up. Tough shit if you don't like it.
And if he isn't can we say he set the franchise back by picking the wrong guy, or is that too doom and gloom?
That doesn't mean that fans still can't objectively (or even irrationally for that matter) question Jones' talents or if he is the right guy for the QB job. More than one conversation can be had regarding the players and the team.
And if you can't see that, then you just can't see...
I honestly don't know any more. I think that some people have become so invested in themselves that nothing else matters. Their ego is caught up in their pontification and outcomes which differs, they will see as invalidating them as persons and that hurts too much.
Another thread about Jones and yet another chance to take shots at him. My Farmer's Almanac says the sun came up again and it was a new day for the cycle to repeat....
People say they just want wins - but if Jones is a below-average QB, any success is likely going to be short-lived, like 2016 was, before we sink back down to mediocrity.
I also look at how we get to our wins. We have invested our first pick in the last five drafts on the offensive side of the ball. We've spent big money on offense - I do not see how we will compete long-term without an above-average offense. Look at the offensive line - this is not going to be a mauler unit with an elite running game. Add in that Barkley is iffy to start week one. I don't see how the offense is good without a good passing game.
Which goes back to the stats GD and Christian have posted.
Jones is going to be better than last year. But that's almost certainly going to lead certain posters telling us how good Jones is even if he is still a below-average QB. Setting objective measures of success helps mitigate that nonsense on both sides. I find it incredibly telling that Jones' biggest supporters seem to have zero faith Jones will put up even average QB numbers.
I am not beholden to metrics. Maybe Jones throws five picks in a game and inflates his turnover numbers. Below average numbers might be fine. I'm skeptical. But why isn't there any confidence he can get there? I'm a Jones skeptic and think he has the skills to be an above-average QB.
Alternatively, if Jones does not produce average TD/yard numbers - are you satisfied if Jones is a game manager? Do you think we can win championships with him as a game manager QB? Secondly, I simply don't think Jones can be a game-manager type given his penchant for turnovers. I don't think it's in his skillset - I never thought it was in Eli's either. So he needs the production to make up for it.
Quote:
In comment 15308714 djm said:
Quote:
because people love to mention where he was picked. And it's the same cast of characters. What's odd is these same folks never mention that DG got the QB he wanted without trading up, something that is quite rare.
Right. All DG had to do was ensure that the team he had to rebuild didn't do anything crazy, like win any more than 5 games or so...
huh? nice pivot. not pertinent at all but any time you can shit on DG you do you.
Sorry for injecting good feelings into this thread. ONe that the OP intended to be somewhat hopeful.
You go out of your way to compliment DG for not having to trade up to grab Daniel Jones at #6 overall, and you think that won't come with any responses?
Hurry up djm, the Good Ship Lollipop is leaving and you wouldn't want to miss it...
Oh, I am sorry, facts annoy you when they aren't shitty doom and gloom facts. Too bad.
If Jones is good, DG deserves enormous credit for selecting him. He took a lot of criticism for it and stuck to his guns. You don't mess around if you think you can get your QB for the next ten years. You just better be right.
Quote:
in 2021 if A) Jones threw 30 touchdowns and the Giants missed the playoffs or B) Jones threw 20 and the Giants made the playoffs. And everyone would pick B. Everyone.
That doesn't mean that fans still can't objectively (or even irrationally for that matter) question Jones' talents or if he is the right guy for the QB job. More than one conversation can be had regarding the players and the team.
And if you can't see that, then you just can't see...
I honestly don't know any more. I think that some people have become so invested in themselves that nothing else matters. Their ego is caught up in their pontification and outcomes which differs, they will see as invalidating them as persons and that hurts too much.
Nah, the investment level is low. Football related predictions are pretty low down on the food chain of validating anyone. I would hope...
Some fans are willing to bend reality to make it seem like the Giants haven't been as bad as they've been, and that their decision making hasn't been as bad as it's been. They think that makes them better fans; maybe it does, I have no idea. I don't know why being a better fan is a goal, but that appears to be important to many.
Whatever your level of fandom, though...facts are facts. And again if you want those facts in a completely unadulterated style I suggest you look at the Giants' PFR pages for the last three years. If you think stats matter, they're there for you to see and they're ugly. If you don't care about the stats and only care about the final score, that's there too and that's also ugly.
Am I supposed to get excited because Brandt thinks Jones can throw 20 TDs this year? If I'm not excited by that does it make me a bad fan?
We all know the team has been bad. Some would rather dissect the past than look to the future though. As a fan, what the fuck am I supposed to do with the past losses? Can I change them? Can I bitch up a storm about the GM and HC as if it will have an impact?
No. But when a change is made and a new HC comes in and appears to be doing good things, what relevance does 2018 have to it? Hell, even when Jones played well, one particular poster, invested in telling the board how bad Jones is, felt the need to say that he didn't play well and only played good in 5 games or some happy horseshit.
Basically the way this works is we're going to hear about how much the team sucks until they don't. Then what? I doubt it will be a "happy I was wrong" thing. More along the lines of "we're winning despite a terrible GM" or something similar.
Another thread about Jones and yet another chance to take shots at him. My Farmer's Almanac says the sun came up again and it was a new day for the cycle to repeat....
Is this directed towards me? I haven't taken any shots at Jones.
Well, if expecting bigger things from the 6th pick in the draft is a "shot" than perhaps I am "guilty"...
The 6th pick thing is true. Know what else is true? The Giants drafted their QB in round one and didn't have to trade a king's ransom for that pick. They didn't have to trade anything, actually. Know how common that is? It's not very common in case you were wondering. Quite uncommon actually. Funny how that nugget get's overlooked by so many. We're talking the 6th pick here. Not pick 1. Not 4 picks. One pick. 6th.
So we should have less expectations because we didn't trade up to select Jones at #6?
Are you downplaying the value of the 6th pick? It seems you may be suggesting that since Jones wasn't a top five pick that may mean we should expect less?
Help understand your angle here...
Bye.
:-)
Bye.
I don't have a problem with your point about not trading up for Jones. I get it.
But Jones was still the 6th pick in the draft. So whether he was acquired through a trade up or not, the expectations for such a high pick don't change. They should be high - a player who is a difference maker.
You seem to be doing some mental gymnastics here to brace for a softer landing if Jones struggles again this year...
:-)
No smiley face needed, btw. That's precisely what happened.
CIA Dave had super sensitive intel that he absolutely knew two other teams were going to take Jones before #17. I mean, if anyone could hack into other team's system to get critical information it's CIA Dave.
Quote:
Jones at #17, and then panicked and picked him at #6.
:-)
No smiley face needed, btw. That's precisely what happened.
I was trying to be nice since he was taking it "slowly" on us...
Quote:
Pro Football Reference have the "fact" that we overdrafted Jones on there?
Another thread about Jones and yet another chance to take shots at him. My Farmer's Almanac says the sun came up again and it was a new day for the cycle to repeat....
Is this directed towards me? I haven't taken any shots at Jones.
Well, if expecting bigger things from the 6th pick in the draft is a "shot" than perhaps I am "guilty"...
So how many QBs are in a better place than Jones is that were drafted in round 1 (or higher for that matter) after 3 years. What difference does it make where he was drafted? He was targeted at 6, and they took him. And no one knows if he is or isn't the guy yet.
I can lose some fingers on one hand and all of the other and still count how many QBs drafted in round 1 (or 2 for that matter) by any team over the last 10 years is worth the pick according to you and is "The Guy".
I'll list them out, (OK I did 12 years so sue me... lol) feel free to point out any I missed.
1) Burrow? Maybe. That brutal knee injury isn't helping. Unknown. And probably will be unknown for at least another 2 years.
2) Kyler Murray? Maybe. He doesn't look infinitely better than Jones to me to this point. Unknown. Haskins no. Lock, no.
3) Baker Mayfield? OK sure I guess. Still pretty close to a maybe. He sucked his first 2 years. Josh Allen. Yep Lamar Jackson. OK, hard not to include him especially as great value where picked. HOWEVER - I feel he landed in the exact right spot. Not sure he is what he is w/o John Harbaugh and the Ravens though.
4) Mahomes - Check. Trubisky - umm, no. Watson - sure, I guess. Except for the criminal activity. Houston sucks, so is he elevating enough as everyone seems to think should happen with these QBs?
5) Goff? Wentz? Not really looking so great at this point. Not terrible (well except Wentz last year) but certainly not great.
6) Winston? Mariota? Umm, nope.
7) Bortles, Manziel? Umm, LOL
8) EJ Manuel? Geno Smith. - Nein.
9) Andrew Luck. Sure. But what did it get Indy? Did he elevate the play enough around him to win? RGIII? Nay
10) Cam Newton. Hmm. Maybe.
11) Bradford? Tebow. Umm, nope.
12) Stafford - I guess. Did he elevate the play enough around him to win?
Brandt is saying Jones has a chance to be one of the least productive TD passing QBs in the league.
And we're supposed to get excited about that?
Brandt is saying Jones has a chance to be one of the least productive TD passing QBs in the league.
And we're supposed to get excited about that?
Evidently.
If this situation were playing out in Dallas or Philly we'd be laughing our asses off.
lol. It's a subjective post, did you not read the question I posed?
It's a question based on the list on who everyone thinks is somehow worth the 1st or second rnd pick based on all the hand wringing over Jones at 6. There are a few, but not all that many, to my mind. It's just a discussion point.
Brandt is saying Jones has a chance to be one of the least productive TD passing QBs in the league.
And we're supposed to get excited about that?
I think Gil believes in DJ becoming our franchise QB, but simply missed the boat on the TD prediction. Maybe he meant 30 instead of 20.
Maybe if someone pointed out to Gil that DJ threw for 24 in just 12 games 2 years ago (as a rookie with FAR less talent at WR/TE), Gil would say, did I say 20? I meant 30.
To me it's not a BFD.
Out of those I listed there are 4 that I would agree absolutely meet their draft status as a 1st or 2nd round pick. The rest either do not, are still unknown, or have circumstances (crime) mitigating their meeting of their draft status.
There are not a whole lot of amazing QBs on that list. Based on the fact that we are still unknown on exactly what we have in Jones, the hand wringing about his being drafted "too high" at 6 is (and always has been) kinda silly to my mind.
And I agree about the rambling nature of my initial post... lol. But I think you see my point(s). You may or may not agree (likely not... lol)
Quote:
Again, the really ironic thing is the premise of this thread is a prediction Jones has a chance to hit a number -- but just hitting that number would actually mean he was towards the bottom of the NFL.
Brandt is saying Jones has a chance to be one of the least productive TD passing QBs in the league.
And we're supposed to get excited about that?
I think Gil believes in DJ becoming our franchise QB, but simply missed the boat on the TD prediction. Maybe he meant 30 instead of 20.
Maybe if someone pointed out to Gil that DJ threw for 24 in just 12 games 2 years ago (as a rookie with FAR less talent at WR/TE), Gil would say, did I say 20? I meant 30.
To me it's not a BFD.
Maybe it's not so bulletproof to source an expert that misses by 50%.
We all know the team has been bad. Some would rather dissect the past than look to the future though. As a fan, what the fuck am I supposed to do with the past losses? Can I change them? Can I bitch up a storm about the GM and HC as if it will have an impact?
No. But when a change is made and a new HC comes in and appears to be doing good things, what relevance does 2018 have to it? Hell, even when Jones played well, one particular poster, invested in telling the board how bad Jones is, felt the need to say that he didn't play well and only played good in 5 games or some happy horseshit.
Basically the way this works is we're going to hear about how much the team sucks until they don't. Then what? I doubt it will be a "happy I was wrong" thing. More along the lines of "we're winning despite a terrible GM" or something similar.
The record and underlying causes of why they've been such a bad team color our perspective of them going forward. Hiring Joe Judge, which may be the best decision since TC was fired, doesn't undo previous poor decisions made by ownership and the FO that still affect the team.
Now I have no idea if Jones "gets it" this year, I will leave that to the usual experts to let me know how bad he is...
If the same prediction was made with the opposite tone -- if an analyst said "I predict Jones's ceiling next year is 20 TDs, which among guys with 14+ starts would only be better than Cam Newton and Teddy Bridgewater" -- how do y'all think that would be received?
The reality is only 6 teams have made the playoffs in the past 5 years with fewer than 20 passing TDs.
The average among playoff teams over the past 5 year is 29, in a 17 game season that means 30.
This isn't about fantasy stats, it's about measurements that correlate with going to the playoffs.
If the Giants have an outlying formula for success, like a dominant defense or dominant run game, that's awesome. If that's the formula, it should help set the value for Jones in any extension discussions.
Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, Mahomes, Andrew Luck. I disqualified Watson because of the 22 sexual assault and harassment suits. He would have been 5. The rest are still "Jury is out" or a big "Nope".
Quote:
And by the way, if the threshold is "amazing QBs" then your list is going to be fairly small. Probably need to lighten up a bit on your measurement stick...
Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, Mahomes, Andrew Luck. I disqualified Watson because of the 22 sexual assault and harassment suits. He would have been 5. The rest are still "Jury is out" or a big "Nope".
Look, no offense but this little experiment makes little sense. 12 years of drafts and you don't think more than 4 QBs were worth taking in the first two rounds? Jury is still out can't be overly used either or you could literally exclude everybody without a Super Bowl run which is silly.
Not for nothing, but in addition to the 4 slam dunks you mentioned above the list of guys that were worth taking imv should be expanded to at least include:
Herbert
Murray
Mayfield
Watson
Carr
Tannehill
Newton
Dalton
Stafford
Quote:
In comment 15308875 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
And by the way, if the threshold is "amazing QBs" then your list is going to be fairly small. Probably need to lighten up a bit on your measurement stick...
Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, Mahomes, Andrew Luck. I disqualified Watson because of the 22 sexual assault and harassment suits. He would have been 5. The rest are still "Jury is out" or a big "Nope".
Look, no offense but this little experiment makes little sense. 12 years of drafts and you don't think more than 4 QBs were worth taking in the first two rounds? Jury is still out can't be overly used either or you could literally exclude everybody without a Super Bowl run which is silly.
Not for nothing, but in addition to the 4 slam dunks you mentioned above the list of guys that were worth taking imv should be expanded to at least include:
Herbert
Murray
Mayfield
Watson
Carr
Tannehill
Newton
Dalton
Stafford
1) Herbert, maybe. I like him but it's still too early for me.
2) You think Stafford, Newton, Murray and Mayfield have met expectations of the #1 pick in the draft? Not me. Not yet anyway.
3) Carr is a good one, as is Dalton. I'll give you those.
4) Would you have picked Tannehill before he got resurrected in Tennessee? He floundered for a long time.
Quote:
In comment 15308941 Johnny5 said:
Quote:
In comment 15308875 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
And by the way, if the threshold is "amazing QBs" then your list is going to be fairly small. Probably need to lighten up a bit on your measurement stick...
Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, Mahomes, Andrew Luck. I disqualified Watson because of the 22 sexual assault and harassment suits. He would have been 5. The rest are still "Jury is out" or a big "Nope".
Look, no offense but this little experiment makes little sense. 12 years of drafts and you don't think more than 4 QBs were worth taking in the first two rounds? Jury is still out can't be overly used either or you could literally exclude everybody without a Super Bowl run which is silly.
Not for nothing, but in addition to the 4 slam dunks you mentioned above the list of guys that were worth taking imv should be expanded to at least include:
Herbert
Murray
Mayfield
Watson
Carr
Tannehill
Newton
Dalton
Stafford
1) Herbert, maybe. I like him but it's still too early for me.
2) You think Stafford, Newton, Murray and Mayfield have met expectations of the #1 pick in the draft? Not me. Not yet anyway.
3) Carr is a good one, as is Dalton. I'll give you those.
4) Would you have picked Tannehill before he got resurrected in Tennessee? He floundered for a long time.
Herbert killed it. Cannot leave off.
I am not certain every #1 pick needs to win a Super Bowl to be worthy of the pick. Stafford and Newton have had excellent years, and Murray and Mayfield have shown they belong just fine so far in helping also-rans.
No I wouldn't have picked Tannehill initially but since he clearly has shown so well as of late, no reason to exclude. Maybe this will be the way of Daniel Jones...
Quote:
If jones is a good qb, which we’ll know soon enough, one could make a case that jones was a bargain. Why? Because many qbs drafted required a trade up. Really not that hard to process.
Bye.
I don't have a problem with your point about not trading up for Jones. I get it.
But Jones was still the 6th pick in the draft. So whether he was acquired through a trade up or not, the expectations for such a high pick don't change. They should be high - a player who is a difference maker.
You seem to be doing some mental gymnastics here to brace for a softer landing if Jones struggles again this year...
Nope. Not in the least.
Quote:
Again, the really ironic thing is the premise of this thread is a prediction Jones has a chance to hit a number -- but just hitting that number would actually mean he was towards the bottom of the NFL.
Brandt is saying Jones has a chance to be one of the least productive TD passing QBs in the league.
And we're supposed to get excited about that?
Evidently.
If this situation were playing out in Dallas or Philly we'd be laughing our asses off.
Yep. Well all be excited if jones throws for only 20 tds despite that being a pretty pedestrian figure and plenty of jones defenders on this very thread pointing out the low total AND jones already eclipsed this total his rookie year.
You really believe that.
Great thread.
Classic...
BBI whines constantly that Jones/Giants don't get any respect in the sports media. So well-respected Gil Brandt comes along and puts out a nice optimistic take on DJ, but in doing so also includes a complete "airball" on expected TD passes as part of his analysis.
So BBI parses out the airball and takes the rest as all good stuff...haha!
How many people on this thread are actually saying 20TD's is a great number to shoot for?
I actually think "Classic BBi" is more akin to "Classic Googs", where the previously banned Clownshoes, who usually rips people for banging against the collective BBI, does it himself when he sees fit.
Way to take the bait as usual...
It does mean that Gil is 89 years old and is quite possibly experiencing age-related decline. Sad, but a fact of life. Considering that isn't just some slip of the tongue, 20 TDs in 2021 is criminally low for a franchise QB. If he only throws 20 and doesn't run for something stupid close to 10 TDs, I'll be almost certainly for drafting his replacement unless he loses half the offense to injuries for a significant time. Even then, gotta do better than that. Really no excuse for it with actual talent on the football field now and a line that isn't going to sink the team itself the first five weeks.
Agreed, I’ve enjoyed the show.
Remember, Brandt had SB about as highly rated as any prospect he's ever seen. So he's probably expecting 20 TDs from him, too...
Quote:
Of course not. Christ.
Classic...
BBI whines constantly that Jones/Giants don't get any respect in the sports media. So well-respected Gil Brandt comes along and puts out a nice optimistic take on DJ, but in doing so also includes a complete "airball" on expected TD passes as part of his analysis.
So BBI parses out the airball and takes the rest as all good stuff...haha!
This just in - ESPN rankings have the Giants #16 in offensive weapons for '21. Seems pretty fair to me.
I'm sure the "The Media Hates the Giants" crowd will complain we aren't top five...
Firepower Rankings 2021 - ( New Window )
2. Sign Devontae Booker
3. Draft a straight ahead, no bullshit runner in Brightwell
I think change is afoot with Gettleman's cornerstone pieces. And it'll be to the Giants' benefit of it is.
By "minority", do you mean the posters genuinely interested in trying to estimate how many points it's going to take to be a playoff contender and how Jones can impact that?
Do you think your boy Brandon Bean tries to figure that out for the Bills, btw?
I like Jones, I really do. But he’s got to play so, so much better to compete for a championship.
I like Jones, I really do. But he’s got to play so, so much better to compete for a championship.
I suggest you Google Matt Waldman's scouting reports of Jones. Going back to Duke he's basically nailed the assessment. I heard him on a podcast last week talk about Jones - he wasn't optimistic that it's going to work out.
Just too slow reading the game. The instincts aren't there. He compared him to Blaine Gabbert.
2. Sign Devontae Booker
3. Draft a straight ahead, no bullshit runner in Brightwell
I think change is afoot with Gettleman's cornerstone pieces. And it'll be to the Giants' benefit of it is.
I'm wondering how common it is for 6th round draft picks to be the cornerstone upon which an entire nfl franchise's entire future rests. Maybe Tom Brady was pure prescience, rather than pure luck?
Are you shitting us?
Way to take the bait as usual...
I was on the thread long before your ridiculous comment, Clownshoes. Way to do the thing you do the majority of the time and troll with bait as usual
Are you shitting us?
I guess anything other than going into the season with Barkley as the only RB on the roster, coming off a major injury, was going to be proof of the Giants moving away from Barkley in Terps’ mind.
They signed a backup RB and drafted one in the 6th round. Barkley’s days are numbered! And apparently that’s a GOOD thing! You simply cannot make this shit up. Oh, Terps forgot to mention that the Giants drafted Rodarius Williams in the 6th round too. Further proof the Giants are moving on from Gettlemans mistakes. Fortunately we can now move on from Bradberry after investing in the CB position with this 6th round gem. That’s a good thing, right?!
Quote:
Wrap your head around this — Jones could double his per game TD production, pro-rate over 16 games — and still only be 17th in the NFL.
I like Jones, I really do. But he’s got to play so, so much better to compete for a championship.
I suggest you Google Matt Waldman's scouting reports of Jones. Going back to Duke he's basically nailed the assessment. I heard him on a podcast last week talk about Jones - he wasn't optimistic that it's going to work out.
Just too slow reading the game. The instincts aren't there. He compared him to Blaine Gabbert.
It took Waldman three years to warm up to Josh Allen (and he'll still criticize him for the occasional bad throw/play). Maybe after Jones' third year, Waldman will warm up to him, too. We'll see.
Quote:
In comment 15309125 christian said:
Quote:
Wrap your head around this — Jones could double his per game TD production, pro-rate over 16 games — and still only be 17th in the NFL.
I like Jones, I really do. But he’s got to play so, so much better to compete for a championship.
I suggest you Google Matt Waldman's scouting reports of Jones. Going back to Duke he's basically nailed the assessment. I heard him on a podcast last week talk about Jones - he wasn't optimistic that it's going to work out.
Just too slow reading the game. The instincts aren't there. He compared him to Blaine Gabbert.
It took Waldman three years to warm up to Josh Allen (and he'll still criticize him for the occasional bad throw/play). Maybe after Jones' third year, Waldman will warm up to him, too. We'll see.
Agreed Klaatu. The last analysis I saw from Waldman was from prior to last season.
We'll see. Man do I hope we kick ass this year.
Link - ( New Window )
Yeah it wasn't that I didn't believe you. I just hadn't seen anything in writing beyond prior to last season. He has his detractors and his proponents in the media, just as he does here. It's going to be an interesting year, and the season can't get here fast enough.
The way I look at it, everyone has their warts (except seemingly Mahomes... lol). Every QB has weaknesses that need to be schemed around. It's pretty clear he doesn't see (feel) outside pressure the way some QBs do. Counter to that though he seems to have balls of steel when it comes to pass rush (or at least he did before the sacks started accumulating). At this point we have to hope he takes a step forward in that regard (and some of us are optimistic about this and some of us, not so much... lol) And of course Judge and the clapper MUST scheme to his strengths and shield the weaknesses more. Better and more consistent play from the OL is huge as is his first read winning more of their one on one matchups. I saw enough from him in year one that I believe he has the good if we are incrementally better in every facet I have stated. We shall see.
When he has time he is a very, very good QB. When he has Saquon his numbers are much better too.
If the OL is average and we are fairly healthy (especially Saquon) he will put up very very good numbers.
Quote:
Waldman was on a podcast last week where he discussed Jones in some detail. He was not positive. The link to the tweet with the podcast is below. Link - ( New Window )
Yeah it wasn't that I didn't believe you. I just hadn't seen anything in writing beyond prior to last season. He has his detractors and his proponents in the media, just as he does here. It's going to be an interesting year, and the season can't get here fast enough.
The way I look at it, everyone has their warts (except seemingly Mahomes... lol). Every QB has weaknesses that need to be schemed around. It's pretty clear he doesn't see (feel) outside pressure the way some QBs do. Counter to that though he seems to have balls of steel when it comes to pass rush (or at least he did before the sacks started accumulating). At this point we have to hope he takes a step forward in that regard (and some of us are optimistic about this and some of us, not so much... lol) And of course Judge and the clapper MUST scheme to his strengths and shield the weaknesses more. Better and more consistent play from the OL is huge as is his first read winning more of their one on one matchups. I saw enough from him in year one that I believe he has the good if we are incrementally better in every facet I have stated. We shall see.
Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the show?
When he has time he is a very, very good QB. When he has Saquon his numbers are much better too.
If the OL is average and we are fairly healthy (especially Saquon) he will put up very very good numbers.
No camp as a rookie?
Why do some of you feel the need to just make shit up?
Well that's kind of my point. Small incremental boosts at each of those levels listed can make a huge difference. Especially if they start building confidence off of the success. We just don't know yet. I feel pretty good about the direction at this point, and I do agree with the assessment that this team is going to surprise. Homerism? Maybe. But I'm optimistic... I have a feeling we finally kick some ass this year... lol
Compare him to his successful peers: Mahomes, Watson (if he plays), Allen, Jackson, Mayfield, Herbert, Murray...as a highly drafted starter it is reasonable to expect him to measure up to these players. If he doesn't it's time to reassess whether his peers aren't actually Trubisky, Mariota, Gabbert, and the like.
Simply improving is not good enough. Measure him against his peers.
That is the only thing that counts.
That is the only thing that counts.
Fair enough. By that standard he's been complete garbage since he entered the league. I agree with you.
If Jones sucks and this team manages a 10-7 record, I'll think this team is a QB away from being a bona fide contender. I'm skeptical this team gets to double digit wins without Jones being good, but teams get to the playoffs with crap QBs all the time.
Quote:
anything "better" is "incremental" - that's the nature of both words' definitions.
Well that's kind of my point. Small incremental boosts at each of those levels listed can make a huge difference. Especially if they start building confidence off of the success. We just don't know yet. I feel pretty good about the direction at this point, and I do agree with the assessment that this team is going to surprise. Homerism? Maybe. But I'm optimistic... I have a feeling we finally kick some ass this year... lol
No, your point is still missing the point.
Incremental doesn't mean what you think it means.
Compare him to his successful peers: Mahomes, Watson (if he plays), Allen, Jackson, Mayfield, Herbert, Murray...as a highly drafted starter it is reasonable to expect him to measure up to these players. If he doesn't it's time to reassess whether his peers aren't actually Trubisky, Mariota, Gabbert, and the like.
Simply improving is not good enough. Measure him against his peers.
I agree with this, but I also believe small boosts in each of those categories magnifies any improvement he has on his own. And if they start to have some success that builds confidence which leads to bigger incremental boosts in each category.
Quote:
In comment 15309695 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
anything "better" is "incremental" - that's the nature of both words' definitions.
Well that's kind of my point. Small incremental boosts at each of those levels listed can make a huge difference. Especially if they start building confidence off of the success. We just don't know yet. I feel pretty good about the direction at this point, and I do agree with the assessment that this team is going to surprise. Homerism? Maybe. But I'm optimistic... I have a feeling we finally kick some ass this year... lol
No, your point is still missing the point.
Incremental doesn't mean what you think it means.
lol. OK thx for the teaching moment.
His performance in 2021 has a huge impact on the future planning of this team.
His performance in 2021 has a huge impact on the future planning of this team.
I think everyone here already agrees with that. It's quantifying specifically in relation to the QB position just how good or how improved it needs to be that everyone seems to struggle with, or more succinctly argue about.... lol
Quote:
In comment 15309699 Johnny5 said:
Quote:
In comment 15309695 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
anything "better" is "incremental" - that's the nature of both words' definitions.
Well that's kind of my point. Small incremental boosts at each of those levels listed can make a huge difference. Especially if they start building confidence off of the success. We just don't know yet. I feel pretty good about the direction at this point, and I do agree with the assessment that this team is going to surprise. Homerism? Maybe. But I'm optimistic... I have a feeling we finally kick some ass this year... lol
No, your point is still missing the point.
Incremental doesn't mean what you think it means.
lol. OK thx for the teaching moment.
Happy to be of assistance.
Quote:
Before May 3rd 2022 the Giants need to decide whether Jones is going to make 20M+ in his fifth year.
His performance in 2021 has a huge impact on the future planning of this team.
I think everyone here already agrees with that. It's quantifying specifically in relation to the QB position just how good or how improved it needs to be that everyone seems to struggle with, or more succinctly argue about.... lol
I thought Gil Brandt concluded on that earlier this week with the 20 TD pass threshold...
Absolutely not. But if the offense is bottom third and this team is carried by the defense, why should a winning record be viewed as a reflection on Jones? Trubisky's made the playoffs twice and everyone agrees he sucks.
please name those people...
If DJ somehow orchestrates an efficient offense that results in 30 rushing TDs and we win 9+ games this year, I don't think anyone should complain.
That's just not a likely course of events.
We’re analyzing probabilities, and what factors are predictors of success.
If Jones has a trend defying productive year, every single person making these arguments is smart enough to observe that.
If Jones is efficient, has very few turnovers, tons of yards, and the Giants have an outlying amount of drives punctuated by rushing TDs, no one will blame Jones.
Quote:
who place more value on TD passes than wins.
please name those people...
EricJ - names please
Are there scenarios in which Jones has 20 TDs and any reasonable person should be happy with him and our season? Sure, of course
Are there a lot more where he has 20 TDs and any reasonable person should be unhappy with his season? Most definitely
Most importantly is what is the greater risk? That Jones gets too much rope to hang the team with or too little?
Given the way this team operates, it would be pretty crazy to say there is risk of him getting too little rope.
Which is why as fans we really shouldn't be doing the team any favors helping them feel like they have rope. Because this team takes every inch of it they can from us.
Why some are still so adamant about giving them that rope when we've seen what happens when we do is kind of astounding. I've come to understand it as more of an issue of personal relationships with the team than anything, which makes sense. It also is both a symptom of the problem and an prime example of the pervasiveness and scope of the problem.
Who is placing more value on TDs over wins? The underlying point being made is that the more TD passes a QB makes - since the league is designed for more passing - the greater the chances of securing a playoff birth/winning record. That's certainly not a guarantee, but the odds are favorable.
As for your example, yes, that could happen. But those will be more exceptions than the rule.
And my guess is you know that...
If Jones sucks and this team manages a 10-7 record, I'll think this team is a QB away from being a bona fide contender. I'm skeptical this team gets to double digit wins without Jones being good, but teams get to the playoffs with crap QBs all the time.
Nice post. And a good example with Trubisky.
It is indeed possible to have a good year with average QB play. But that's more of an anomaly in today's game and something you don't want to bet on.
To justify the fifth year option he has to play at a level he's never shown. Not impossible, but is it realistic?
To justify the fifth year option he has to play at a level he's never shown. Not impossible, but is it realistic?
I am thinking that the Giants want to see more from Jones than being a passenger. Of course it should be examined why he was just a passenger. After examining and seeing that Jones is still making the some mistakes with little improvement elsewhere they may be wise to decide to start looking in another direction. I certainly think Jones could play at another level without notice, it is not so rare in the NFL. Just as there is a decent chance he may never be more than he is now.
Look at what Chicago did with Trubisky. This is the 2nd overall pick, who has a 29-21 career, a pretty good TD/Int ratio, and got a team to the playoffs.
And after year 3 didn’t lock themselves into a corner with the 5th year option. In year 3 Trubisky put up a 17/10 season and had a winning record as a starter.
Did the Bears make the right decision with Trubisky?
Quote:
against the standings.
That is the only thing that counts.
Fair enough. By that standard he's been complete garbage since he entered the league. I agree with you.
I also think that you’re only as good as your fans.
To justify the fifth year option he has to play at a level he's never shown. Not impossible, but is it realistic?
That’s fair, other than I disagree he has never shown it. You can find games, especially his first year where he has. And there was one game last season(can’t recall which one) where you had a mental or ego lapse and we’re absolutely (for you) praising him.
I let my fandom get in the way of reality. It's a mistake we all make...some more than others.
To justify the fifth year option he has to play at a level he's never shown. Not impossible, but is it realistic?
you mean at a level you refuse to see beyond your ESPN stat sheet. He's played at a very high level in spots in my view of him when he actually plays.
Saying he has to play at a level he's never seen before makes it seem like the guy has never done well. He played for a bottom feeder in the ACC and helped them get to a bowl game. He threw 24 TD's his rookie season although some will have you believe it is tough for him to break 10 TD's. He tied a rookie record for having 4 or more TD's in a game, but Terps will come on here and say that doesn't matter because he played terrible in every other game.
Basically, any positive said about Jones a supposed fan of the team not only tries to refute but takes great pains to do so - even creating a table to try and show just how shitty Jones is.
And the prevailing question continues to be a very basic one - Why? Why on every thread about Jones is there a need to tell the board how bad he has been? and it is stated bluntly that he hasn't just been bad - but historically bad - without the actual proof to make such a ridiculous statement
Oh, I know why. Because nobody cares...
So it’s not the best argument here. I’m more convinced that any success Duke had with Jones is considerably more Cutcliffe at this point than Jones.
Yeah he went to Duke...which lends the question of why we drafted a guy for whom an excuse already had to be made? We can be fairly confident of why - the Cutcliffe/Manning connection. If Jones had the identical college career at another school unconnected to Cutcliffe/Manning would the Giants still have drafted him? Seems unlikely. The process that led to his being drafted seems to have been deeply flawed, and we've seen the results through two years. Little reason to expect something different in year three...particularly with Garrett as the OC. It's a marriage made in third and long.
I'm optimistic though. I think Judge is going to draft a guy that he wants in 2021, and I trust that Judge's methodology will be smarter and more thorough than "Let's call Ernie and see what he thinks." I think things are looking up.
Wait, who said that again? Oh right, no one.