“When he does – and I don’t think it’s an if, it’s a when,” Dilfer said about the turnover problem. “When he does, and as they get more talented up front, they gotta get better up front. When those things happen, I think this is probably a next year thing to be honest with you. You’ll see flashes of it this year. But when he does, he’s going to be one of the better players in the NFL.
I'll have what he's having!
Quote:
In comment 15367482 Go Terps said:
Quote:
There were warning signs in Jones's rookie season. Most opted to ignore them because he threw five TDs against Washington in a meaningless game.
It's worked out great.
I know you like to bury Jones, but you are usually pretty fair. I'd like your opinion of what the rest of the team played like compared to Denver?
In what aspect did we outperform Denver?
Our running game? Our passing game? Our Defense? Our specials?
Is it at all possible that Daniel Jones is just put in a position to fail since last year?
Does Jones need to be perfect to win?
Are the players around him excelling in spite of him?
Should he excel regardless of poor play around him?
Is he the reason other players are playing poor?
Not making excuses. Asking honest questions
Many players are playing poorly. I won't argue there. This roster is a disaster.
But Jones is one of those players playing poorly, and he is very much part of the disaster. He sets himself up to fail by being slow to see anything past his first read, by having no pocket presence, by having slow mechanics, and by not being careful with the football.
He's a very poor starting NFL quarterback. The signs were there his rookie year, they manifested themselves clearly during his horrendous second season, and we saw more of the same against Denver.
I hope you didn't buy a Jones jersey. If you did it's soon going to be stashed next to your Odell Beckham and Eli Apple jerseys.
I haven't spent money on this team since Coughlin got canned.
I just don't buy into the "coaches have film" bullshit you talk about.
It isn't just Jones they has shit the bed since his rookie year. The decline of Slayton and Hernandez really stand out. Barkley and Tate both had a pretty big 2019. None of our other running backs or WRs are putting up big games.
That can't be because of Jones and film.
Quote:
The tide of excuses for Jones is endless.
As are his critics relentless. Not really any difference in the two camps. I guess it depends on whose Ox is getting gored.
I can be anything, I can't be that, that behavior is destroying the world.
Ok. I appreciate your response. Now I just need to figure out why every other player other than Shep and Logan Ryan were shitty on Sunday. Progress
I keep hearing this about DJ - he needs a better line - better receivers - better O-co - better TE... wait until Barkley gets back... on and on and on about how all DJ needs is better players and coaches.
But this ignores all kinds of problems that are squarely with Jones. He locks on to receivers and forces throws and he's done this since he was a Duke. (I point this out too, when he was at Duke the excuse for Jones was always the players around him). His pre and post snap processing are not where they should be after two years in the NFL. What about that fumble against Denver? Would an All Pro line have made any difference there?
Quote:
Part of the reason is that Jones is a shitty quarterback. It's not the whole reason, but it's part of it.
Ok. I appreciate your response. Now I just need to figure out why every other player other than Shep and Logan Ryan were shitty on Sunday. Progress
Because it's a roster of poor players put together by an incompetent GM. And remember, that same incompetent GM saw fit to pick Jones #6 overall almost entirely on the basis of him looking and feeling like Eli Manning.
Quote:
I might be wrong.
Don't look at stats.
Eye test.
We lost that game because Bridgewater was a much better QB.
Right now, Daniel Jones is not as good as Teddy Bridgewater.
That, is a fact.
That is a big problem.
That is NOT a fact. That isn't even close to true. Go back and look at the game. Bridgewater would never have completed 40% of his passes if he and Jones switched teams and i think Jones would have beaten the Gmen if were the QB for the Broncos. We missed a TON of chances tackling Bridgewater. We missed a ton of tackles elsewhere. We didn't get "free" or easy rushes on Bridgewater like the Broncos got on Jones. Our run blocking was poor..
This whole idea that Bridgewater was better than Jones is only true via the Broncos played better than the Giants. Have the QB's Switch teams and the same result happens. No way Bridgewater escapes the rush for us. With no running game he isn't dinking and dunking in our offense down the field. Jones on the other hand, in Shurmurs offense would make plays against our defense and with our poor tackling from that game we probably lose by even more.
I watched the entire game, and I've watched Jones for 3 years. I'd trade him for Teddy Bridgewater tomorrow...but Denver wouldn't.
Quote:
In comment 15367559 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Part of the reason is that Jones is a shitty quarterback. It's not the whole reason, but it's part of it.
Ok. I appreciate your response. Now I just need to figure out why every other player other than Shep and Logan Ryan were shitty on Sunday. Progress
Because it's a roster of poor players put together by an incompetent GM. And remember, that same incompetent GM saw fit to pick Jones #6 overall almost entirely on the basis of him looking and feeling like Eli Manning.
I don't entirely disagree. But why give a pass to Judge? It's his job to make this look like an NFL team on Sundays. He failed. You can't tell me there is no talent...well maybe you can...it's just all on special teams, which barely saw the field.
Quote:
In comment 15367435 Thegratefulhead said:
Quote:
I might be wrong.
Don't look at stats.
Eye test.
We lost that game because Bridgewater was a much better QB.
Right now, Daniel Jones is not as good as Teddy Bridgewater.
That, is a fact.
That is a big problem.
That is NOT a fact. That isn't even close to true. Go back and look at the game. Bridgewater would never have completed 40% of his passes if he and Jones switched teams and i think Jones would have beaten the Gmen if were the QB for the Broncos. We missed a TON of chances tackling Bridgewater. We missed a ton of tackles elsewhere. We didn't get "free" or easy rushes on Bridgewater like the Broncos got on Jones. Our run blocking was poor..
This whole idea that Bridgewater was better than Jones is only true via the Broncos played better than the Giants. Have the QB's Switch teams and the same result happens. No way Bridgewater escapes the rush for us. With no running game he isn't dinking and dunking in our offense down the field. Jones on the other hand, in Shurmurs offense would make plays against our defense and with our poor tackling from that game we probably lose by even more.
I watched the entire game, and I've watched Jones for 3 years. I'd trade him for Teddy Bridgewater tomorrow...but Denver wouldn't.
I can tell you with certainty Denver was going to draft Jones if we didn't. Their FO has changed but not entirely and with Shurmur being there I'm confident they'd be interested if he were on the market.
Quote:
In comment 15367559 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Part of the reason is that Jones is a shitty quarterback. It's not the whole reason, but it's part of it.
Ok. I appreciate your response. Now I just need to figure out why every other player other than Shep and Logan Ryan were shitty on Sunday. Progress
Because it's a roster of poor players put together by an incompetent GM. And remember, that same incompetent GM saw fit to pick Jones #6 overall almost entirely on the basis of him looking and feeling like Eli Manning.
I agree with most of your takes on Jones, but this is BS. If you gave Andy Reid the weapons we have on offense, this would be a 10 win team, especially with this defense. Jones is mobile enough to be successful behind this line...he needs to roll out more, run more, at least make the defense gameplan for his athleticism.
On Dilfer...I guarantee he liked Winston, Darnold, Rosen, Sanchez, and most other NFL busts in at least one interview. Gotta cover his ass.
I can't believe the Giants are in this situation. Some of us truly feel Jones is not THE GUY. Some of us blame the lack of talent and poor game planning. But none of us know for sure either way. What's obvious is the offense we saw week one was not ready to play an NFL defense.
My own take? Jones seems to be one of these QBs who needs everything to be just right in order to succeed. That has worried me since day one. No matter what happens, I don't think things are going to be just right for the Giants' QB for a while.
There is nothing to support the idea that the previous Denver regime was high on Jones. There were reports that Denver would have taken him, but Peter King was in their draft room, and said Jones's name never came up. Now if people want to ding Peter King (I think he's a solid reporter with good contacts), that's fine, but I'll need to see something more concrete than Dave Gettleman saying Denver would have taken him.
Quote:
In comment 15367459 jvm52106 said:
Quote:
In comment 15367435 Thegratefulhead said:
Quote:
I might be wrong.
Don't look at stats.
Eye test.
We lost that game because Bridgewater was a much better QB.
Right now, Daniel Jones is not as good as Teddy Bridgewater.
That, is a fact.
That is a big problem.
That is NOT a fact. That isn't even close to true. Go back and look at the game. Bridgewater would never have completed 40% of his passes if he and Jones switched teams and i think Jones would have beaten the Gmen if were the QB for the Broncos. We missed a TON of chances tackling Bridgewater. We missed a ton of tackles elsewhere. We didn't get "free" or easy rushes on Bridgewater like the Broncos got on Jones. Our run blocking was poor..
This whole idea that Bridgewater was better than Jones is only true via the Broncos played better than the Giants. Have the QB's Switch teams and the same result happens. No way Bridgewater escapes the rush for us. With no running game he isn't dinking and dunking in our offense down the field. Jones on the other hand, in Shurmurs offense would make plays against our defense and with our poor tackling from that game we probably lose by even more.
I watched the entire game, and I've watched Jones for 3 years. I'd trade him for Teddy Bridgewater tomorrow...but Denver wouldn't.
I can tell you with certainty Denver was going to draft Jones if we didn't. Their FO has changed but not entirely and with Shurmur being there I'm confident they'd be interested if he were on the market.
After Sunday, and especially last year, I'm pretty certain they're happy they didn't get stuck with Jones in 2019. They already have DJ on their roster...he sits behind Teddy. Denver is smart enough to move on from mediocrity.
I watched the entire game, and I've watched Jones for 3 years. I'd trade him for Teddy Bridgewater tomorrow...but Denver wouldn't.
I can tell you with certainty Denver was going to draft Jones if we didn't. Their FO has changed but not entirely and with Shurmur being there I'm confident they'd be interested if he were on the market.
This has been discussed on site before and there is more evidence that Denver wasn't going with Jones, at least not in Rd 1. And they had Lock higher than Jones if they both made it to Rd 2.
And while it really doesn't matter anyway. If you want to post what was the "certainty" go ahead...
I can tell you with certainty Denver was going to draft Jones if we didn't. Their FO has changed but not entirely and with Shurmur being there I'm confident they'd be interested if he were on the market.
Uh, you can't. That's complete BS. Just like the speculation Gettleman tossed out there that he knew for "a fact" other teams would take Jones before the Giants 17th pick.
I feel very comfortable saying Denver had Lock much more highly rates than most teams. And got their man - at the time.
Quote:
I can tell you with certainty Denver was going to draft Jones if we didn't. Their FO has changed but not entirely and with Shurmur being there I'm confident they'd be interested if he were on the market.
Uh, you can't. That's complete BS. Just like the speculation Gettleman tossed out there that he knew for "a fact" other teams would take Jones before the Giants 17th pick.
I feel very comfortable saying Denver had Lock much more highly rates than most teams. And got their man - at the time.
I'm not speculating but you are free to believe whatever you want.
I can tell you with certainty Denver was going to draft Jones if we didn't. Their FO has changed but not entirely and with Shurmur being there I'm confident they'd be interested if he were on the market.
I'd like to see how you know that with such certainty? I'm more than willing to accept it is you have a legitimate source, but as I said, Peter King was in the room, and specifically stated that Jones's name never came up.
And while many will pile on King, that's fine, he has his faults, one thing I can't believe he would agree to is to lie about who Denver was looking at. Would he agree not to mention certain things? Absolutely, but that is not the case here. He was very clear, so the only explanation would be that he agreed to lie for Elway, and I do not believe he would do that.
Uh, you can't. That's complete BS. Just like the speculation Gettleman tossed out there that he knew for "a fact" other teams would take Jones before the Giants 17th pick.
I feel very comfortable saying Denver had Lock much more highly rates than most teams. And got their man - at the time.
I'm not speculating but you are free to believe whatever you want.
How is your information not speculative?
Just looking for his definition of great and naming comparable great QB's may help communicate his definition.
I suspect it will be with another team. I think he’d really benefit from a reset. Sit down a year and work out his flaws.
If I’m the Giants, and he’s still struggling this year, I make the call in the offseason to Tampa and see if I can get a 2nd round pick for him.
Quote:
In comment 15367461 Go Terps said:
Quote:
The tide of excuses for Jones is endless.
As are his critics relentless. Not really any difference in the two camps. I guess it depends on whose Ox is getting gored.
There is a difference. One side is right and the other never knew what they were talking about.
😄. Good one.
Quote:
I can tell you with certainty Denver was going to draft Jones if we didn't. Their FO has changed but not entirely and with Shurmur being there I'm confident they'd be interested if he were on the market.
I'd like to see how you know that with such certainty? I'm more than willing to accept it is you have a legitimate source, but as I said, Peter King was in the room, and specifically stated that Jones's name never came up.
And while many will pile on King, that's fine, he has his faults, one thing I can't believe he would agree to is to lie about who Denver was looking at. Would he agree not to mention certain things? Absolutely, but that is not the case here. He was very clear, so the only explanation would be that he agreed to lie for Elway, and I do not believe he would do that.
In addition to the King reports from inside their War Room, this article reports basically the same thoughts from a different source...
Report: Giants were wrong to think Broncos would draft Daniel Jones
Posted by Michael David Smith on April 28, 2019, 4:10 PM EDT
After Giants General Manager Dave Gettleman justified his decision to take Daniel Jones with the sixth overall pick in the draft by saying he knows for a fact two other teams would have taken Jones in the first half of Round 1, a report emerged that the two teams were Washington and Denver. But that may not be the case.
According to Mike Klis of 9 News, the Broncos would not have taken Jones in the first round. In fact, Klis (who is always plugged-in to Broncos General Manager John Elway) tweets that Drew Lock was Denver’s No. 1 quarterback. The Broncos eventually took Lock with the 42nd overall pick, but Denver passed on Lock in the first round.
That doesn’t mean Gettleman is wrong that someone would have taken Jones before the Giants got their next pick at No. 17 overall, but the report is that it definitely wasn’t the Broncos.
If Jones was Gettleman’s top-rated quarterback, taking him at No. 6 was probably smarter than sitting and waiting and hoping he would be there at No. 17. The Giants need a successor to Eli Manning and couldn’t risk missing out on their top choice. But few outside the Giants organization had Jones rated as highly.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/04/28/report-giants-were-wrong-to-think-broncos-would-draft-daniel-jones/
Quote:
The tide of excuses for Jones is endless.
Terps your posts about Jones use to infuriate me, but I tip my hat to you. I beginning to believe everything you say about him is correct.
Yeah, it's like Odell Beckham all over again. Like with him, I bet in two years everyone on the board will act like they always wanted Jones replaced and debates about his potential never happened.
That's what the league has film on and knows how to stop. And it's actually something they've known how to stop since 2012 when he got demoted from play calling the first time. https://twitter.com/GiantsAlliance/status/1416392487401361414?s=20 - ( New Window )
Well then we're screwed, because it sure seems like Garrett ain't going anywhere.
Maybe if we get rolled tomorrow night by a double-digit margin, but even then I imagine they'll focus on the positives and the signs of improvement.
Downfield interceptions are going to happen to any aggressive QB and they're not that different from a punt in terms of field position. Fumbles, however, are backbreakers. You not only surrender a possession, you flip field position. If Jones can't stop fumbling, he can't be an NFL quarterback. He's got a ton of talent but that's a deal-breaker.
The selection of Jones is a classic panic pick by a GM.
And the aftermath of telling the press that Jones was such a hot commodity that DG had to take him at #6, is classic CYA.
If Gettleman picked Jones at 6 because he thought he could be a good NFL quarterback — cool.
Running a draft out of fear of what others might do is the epitome of lame ass management. I hope that didn’t happen.
I don't think he would have been there at 17.
This, of course, would mean Garrett has to dramatically modify his offense. Frankly, I think Fred Kitchens could do this much better. Making it work with Jones is MUCH, MUCH better for the team going forward, then having to start all over again from scratch.
Yes, agreed. Design the offense (or defense) to the talent available. It's what good coaches do.
Also, they lost the game because the DEFENSE SUCKED. Denver had 3 drives with 10 or more plays, 2 of them over 8 minutes long. The final score should been worse. The Giants lucked out on the Ryan fumble recovery near the goal line, and that could have been overturned.
This is the year for that to show through, otherwise the DJ experiment AND the DG experiment should be over.
I posted the info about Denver because this has been gone thru in detail before and keeps coming around in questionable context...
OTOH, on short routes, he locks onto primary targets, doesn't look off the safety, probably because he is concerned with getting the ball out on time. So the obvious answer would be to call more intermediate to deep pass plays, right?
Until you get in the red zone. The RZ is where great QB's make their money, when every pass play is a short pass play. If DJ can't get that figured out, he will never be anything more than a marginal NFL QB.
Also, they lost the game because the DEFENSE SUCKED. Denver had 3 drives with 10 or more plays, 2 of them over 8 minutes long. The final score should been worse. The Giants lucked out on the Ryan fumble recovery near the goal line, and that could have been overturned.
They lost because they played poorly on both sides of the ball. Scoring a single touchdown outside of garbage time isn't going to win you any games either.
And whether you hate or like Jones, I think we can all agree I would like to see Jones with someone other than Garrett. I dont care if our QB was Mahomes, Wilson, Murray, Brady or whoever - they probably would not reach their potential with Garrett as OC.
The people who still like Jones point to a few plays which show he can make big throws on occasion. But the bottom line is, if he's going to make one or two huge boneheaded plays a game, he's going to have throw three or four TDs to make up for it. he's not that productive. What we get instead is labored offense, eventually a great play or two, and just as many boneheaded plays. If the Giants put up 24 vs the Broncos and Jones had 3 TDs we would all feel a lot better. Instead the offense had few great moments, and Jones was unable to distinguish himself.
And whether you hate or like Jones, I think we can all agree I would like to see Jones with someone other than Garrett. I dont care if our QB was Mahomes, Wilson, Murray, Brady or whoever - they probably would not reach their potential with Garrett as OC.
Some had Jones rated as a 2nd or 3rd round talent. Gettleman reached. But that's ok if you have a conviction about a player. We have to say Gettleman did a gutsy thing. He liked a guy and made the pick. The problem is, however, that QB is not good. And he doesn't have the skills you want to see in a top QB pick, like Kyler, like Herbert, like Burrow, like Mahomes, like Allen...
Quote:
There were warning signs in Jones's rookie season. Most opted to ignore them because he threw five TDs against Washington in a meaningless game.
It's worked out great.
There were warning signs, but also some positive traits as well.
Those positives have barely shown itself since.
Look at that Tampa Bay game his rookie year. It's not the same quarterback.
I really wonder where that guy is.
Quote:
knows A LOT more than any of us here.
Also, they lost the game because the DEFENSE SUCKED. Denver had 3 drives with 10 or more plays, 2 of them over 8 minutes long. The final score should been worse. The Giants lucked out on the Ryan fumble recovery near the goal line, and that could have been overturned.
They lost because they played poorly on both sides of the ball. Scoring a single touchdown outside of garbage time isn't going to win you any games either.
Yes you have to score. But how do score when you don't touch the ball for more than 1 full quarter around half time?
Garrett is a problem, but he isnt the only problem.
Jones is a big problem. I think a different OC could spark this offense a little more, but they would still need a competent OL and they would need Jones to stop turning the ball over to have any chance.
Quote:
Uh, you can't. That's complete BS. Just like the speculation Gettleman tossed out there that he knew for "a fact" other teams would take Jones before the Giants 17th pick.
I feel very comfortable saying Denver had Lock much more highly rates than most teams. And got their man - at the time.
I'm not speculating but you are free to believe whatever you want.
How is your information not speculative?
there's not really a way for me to answer that so it's up to you to either believe it or not. ive never claimed to be an asshat but it's not hearsay or speculation.
Quote:
In comment 15367659 Victor in CT said:
Quote:
knows A LOT more than any of us here.
Also, they lost the game because the DEFENSE SUCKED. Denver had 3 drives with 10 or more plays, 2 of them over 8 minutes long. The final score should been worse. The Giants lucked out on the Ryan fumble recovery near the goal line, and that could have been overturned.
They lost because they played poorly on both sides of the ball. Scoring a single touchdown outside of garbage time isn't going to win you any games either.
Yes you have to score. But how do score when you don't touch the ball for more than 1 full quarter around half time?
Not fumbling in the redzone would have been a good start.
Think of it this way, the Giants defense played an extremely poor game. However, Daniel Jones had the chance to complete that drive with a TD that would have given the Giants a very good chance to win the game.
Daniel Jones COULD have been the hero on Sunday. All of his biggest fans COULD have come out of the game talking about how the defense played like shit but Daniel Jones rallied the Giants to victory with a couple of 2nd half scoring drives.
The implication that life just isn't fair for Daniel Jones because the defense didn't play well is ridiculous. Defenses league-wide play poorly every single week, and the league's best QBs win games in spite of it. Sometimes you're going to need to score nearly every time you touch the ball. Be a goddamn hero for once.