This guy is a good QB. I am sorry he is. Is he elite no? Can he win gems by himself as some can? No. Does he have warts in terms of field processing? Yes. But he can run, he can deliver a football almost anywhere on the field and I am thinking (and again this is a long way away from this decision) he may be the future.
Are we sure if we have a bad year there will be a better NFL QB than him in the draft? I know after next year we have to make an extension (some do it after the third year), but I really think this is a guy like Phil Simms if you give him time and a team to work around, he will lead you to the promised land.
Quote:
In comment 15373767 Thunderstruck27 said:
Quote:
In comment 15373747 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Heinike had as good a night as Jones did, including leading the game winning drive...
Is he worth paying $30M a year?
When you say stuff like this, it makes me wonder if you saw the Giants trying to play defense the last 2 games. So far both QBs who played against us look like Super Bowl MVPs
Can’t the same be said for Washington’s defense? You can’t discredit Heinike for our defense playing bad but then not do the same for Jones. At least be fair.
Actually, now that you mention it, Jones looked far superior to golden boy Herbert who played the WFT last week. Fair?
Are you out of your mind? Have you watched Herbert play? As a thrower of the football Herbert is in another dimension from Jones. And he is more athletic. Try to be a little objective -- please. There is no GM in the NFL that wouldn't rate Herbert above Jones.
Lol FAR superior. I'll give Henicke credit. He played a good game. Ok?
Quote:
In comment 15373781 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
In comment 15373767 Thunderstruck27 said:
Quote:
In comment 15373747 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Heinike had as good a night as Jones did, including leading the game winning drive...
Is he worth paying $30M a year?
When you say stuff like this, it makes me wonder if you saw the Giants trying to play defense the last 2 games. So far both QBs who played against us look like Super Bowl MVPs
Can’t the same be said for Washington’s defense? You can’t discredit Heinike for our defense playing bad but then not do the same for Jones. At least be fair.
Actually, now that you mention it, Jones looked far superior to golden boy Herbert who played the WFT last week. Fair?
Are you out of your mind? Have you watched Herbert play? As a thrower of the football Herbert is in another dimension from Jones. And he is more athletic. Try to be a little objective -- please. There is no GM in the NFL that wouldn't rate Herbert above Jones.
There it is. Your answer is completely out of context. Was comparing the games against the same defense. Jones didn't have a turnover and basically should have won the game with his legs...if our defense can make a stop or we dont get a BS holding call. Not to mention the dropped balls.
But like I said..haters gonna hate)
Quote:
.
Lol FAR superior. I'll give Henicke credit. He played a good game. Ok?
Herbert threw for 100 more yards and the same amount of TDs.
Quote:
In comment 15373800 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
.
Lol FAR superior. I'll give Henicke credit. He played a good game. Ok?
Herbert threw for 100 more yards and the same amount of TDs.
Oh, you forgot Daniel Jones rushed for 95 yards and a TD and didn't throw a pick.
Quote:
In comment 15373817 Thunderstruck27 said:
Quote:
In comment 15373800 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
.
Lol FAR superior. I'll give Henicke credit. He played a good game. Ok?
Herbert threw for 100 more yards and the same amount of TDs.
Oh, you forgot Daniel Jones rushed for 95 yards and a TD and didn't throw a pick.
Herbert isn’t a runner. Is Lamar Jackson better than Aaron Rodgers because he runs?
Quote:
In comment 15373833 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
In comment 15373817 Thunderstruck27 said:
Quote:
In comment 15373800 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
.
Lol FAR superior. I'll give Henicke credit. He played a good game. Ok?
Herbert threw for 100 more yards and the same amount of TDs.
Oh, you forgot Daniel Jones rushed for 95 yards and a TD and didn't throw a pick.
Herbert isn’t a runner. Is Lamar Jackson better than Aaron Rodgers because he runs?
Also Herbert fumbled. Jones played FAR superior.
Far superior is a stretch.
Far superior is a stretch.
I mean...Slayton drops a gimme, Jones has a TD called back, our defense once again fails in dramatic fashion, our RB made one play all game...
Does Herbert overcome all that? I'd guess no.
Quote:
Led his team on a 75 yard 6:43 second drive to close the game out, that included for him throwing for four first downs on it.
Far superior is a stretch.
I mean...Slayton drops a gimme, Jones has a TD called back, our defense once again fails in dramatic fashion, our RB made one play all game...
Does Herbert overcome all that? I'd guess no.
That wasn’t on the final drive where he had a chance to close out the game. But keep moving the goalposts
Herbert isn’t a runner. Is Lamar Jackson better than Aaron Rodgers because he runs?
If Lamar Jackson consistently put up more total yards and TD's than Rodgers, than yes, he would be better. Why would you discount Jones's Rushing yards? It is part of his overall skill set. The bottom line is that he accounted for 350 yards of offense and 2 TD's, and no TO's. If Eli had thrown for 350 yds, 2 TD's and no INT's, we'd all be (rightfully) saying what a great game he had. I'm not sure why you can't do the same for DJ.
The fact is that DJ did have a better game v WFT than Herbert. That doesn't make him a better QB. Look, I've been as critical of DJ as anyone, but he was very good last night. He had his blemishes (is the 1st half sack that took them out of FG range), but overall played very well. He was not the reason we lost.
That wasn’t on the final drive where he had a chance to close out the game. But keep moving the goalposts
How was Jones supposed to "close out the game" when he was asked to hand off?
But if he doesn't then it's pretty clear the team needs to get a different QB.
One of those knocked us out of FG range, although it was after 2 back to back false starts.
Other than that, he played a clean game last night and was really good. Passed the eye ball test, looked more confident, played tough.
We just need to keep seeing it, and preferably against a team that ISN'T Washington
We need a QB that can do that.
I don't
I can't
I will not
Accept excuses.
Win games that matter.
End of story.
Is he worth paying $30M a year?
Ha! Good point. And I’m sure the usual suspects will harangue you for making such a logical and simple point. The way some people are acting here you might think Jones led the Giants on a game *winning* drive in the biggest game of season. But this is where we are now - lowered expectations.
to justify $30M/yr.
If they pay him huge money and he isn't top-8, we will suck for another decade.
Good I would agree to be determined
Great I would say TBD cause he has the ability and skill set not many QB’s have.
If you question winning he would have won a lot more games with very easy plays that were missed by teammates.
Turnovers 1 this year (with two hands on ball) and last 5 games last year he took care of ball nicely.
Negatives looks one way a lot. Doesn’t believe in throwing ball away.
He (if coached up right) in the right system has everything we need.
Toughness and leadership also seems to be there. I’m buying big time.
Quote:
That wasn’t on the final drive where he had a chance to close out the game. But keep moving the goalposts
How was Jones supposed to "close out the game" when he was asked to hand off?
They threw the ball on 3rd down and 7. Make a play.
Also Herbert fumbled. Jones played FAR superior.
You talk about other people being biased and then toss out this comment? That wasn't a fumble, come on - it was an incompletion that an awful call was made on.
He wasn't "FAR superior". That's a ridiculous comment.
I don't believe you watch other games besides Giants games. Most of the great QBs play at that level or higher all the time.
Quote:
In comment 15373878 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
That wasn’t on the final drive where he had a chance to close out the game. But keep moving the goalposts
How was Jones supposed to "close out the game" when he was asked to hand off?
They threw the ball on 3rd down and 7. Make a play.
The runs there were a fucking joke by #2 overall
How was Jones supposed to "close out the game" when he was asked to hand off?
What about the next to last possession? The series before the INT, when they were down 27-26? Four and out - made a nice pass to move the chains on the first play, then three more and out. Two incompletions.
Look, he played well in the second half, but people are going kind of nuts here, as if this were some kind of legendary Peyton Manning performance. He played well enough to win, yes, and the defense let him down. He still had chances to overcome that and make things happen and win. Eli could do that. To this point, Jones hasn't shown that he can.
Whats even the argument here? Overall he's terrible. Last night he was good. If he plays good for a while, then he'll be good.
It's hard to tell if this is sarcasm or the most ridiculous comment ever.
Go do what he did last night in 75% of the games, then you are the conversation for an extension.
Whats even the argument here? Overall he's terrible. Last night he was good. If he plays good for a while, then he'll be good.
I've said it a few times. Jones is always good against WFT. He's been above average for 5 games now against them.
Against the rest of the league? Average or below.
Until we see similar performances against the rest of the league, last night could just as easily be a typical Jones one-off...
Quote:
Jones pretty much stinks and has been one of the worst QBs in the league, but he was good last night. If he plays like that on a regular basis, he'll be a good QB.
Whats even the argument here? Overall he's terrible. Last night he was good. If he plays good for a while, then he'll be good.
I've said it a few times. Jones is always good against WFT. He's been above average for 5 games now against them.
Against the rest of the league? Average or below.
Until we see similar performances against the rest of the league, last night could just as easily be a typical Jones one-off...
I tend to stay away from the argument "Plays well against [a certain team]" Does the laundry really make a difference. I'm not sure. But he does have to sustain this. And play even better, to merit a second contract.
Quote:
In comment 15373313 crick n NC said:
Quote:
if Jones plays like last night or close to it he would be worth keeping.
Nah. If you're going to invest in a second contract, performances like last night need to become the baseline, not the high water mark.
Wouldn't the value of the contract matter? I do not think it is easy to find quarterbacks playing the game Jones played on average. I could be wrong.
Quarterback is the one position where it may not be in your best interest to seek a bargain.
Obviously, you don't want to overpay for mediocrity. But there's only one QB out there, and he has to be really good for your team to be really good. So even if you get a fair value contract for a middle-of-the-road QB, it's a really complicated puzzle to then build a championship roster around him (a la Trent Dilfer), and it introduces several more moving parts.
It would be much simpler if Jones would just shut everybody up by becoming a bona fide franchise QB!
Quote:
In comment 15373323 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 15373313 crick n NC said:
Quote:
if Jones plays like last night or close to it he would be worth keeping.
Nah. If you're going to invest in a second contract, performances like last night need to become the baseline, not the high water mark.
Wouldn't the value of the contract matter? I do not think it is easy to find quarterbacks playing the game Jones played on average. I could be wrong.
Quarterback is the one position where it may not be in your best interest to seek a bargain.
Obviously, you don't want to overpay for mediocrity. But there's only one QB out there, and he has to be really good for your team to be really good. So even if you get a fair value contract for a middle-of-the-road QB, it's a really complicated puzzle to then build a championship roster around him (a la Trent Dilfer), and it introduces several more moving parts.
It would be much simpler if Jones would just shut everybody up by becoming a bona fide franchise QB!
Hi GD. Your points are certainly valid. Choosing to pay quarterbacks that may not have established who they are is tricky and risky. I admit that I was being a bit naive with my question about the value of the contract. It seems there is not a lot of wiggle room with quarterback contracts.
Quote:
In comment 15373323 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 15373313 crick n NC said:
Quote:
if Jones plays like last night or close to it he would be worth keeping.
Nah. If you're going to invest in a second contract, performances like last night need to become the baseline, not the high water mark.
Wouldn't the value of the contract matter? I do not think it is easy to find quarterbacks playing the game Jones played on average. I could be wrong.
Quarterback is the one position where it may not be in your best interest to seek a bargain.
Obviously, you don't want to overpay for mediocrity. But there's only one QB out there, and he has to be really good for your team to be really good. So even if you get a fair value contract for a middle-of-the-road QB, it's a really complicated puzzle to then build a championship roster around him (a la Trent Dilfer), and it introduces several more moving parts.
It would be much simpler if Jones would just shut everybody up by becoming a bona fide franchise QB!
This is quite a complicated question. When do you pay a QB big bucks? Do you only pay the best of the best? Or do you pay the next tier big bucks as well? for instance I think we all agree the Mahomes, Rodgers tier gets and probably deserves the $30M+ dollars. But what about Baker Mayfield? Should the Browns pay him what he will certainly ask? This is where your budget comes into play. Mayfield is not as good as Mahomes but he is a lot better than QBs 15-25 (which is roughly where Jones is right now). If you pay Mayfield $35M, even though he is better than most QBs, can you still win? It's a tough question and some feel at his performance level you can't pay him that kind of money and still field a competitive team. And Jones is not in Mayfield's class, at least not yet. The better move for the Browns might be to get another good rook, or a cheap vet and still field a great roster. teh reality of the NFL today, may be that you pay only the elite of the elite the really big bucks, the top-8, And the next tier either takes less money or you look elsewhere. With Jones being one or two tiers behind Mayfield, I think the Giants would be wise to look elsewhere.
Quote:
In comment 15373433 crick n NC said:
Quote:
In comment 15373323 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 15373313 crick n NC said:
Quote:
if Jones plays like last night or close to it he would be worth keeping.
Nah. If you're going to invest in a second contract, performances like last night need to become the baseline, not the high water mark.
Wouldn't the value of the contract matter? I do not think it is easy to find quarterbacks playing the game Jones played on average. I could be wrong.
Quarterback is the one position where it may not be in your best interest to seek a bargain.
Obviously, you don't want to overpay for mediocrity. But there's only one QB out there, and he has to be really good for your team to be really good. So even if you get a fair value contract for a middle-of-the-road QB, it's a really complicated puzzle to then build a championship roster around him (a la Trent Dilfer), and it introduces several more moving parts.
It would be much simpler if Jones would just shut everybody up by becoming a bona fide franchise QB!
Hi GD. Your points are certainly valid. Choosing to pay quarterbacks that may not have established who they are is tricky and risky. I admit that I was being a bit naive with my question about the value of the contract. It seems there is not a lot of wiggle room with quarterback contracts.
I think there's a tier of QBs that you can win championships because of. And then there's a tier that you can win championships with. And then there's the occasional QB that you can win a championship in spite of. That last category is so difficult to plan for that it's not worth even considering unless/until the other roster elements make it clear that you can pull it off (again, 2000 Ravens with Dilfer come to mind).
You obviously pay the top tier that you can win a championship because of. And I think, unless the rest of your roster is in shambles, you also pay the next tier: the guys you can win a trophy with. Sometimes the contracts for these two tiers overlap as a function of timing and cap room.
The question that the Giants need to answer this year is whether Jones is a QB they can win with or in spite of. I doubt he elevates his game this year to the tier of those QBs who make their team a contender by their mere existence. That's hallowed ground.
Quote:
In comment 15375294 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 15373433 crick n NC said:
Quote:
In comment 15373323 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 15373313 crick n NC said:
Quote:
if Jones plays like last night or close to it he would be worth keeping.
Nah. If you're going to invest in a second contract, performances like last night need to become the baseline, not the high water mark.
Wouldn't the value of the contract matter? I do not think it is easy to find quarterbacks playing the game Jones played on average. I could be wrong.
Quarterback is the one position where it may not be in your best interest to seek a bargain.
Obviously, you don't want to overpay for mediocrity. But there's only one QB out there, and he has to be really good for your team to be really good. So even if you get a fair value contract for a middle-of-the-road QB, it's a really complicated puzzle to then build a championship roster around him (a la Trent Dilfer), and it introduces several more moving parts.
It would be much simpler if Jones would just shut everybody up by becoming a bona fide franchise QB!
Hi GD. Your points are certainly valid. Choosing to pay quarterbacks that may not have established who they are is tricky and risky. I admit that I was being a bit naive with my question about the value of the contract. It seems there is not a lot of wiggle room with quarterback contracts.
I think there's a tier of QBs that you can win championships because of. And then there's a tier that you can win championships with. And then there's the occasional QB that you can win a championship in spite of. That last category is so difficult to plan for that it's not worth even considering unless/until the other roster elements make it clear that you can pull it off (again, 2000 Ravens with Dilfer come to mind).
You obviously pay the top tier that you can win a championship because of. And I think, unless the rest of your roster is in shambles, you also pay the next tier: the guys you can win a trophy with. Sometimes the contracts for these two tiers overlap as a function of timing and cap room.
The question that the Giants need to answer this year is whether Jones is a QB they can win with or in spite of. I doubt he elevates his game this year to the tier of those QBs who make their team a contender by their mere existence. That's hallowed ground.
You laid it out well. Thanks 👍
Quote:
In comment 15375294 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 15373433 crick n NC said:
Quote:
In comment 15373323 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 15373313 crick n NC said:
Quote:
if Jones plays like last night or close to it he would be worth keeping.
Nah. If you're going to invest in a second contract, performances like last night need to become the baseline, not the high water mark.
Wouldn't the value of the contract matter? I do not think it is easy to find quarterbacks playing the game Jones played on average. I could be wrong.
Quarterback is the one position where it may not be in your best interest to seek a bargain.
Obviously, you don't want to overpay for mediocrity. But there's only one QB out there, and he has to be really good for your team to be really good. So even if you get a fair value contract for a middle-of-the-road QB, it's a really complicated puzzle to then build a championship roster around him (a la Trent Dilfer), and it introduces several more moving parts.
It would be much simpler if Jones would just shut everybody up by becoming a bona fide franchise QB!
Hi GD. Your points are certainly valid. Choosing to pay quarterbacks that may not have established who they are is tricky and risky. I admit that I was being a bit naive with my question about the value of the contract. It seems there is not a lot of wiggle room with quarterback contracts.
I think there's a tier of QBs that you can win championships because of. And then there's a tier that you can win championships with. And then there's the occasional QB that you can win a championship in spite of. That last category is so difficult to plan for that it's not worth even considering unless/until the other roster elements make it clear that you can pull it off (again, 2000 Ravens with Dilfer come to mind).
You obviously pay the top tier that you can win a championship because of. And I think, unless the rest of your roster is in shambles, you also pay the next tier: the guys you can win a trophy with. Sometimes the contracts for these two tiers overlap as a function of timing and cap room.
The question that the Giants need to answer this year is whether Jones is a QB they can win with or in spite of. I doubt he elevates his game this year to the tier of those QBs who make their team a contender by their mere existence. That's hallowed ground.
SI had an article a few months ago that basically said the consensus around league execs is that Jones is a win with QB not a win because of QB
The question that the Giants need to answer this year is whether Jones is a QB they can win with or in spite of. I doubt he elevates his game this year to the tier of those QBs who make their team a contender by their mere existence. That's hallowed ground.
SI had an article a few months ago that basically said the consensus around league execs is that Jones is a win with QB not a win because of QB
Seems pretty accurate. Pretty sure Jones played as well as ANY QB could have in his situation on Thursday and we still lost.
Quote:
In comment 15375332 Gatorade Dunk said:
The question that the Giants need to answer this year is whether Jones is a QB they can win with or in spite of. I doubt he elevates his game this year to the tier of those QBs who make their team a contender by their mere existence. That's hallowed ground.
SI had an article a few months ago that basically said the consensus around league execs is that Jones is a win with QB not a win because of QB
Seems pretty accurate. Pretty sure Jones played as well as ANY QB could have in his situation on Thursday and we still lost.
If Jones can continue to get lots of yards running I think you can absolutely win because of him
When he has a bad game do you bring up his few good plays/drives? If you're just going to bring up the bad plays during good games and not the good plays during bad games then you have an agenda.
Quote:
In comment 15375332 Gatorade Dunk said:
The question that the Giants need to answer this year is whether Jones is a QB they can win with or in spite of. I doubt he elevates his game this year to the tier of those QBs who make their team a contender by their mere existence. That's hallowed ground.
SI had an article a few months ago that basically said the consensus around league execs is that Jones is a win with QB not a win because of QB
Seems pretty accurate. Pretty sure Jones played as well as ANY QB could have in his situation on Thursday and we still lost.
That's a lazy argument. His defense was bad. Did you see Tom Brady against the Eagles in the Super Bowl. Was flawless other than a fumble a drop as a receiver. But his defense lost them the game.
So until I can considerably similar efforts against the league, DJ's performance is to be viewed cautiously.
Quote:
But if you're going to wax rhapsodic over how incredible he was, then you're setting the bar high.
When he has a bad game do you bring up his few good plays/drives? If you're just going to bring up the bad plays during good games and not the good plays during bad games then you have an agenda.
Quote:
But if you're going to wax rhapsodic over how incredible he was, then you're setting the bar high.
When he has a bad game do you bring up his few good plays/drives? If you're just going to bring up the bad plays during good games and not the good plays during bad games then you have an agenda.
This is really a silly argument. A franchise QB is expected to make many good or great plays on a weekly basis, and zero bad plays. If he makes just as many bad plays as he does great plays, he is Mitchell Trubisky and becomes a backup. Don't expect people to praise good plays during a bad performance. It's not an agenda, it is because the player is bad.
Quote:
In comment 15373279 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
But if you're going to wax rhapsodic over how incredible he was, then you're setting the bar high.
When he has a bad game do you bring up his few good plays/drives? If you're just going to bring up the bad plays during good games and not the good plays during bad games then you have an agenda.
There's no fucking agenda with Jones. He is in year 3 of a career that has had more mediocre to bad moments than good ones. The good ones were good enough to give people hope. But, a #6 pick rests on hope for only so long. He needs to consistently play well and lead the team to wins.
I agree with this but if you're analyzing a particular game and it's a good game and all you could do is look at the bad stuff but don't do the same when a game wasn't great but he had good plays and drives you have an agenda. Very different from saying you need to see good games consistently.
Quote:
In comment 15373279 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
But if you're going to wax rhapsodic over how incredible he was, then you're setting the bar high.
When he has a bad game do you bring up his few good plays/drives? If you're just going to bring up the bad plays during good games and not the good plays during bad games then you have an agenda.
This is really a silly argument. A franchise QB is expected to make many good or great plays on a weekly basis, and zero bad plays. If he makes just as many bad plays as he does great plays, he is Mitchell Trubisky and becomes a backup. Don't expect people to praise good plays during a bad performance. It's not an agenda, it is because the player is bad.
And he made a lot more good plays than bad plays last game and all we're hearing from some is about the bad plays. Maybe we need a perfect QB back there for people to give him credit. And there's no fucking thing as zero bad plays. Maybe a game or two a year. If you have consistent games with zero bad plays you're not a franchise QB you're the greatest QB to ever play and probably not human.
Quote:
In comment 15375366 Scooter185 said:
Quote:
In comment 15375332 Gatorade Dunk said:
The question that the Giants need to answer this year is whether Jones is a QB they can win with or in spite of. I doubt he elevates his game this year to the tier of those QBs who make their team a contender by their mere existence. That's hallowed ground.
SI had an article a few months ago that basically said the consensus around league execs is that Jones is a win with QB not a win because of QB
Seems pretty accurate. Pretty sure Jones played as well as ANY QB could have in his situation on Thursday and we still lost.
If Jones can continue to get lots of yards running I think you can absolutely win because of him
And yet, we haven't.