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.
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.