I have a bad feeling 20 points will be the most we can generate again this week. And that is being optimistic. Burrows only got 17 and he is much better than Danny and Chase is much better than anyone we have.
Then why are Sills and James getting all of the reps over Golladay and Toney?
I'm not sure I understand the comparison. There's no question that you simply don't criticise the QB for all to see and hear, especially one that it's understood is under a critical eye already. Taking the blame on oneself is what good teammates do. There are very few cases in recent history where teammates would call out Eli Manning for his many, obvious on-field turnovers, and there was no time I can remember Eli would name players who are playing poorly - and he could have. It's just not done except in situations that are borderline dysfunctional.
Shepard including himself in saying the WRs have to do better is fully normal.
When Jones, in week one, was getting screamed at by Daboll in front of the camera for his bonehead INT, Daboll said to the media after the game he wasn't yelling at jones, he was talking on his headset. He wasn't *wearing* a headset.
Q: Looks like you had a fiery conversation with Daniel (Jones) after interception. What did you say to him and how did you like how he bounced back?
A: I wasn't talking to Daniel (Jones). I was talking on the headset to some of the coaches, but I just said what'd you see. He thought he could potentially back shoulder it. And I said, 'That's not what I saw, but you got the ball in your hands, so you're going to get the ball back at some point. Our defense is going to get it to you. Let's drive down and get it again.'
No one is going to criticize or provide an 'honest assessment' the QB publicly. It is understood that those things are behind the scenes.
the offense, but that doesn't mean he's going to tell you or me.*
It was a generic call out by Shep. He is a leader. He is onboard with Daboll requiring preparation to play. I am sorry but those 1st two series I still say the play calling was atrocious.
Best thing for Ezeudu might be to not play right now and to just be working on his technique. He was never supposed to play this early in year 1. Lemieaux was supposed to be playing right now and would be if he hadn't gotten injured.
Mentioned it a few times before (others have echoed), but Bredesen was good at C in the Pats exhibition. Yes, against 2nd and 3rd stringers, and Patriots are no longer world beaters.
But Feliciano is just having too many negative plays and is usually overmatched. If he is injured, as someone above says, why are the offensive minded HC and OC starting him. He was always a stop-gap replacement for our 'Don't sleep on 'Pio' position.
It's clear Dabs and Kafka think right now that Ezeudu is floundering, but what the hey? Yes, they're trying to win, but all this talk of aiming at 4 - 0 start and how critical Dallas game is, my goodness, this season is about the roster we have now.
There are so many basic needs: OL at C (Jimmy G), WRs, ILBs, TE, Corners,etc., never mind how QB shakes out.
Let Ezeudu take his lumps and see if Josh/Ben/Glow can be better. It can't be too much worse than what we're seeing now. LOL, it might be to start.
Is a cop out. So is the Judge coached him to be conservative one. If he’s supposed to be a franchise QB he’d adjust. How many backups do we see bounce from system to system each year and step in on a weeks notice and perform?
If Jones can’t adjust threw a full offseason and this problem consists all year, he doesn’t have the make up to be a starting QB in this league. You have to adapt to survive.
Wrong. All wrong.
He doesn't need to be a Franchise QB. He needs to be more like a Jimmy G where he is "good enough."
As SY had said - he compares him to a young Tannehill. This is what DJ is - ie potentially that type. Tenn was stupid paying Tannehill that much he isn't a franchise QB.
But to set a bar that DJ must show he is a Franchise QB is wrong analysis.
Is a cop out. So is the Judge coached him to be conservative one. If he’s supposed to be a franchise QB he’d adjust. How many backups do we see bounce from system to system each year and step in on a weeks notice and perform?
If Jones can’t adjust threw a full offseason and this problem consists all year, he doesn’t have the make up to be a starting QB in this league. You have to adapt to survive.
Wrong. All wrong.
He doesn't need to be a Franchise QB. He needs to be more like a Jimmy G where he is "good enough."
As SY had said - he compares him to a young Tannehill. This is what DJ is - ie potentially that type. Tenn was stupid paying Tannehill that much he isn't a franchise QB.
But to set a bar that DJ must show he is a Franchise QB is wrong analysis.
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
I didn’t see anyone mention it. But you mentioned in your details on Carolina that they should make a hard push to go after Lamar Jackson this off-season. So you believe Jackson will test FA? If so, don’t you think the Giants should be in that bidding contest as well? Or do you not see him as a fit in Daboll’s offense.
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
I hate to nitpick, but just what does "set the bar as high as possible" mean - relative to him or the best of the NFL? Just what are you looking for? There is no way Jones is ever at Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, Jackson, Herbert, Burrow level. Jones is a mid-level, at best, QB.
He isn't going to be here next year, unless Schoen and Daboll do not like what they see in the NCAA and where the Giants pick in the draft. Tyrod was obviously signed because of Jones injury history and as that bridge QB. So it seems to me, they set up to move on from Jones already.
Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I am beginning to like Lamar Jackson in blue.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
What are the other exceptions besides Trent Dilfer?
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
I agree to an extent, the surrounding team matters quite a bit. I think history probably shows that quarterback needs to be a strength of your team, and that is putting it probably a bit too simply. A quarterback may be top 5 during the season, but maybe falls to top 10 during the post-season.
Overall as this relates to Jones, he does not represent a strength at this moment in time in my view.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
Numbers seem to show that QBs in the elite/excellent class win more than 80% of the championships. You want to be one of the 8 (or so) teams in that category, rather than one of the 24 teams fighting it out for what's left over.
It's so good to have a trained eye reviewing the play.
Re: Jones. I think the lack of taking chances was burned into him the last two years by the previous regime that wanted to minimize turnovers. As Bill Parcells used to say if you don't throw a couple of interceptions you're not being aggressive enough.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
What are the other exceptions besides Trent Dilfer?
How about Brad Johnson. Also, I think Payton Manning with the Broncos was a shell of his former self. Definitely not top 10.
As I recall, almost no one considered Eli top ten prior to 07'. Now that I think about it many didn't give him that designation after 07.
Kaepernic and Garopalo came within an eyelash.
I'd also note that between Marino, Brees and Rodgers only two championships, in spite of the fact that they are 3 of the most prolific passers ever. Given their production you'd have to have expected them to win more.
game analysis a few times. Either he is unwilling to call out Jones on his reads, or he, like the rest of us in unsure what ails Jones.
"..... If it is a matter of him not seeing the action, that is a different discussion. But Jones CAN do it. He DID it in this game. Make tight throws in big moments that are considered “elite” throws. Will Daboll get this out of him? Keep an eye on it."
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
Eli stepped up to an elite level come playoff time.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
This is a vague rebuttal. Look at the data. Look at the playoff teams every year. It's a list of the best QBs, with a couple of exceptions. Nobody claims there aren't exceptions, so your argument falls flat. Being in the best QBs group exponentially raises your odds for competing for a Super Bowl year in and year out. It is far harder to build a great team without one, and almost impossible to sustain it beyond a few seasons. A lot more has to go right. Those are the inconvenient facts.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
This is a vague rebuttal. Look at the data. Look at the playoff teams every year. It's a list of the best QBs, with a couple of exceptions. Nobody claims there aren't exceptions, so your argument falls flat. Being in the best QBs group exponentially raises your odds for competing for a Super Bowl year in and year out. It is far harder to build a great team without one, and almost impossible to sustain it beyond a few seasons. A lot more has to go right. Those are the inconvenient facts.
Maybe. But there is a chicken or egg argument to be made. Is part of the reason that QBs are elite because they play for very good teams? Back to Foles, he wasn't good enough, until he got to play for the Eagles in their champ year. Then he played "elite" (according to ajr.) He soon went back to not good enough with the Bears. Or Russel Wilson, is he the elite QB from the SB days or is he the pedestrian one of last year.
Good QB play improves the fortunes of the team. Likewise good teams raise the level of output of their QBs.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
This is a vague rebuttal. Look at the data. Look at the playoff teams every year. It's a list of the best QBs, with a couple of exceptions. Nobody claims there aren't exceptions, so your argument falls flat. Being in the best QBs group exponentially raises your odds for competing for a Super Bowl year in and year out. It is far harder to build a great team without one, and almost impossible to sustain it beyond a few seasons. A lot more has to go right. Those are the inconvenient facts.
Maybe. But there is a chicken or egg argument to be made. Is part of the reason that QBs are elite because they play for very good teams? Back to Foles, he wasn't good enough, until he got to play for the Eagles in their champ year. Then he played "elite" (according to ajr.) He soon went back to not good enough with the Bears. Or Russel Wilson, is he the elite QB from the SB days or is he the pedestrian one of last year.
Good QB play improves the fortunes of the team. Likewise good teams raise the level of output of their QBs.
Ron Johnson agreed. These endless 6000+ view and 10 page long debates on almost every thread at this point... where people call each other out as Haters or Homers (or Jones lovers)... and it's really not about that. Typically the people that argue against the crowd that say definitively that "Jones sucks" put more emphasis around the team aspect rather than just the QB. That's really what it comes down to. Of course I want Jones to succeed as a Giant and I root for him to kick ass but I have no personal interest in him specifically. And I am realistic enough to say that what I post are my OPINIONS, not facts... lol. If we are winning I am happy. If Schoen and Daboll decide to move on from DJ, which is likely at this point, I am rooting for the next QB up. It's really that simple.
You can’t just pick one year from an aging Wilson’s
Career and use it to outweigh the 7 years before that.
And it’s not according to me, Foles was elite in those playoffs. The numbers speak for itself. Foles also at least had flashes. He threw 27 TDS in 13 games in 2013
game analysis a few times. Either he is unwilling to call out Jones on his reads, or he, like the rest of us in unsure what ails Jones.
"..... If it is a matter of him not seeing the action, that is a different discussion. But Jones CAN do it. He DID it in this game. Make tight throws in big moments that are considered “elite” throws. Will Daboll get this out of him? Keep an eye on it."
I remember reading that paragraph from Sy and thinking, "What throws were elite?"
Because I watched the Chiefs-Chargers game last Thursday and actually saw real elite throws by Herbert and Mahomes. And have never been more convinced that Jones will NEVER be able to be a QB who is a force-multiplier because he doesn't have the throwing skills.
I know what he did last year, but to the "no excuses" people, does Burrow all of a sudden suck? His team is 0-2. He's got 3 TDs, 4 INTs and QBR of 44.7
"..... If it is a matter of him not seeing the action, that is a different discussion. But Jones CAN do it. He DID it in this game. Make tight throws in big moments that are considered “elite” throws. Will Daboll get this out of him? Keep an eye on it."
..... And have never been more convinced that Jones will NEVER be able to be a QB who is a force-multiplier because he doesn't have the throwing skills.
Kindly explain elite throwing skills because that can encompass many things: (or a combination)
Accurate and anticipation like Peyton
Cannon arm in Allen
Quick release like Rodgers/Marino
Strong and accurate - Brady
ad lib - Mahomes
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
This is a vague rebuttal. Look at the data. Look at the playoff teams every year. It's a list of the best QBs, with a couple of exceptions. Nobody claims there aren't exceptions, so your argument falls flat. Being in the best QBs group exponentially raises your odds for competing for a Super Bowl year in and year out. It is far harder to build a great team without one, and almost impossible to sustain it beyond a few seasons. A lot more has to go right. Those are the inconvenient facts.
Maybe. But there is a chicken or egg argument to be made. Is part of the reason that QBs are elite because they play for very good teams? Back to Foles, he wasn't good enough, until he got to play for the Eagles in their champ year. Then he played "elite" (according to ajr.) He soon went back to not good enough with the Bears. Or Russel Wilson, is he the elite QB from the SB days or is he the pedestrian one of last year.
Good QB play improves the fortunes of the team. Likewise good teams raise the level of output of their QBs.
Ron Johnson agreed. These endless 6000+ view and 10 page long debates on almost every thread at this point... where people call each other out as Haters or Homers (or Jones lovers)... and it's really not about that. Typically the people that argue against the crowd that say definitively that "Jones sucks" put more emphasis around the team aspect rather than just the QB. That's really what it comes down to. Of course I want Jones to succeed as a Giant and I root for him to kick ass but I have no personal interest in him specifically. And I am realistic enough to say that what I post are my OPINIONS, not facts... lol. If we are winning I am happy. If Schoen and Daboll decide to move on from DJ, which is likely at this point, I am rooting for the next QB up. It's really that simple.
Same here. I root for him because he's our guy. When he's gone I'll root for the next guy.
One other thing, a lot of people bring up the concept of being in QB hell. Which is, I think is when you sign a mediocre QB to a big money contract. But there's another level of hell, and that's drafting and missing over and over again, like the Jets have done. They hope they're out now with Wilson but that remains to be seen.
The Giants' plan may be to draft one next year but the hit rate is less than 50%. They need to be prepared to draft another 2 years later.
That Jones isn’t Mahomes or Herbert or Allen. The problem is he hasn’t shown the ability to play like them for even a quarter.
he was offensive player of the week last year against NO. Barkley, Golladay and Toney were healthy, he had time to throw .... and that's what happened.
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
I hate to nitpick, but just what does "set the bar as high as possible" mean - relative to him or the best of the NFL? Just what are you looking for? There is no way Jones is ever at Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, Jackson, Herbert, Burrow level. Jones is a mid-level, at best, QB.
He isn't going to be here next year, unless Schoen and Daboll do not like what they see in the NCAA and where the Giants pick in the draft. Tyrod was obviously signed because of Jones injury history and as that bridge QB. So it seems to me, they set up to move on from Jones already.
Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I am beginning to like Lamar Jackson in blue.
How about "great," instead of simply "good enough?" Why settle for anything less?
Kindly explain elite throwing skills because that can encompass many things: (or a combination)
Accurate and anticipation like Peyton
Cannon arm in Allen
Quick release like Rodgers/Marino
Strong and accurate - Brady
ad lib - Mahomes
In my view, I would categorize elite throwing as:
Quick release.
Accuracy from the pocket and on the move.
Sticking the ball in tight windows from the pocket.
Sticking the ball in tight windows on the move.
>>>>(Can also be called - throwing receivers open)
Making throws short, medium and long on the run (both directions).
Being able to apply velocity, touch, arc.
When needed:
Being able to make throws in inclement weather.
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
I hate to nitpick, but just what does "set the bar as high as possible" mean - relative to him or the best of the NFL? Just what are you looking for? There is no way Jones is ever at Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, Jackson, Herbert, Burrow level. Jones is a mid-level, at best, QB.
He isn't going to be here next year, unless Schoen and Daboll do not like what they see in the NCAA and where the Giants pick in the draft. Tyrod was obviously signed because of Jones injury history and as that bridge QB. So it seems to me, they set up to move on from Jones already.
Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I am beginning to like Lamar Jackson in blue.
How about "great," instead of simply "good enough?" Why settle for anything less?
There is an in between from good enough to great. Rodgers and Brady are great. Peyton Manning, John Elway and maybe Drew Brees.
Mahomes, Wilson and Jackson are very good. Herbert and Burrow also look like very good. Eli is likely in this category leaking into great.
Great is a lucky pick. Very good is probably findable.
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
I hate to nitpick, but just what does "set the bar as high as possible" mean - relative to him or the best of the NFL? Just what are you looking for? There is no way Jones is ever at Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, Jackson, Herbert, Burrow level. Jones is a mid-level, at best, QB.
He isn't going to be here next year, unless Schoen and Daboll do not like what they see in the NCAA and where the Giants pick in the draft. Tyrod was obviously signed because of Jones injury history and as that bridge QB. So it seems to me, they set up to move on from Jones already.
Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I am beginning to like Lamar Jackson in blue.
How about "great," instead of simply "good enough?" Why settle for anything less?
Suppose you can't find "Great?" Then what do you do?
Then why are Sills and James getting all of the reps over Golladay and Toney?
I'm not sure I understand the comparison. There's no question that you simply don't criticise the QB for all to see and hear, especially one that it's understood is under a critical eye already. Taking the blame on oneself is what good teammates do. There are very few cases in recent history where teammates would call out Eli Manning for his many, obvious on-field turnovers, and there was no time I can remember Eli would name players who are playing poorly - and he could have. It's just not done except in situations that are borderline dysfunctional.
Shepard including himself in saying the WRs have to do better is fully normal.
When Jones, in week one, was getting screamed at by Daboll in front of the camera for his bonehead INT, Daboll said to the media after the game he wasn't yelling at jones, he was talking on his headset. He wasn't *wearing* a headset.
Q: Looks like you had a fiery conversation with Daniel (Jones) after interception. What did you say to him and how did you like how he bounced back?
A: I wasn't talking to Daniel (Jones). I was talking on the headset to some of the coaches, but I just said what'd you see. He thought he could potentially back shoulder it. And I said, 'That's not what I saw, but you got the ball in your hands, so you're going to get the ball back at some point. Our defense is going to get it to you. Let's drive down and get it again.'
No one is going to criticize or provide an 'honest assessment' the QB publicly. It is understood that those things are behind the scenes.
Shepard would know more than anyone here about
It was a generic call out by Shep. He is a leader. He is onboard with Daboll requiring preparation to play. I am sorry but those 1st two series I still say the play calling was atrocious.
Jones deserved to be yelled at on that INT. But he is equal opportunity, and he is giving it to the WRs here in the clip. I love Daboll.
In comment 15824989 ColHowPepper said:
But Feliciano is just having too many negative plays and is usually overmatched. If he is injured, as someone above says, why are the offensive minded HC and OC starting him. He was always a stop-gap replacement for our 'Don't sleep on 'Pio' position.
It's clear Dabs and Kafka think right now that Ezeudu is floundering, but what the hey? Yes, they're trying to win, but all this talk of aiming at 4 - 0 start and how critical Dallas game is, my goodness, this season is about the roster we have now.
There are so many basic needs: OL at C (Jimmy G), WRs, ILBs, TE, Corners,etc., never mind how QB shakes out.
Let Ezeudu take his lumps and see if Josh/Ben/Glow can be better. It can't be too much worse than what we're seeing now. LOL, it might be to start.
If Jones can’t adjust threw a full offseason and this problem consists all year, he doesn’t have the make up to be a starting QB in this league. You have to adapt to survive.
Wrong. All wrong.
He doesn't need to be a Franchise QB. He needs to be more like a Jimmy G where he is "good enough."
As SY had said - he compares him to a young Tannehill. This is what DJ is - ie potentially that type. Tenn was stupid paying Tannehill that much he isn't a franchise QB.
But to set a bar that DJ must show he is a Franchise QB is wrong analysis.
Quote:
Is a cop out. So is the Judge coached him to be conservative one. If he’s supposed to be a franchise QB he’d adjust. How many backups do we see bounce from system to system each year and step in on a weeks notice and perform?
If Jones can’t adjust threw a full offseason and this problem consists all year, he doesn’t have the make up to be a starting QB in this league. You have to adapt to survive.
Wrong. All wrong.
He doesn't need to be a Franchise QB. He needs to be more like a Jimmy G where he is "good enough."
As SY had said - he compares him to a young Tannehill. This is what DJ is - ie potentially that type. Tenn was stupid paying Tannehill that much he isn't a franchise QB.
But to set a bar that DJ must show he is a Franchise QB is wrong analysis.
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
The Eagles had far from “just ok” QB play that year
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
I hate to nitpick, but just what does "set the bar as high as possible" mean - relative to him or the best of the NFL? Just what are you looking for? There is no way Jones is ever at Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, Jackson, Herbert, Burrow level. Jones is a mid-level, at best, QB.
He isn't going to be here next year, unless Schoen and Daboll do not like what they see in the NCAA and where the Giants pick in the draft. Tyrod was obviously signed because of Jones injury history and as that bridge QB. So it seems to me, they set up to move on from Jones already.
Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I am beginning to like Lamar Jackson in blue.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
Quote:
rather than a rule. Just not likely to happen.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
What are the other exceptions besides Trent Dilfer?
Quote:
rather than a rule. Just not likely to happen.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
I agree to an extent, the surrounding team matters quite a bit. I think history probably shows that quarterback needs to be a strength of your team, and that is putting it probably a bit too simply. A quarterback may be top 5 during the season, but maybe falls to top 10 during the post-season.
Overall as this relates to Jones, he does not represent a strength at this moment in time in my view.
Quote:
rather than a rule. Just not likely to happen.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Simple game theory.
Re: Jones. I think the lack of taking chances was burned into him the last two years by the previous regime that wanted to minimize turnovers. As Bill Parcells used to say if you don't throw a couple of interceptions you're not being aggressive enough.
Quote:
In comment 15826046 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
rather than a rule. Just not likely to happen.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
What are the other exceptions besides Trent Dilfer?
How about Brad Johnson. Also, I think Payton Manning with the Broncos was a shell of his former self. Definitely not top 10.
As I recall, almost no one considered Eli top ten prior to 07'. Now that I think about it many didn't give him that designation after 07.
Kaepernic and Garopalo came within an eyelash.
I'd also note that between Marino, Brees and Rodgers only two championships, in spite of the fact that they are 3 of the most prolific passers ever. Given their production you'd have to have expected them to win more.
"..... If it is a matter of him not seeing the action, that is a different discussion. But Jones CAN do it. He DID it in this game. Make tight throws in big moments that are considered “elite” throws. Will Daboll get this out of him? Keep an eye on it."
Quote:
In comment 15826046 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
rather than a rule. Just not likely to happen.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
Johnson and anyone from San Fran had elite defenses, which takes some time to build up. It also makes your margin for error razor thin.
Quote:
In comment 15826070 Ron Johnson said:
Quote:
In comment 15826046 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
rather than a rule. Just not likely to happen.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
This is a vague rebuttal. Look at the data. Look at the playoff teams every year. It's a list of the best QBs, with a couple of exceptions. Nobody claims there aren't exceptions, so your argument falls flat. Being in the best QBs group exponentially raises your odds for competing for a Super Bowl year in and year out. It is far harder to build a great team without one, and almost impossible to sustain it beyond a few seasons. A lot more has to go right. Those are the inconvenient facts.
Quote:
In comment 15826088 cosmicj said:
Quote:
In comment 15826070 Ron Johnson said:
Quote:
In comment 15826046 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
rather than a rule. Just not likely to happen.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
This is a vague rebuttal. Look at the data. Look at the playoff teams every year. It's a list of the best QBs, with a couple of exceptions. Nobody claims there aren't exceptions, so your argument falls flat. Being in the best QBs group exponentially raises your odds for competing for a Super Bowl year in and year out. It is far harder to build a great team without one, and almost impossible to sustain it beyond a few seasons. A lot more has to go right. Those are the inconvenient facts.
Maybe. But there is a chicken or egg argument to be made. Is part of the reason that QBs are elite because they play for very good teams? Back to Foles, he wasn't good enough, until he got to play for the Eagles in their champ year. Then he played "elite" (according to ajr.) He soon went back to not good enough with the Bears. Or Russel Wilson, is he the elite QB from the SB days or is he the pedestrian one of last year.
Good QB play improves the fortunes of the team. Likewise good teams raise the level of output of their QBs.
Quote:
In comment 15826186 Ron Johnson said:
Quote:
In comment 15826088 cosmicj said:
Quote:
In comment 15826070 Ron Johnson said:
Quote:
In comment 15826046 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
rather than a rule. Just not likely to happen.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
This is a vague rebuttal. Look at the data. Look at the playoff teams every year. It's a list of the best QBs, with a couple of exceptions. Nobody claims there aren't exceptions, so your argument falls flat. Being in the best QBs group exponentially raises your odds for competing for a Super Bowl year in and year out. It is far harder to build a great team without one, and almost impossible to sustain it beyond a few seasons. A lot more has to go right. Those are the inconvenient facts.
Maybe. But there is a chicken or egg argument to be made. Is part of the reason that QBs are elite because they play for very good teams? Back to Foles, he wasn't good enough, until he got to play for the Eagles in their champ year. Then he played "elite" (according to ajr.) He soon went back to not good enough with the Bears. Or Russel Wilson, is he the elite QB from the SB days or is he the pedestrian one of last year.
Good QB play improves the fortunes of the team. Likewise good teams raise the level of output of their QBs.
Ron Johnson agreed. These endless 6000+ view and 10 page long debates on almost every thread at this point... where people call each other out as Haters or Homers (or Jones lovers)... and it's really not about that. Typically the people that argue against the crowd that say definitively that "Jones sucks" put more emphasis around the team aspect rather than just the QB. That's really what it comes down to. Of course I want Jones to succeed as a Giant and I root for him to kick ass but I have no personal interest in him specifically. And I am realistic enough to say that what I post are my OPINIONS, not facts... lol. If we are winning I am happy. If Schoen and Daboll decide to move on from DJ, which is likely at this point, I am rooting for the next QB up. It's really that simple.
And it’s not according to me, Foles was elite in those playoffs. The numbers speak for itself. Foles also at least had flashes. He threw 27 TDS in 13 games in 2013
"..... If it is a matter of him not seeing the action, that is a different discussion. But Jones CAN do it. He DID it in this game. Make tight throws in big moments that are considered “elite” throws. Will Daboll get this out of him? Keep an eye on it."
I remember reading that paragraph from Sy and thinking, "What throws were elite?"
Because I watched the Chiefs-Chargers game last Thursday and actually saw real elite throws by Herbert and Mahomes. And have never been more convinced that Jones will NEVER be able to be a QB who is a force-multiplier because he doesn't have the throwing skills.
I don't think he suddenly sucks.
Remember how Accorsi emphasized how Eli stepped up in pressure situations. Is Jones like that? Answer: null set.
That's not the point. The point is Jones doesn't make enough elite throws.
Quote:
"..... If it is a matter of him not seeing the action, that is a different discussion. But Jones CAN do it. He DID it in this game. Make tight throws in big moments that are considered “elite” throws. Will Daboll get this out of him? Keep an eye on it."
..... And have never been more convinced that Jones will NEVER be able to be a QB who is a force-multiplier because he doesn't have the throwing skills.
Kindly explain elite throwing skills because that can encompass many things: (or a combination)
Accurate and anticipation like Peyton
Cannon arm in Allen
Quick release like Rodgers/Marino
Strong and accurate - Brady
ad lib - Mahomes
Quote:
In comment 15826212 Producer said:
Quote:
In comment 15826186 Ron Johnson said:
Quote:
In comment 15826088 cosmicj said:
Quote:
In comment 15826070 Ron Johnson said:
Quote:
In comment 15826046 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
rather than a rule. Just not likely to happen.
There are several exceptions. Maybe the rule is wrong. Maybe you don't need a top 10 QB to win. Maybe the overall quality of a team is just as important if not more than statistical output of the QB.
So let’s bring Tom Brady into this debate…
Brady was elite and got it done, no doubt. But even a close look at his career we can see that arguably his best year (07) he didn't get it done. While his rookie year he was little more than a game manager and he did win.
Anomalies maybe but, it points to the fact I think, that big passing stats guarantee nothing .... and you can win with a good team well managed.
This is a vague rebuttal. Look at the data. Look at the playoff teams every year. It's a list of the best QBs, with a couple of exceptions. Nobody claims there aren't exceptions, so your argument falls flat. Being in the best QBs group exponentially raises your odds for competing for a Super Bowl year in and year out. It is far harder to build a great team without one, and almost impossible to sustain it beyond a few seasons. A lot more has to go right. Those are the inconvenient facts.
Maybe. But there is a chicken or egg argument to be made. Is part of the reason that QBs are elite because they play for very good teams? Back to Foles, he wasn't good enough, until he got to play for the Eagles in their champ year. Then he played "elite" (according to ajr.) He soon went back to not good enough with the Bears. Or Russel Wilson, is he the elite QB from the SB days or is he the pedestrian one of last year.
Good QB play improves the fortunes of the team. Likewise good teams raise the level of output of their QBs.
Ron Johnson agreed. These endless 6000+ view and 10 page long debates on almost every thread at this point... where people call each other out as Haters or Homers (or Jones lovers)... and it's really not about that. Typically the people that argue against the crowd that say definitively that "Jones sucks" put more emphasis around the team aspect rather than just the QB. That's really what it comes down to. Of course I want Jones to succeed as a Giant and I root for him to kick ass but I have no personal interest in him specifically. And I am realistic enough to say that what I post are my OPINIONS, not facts... lol. If we are winning I am happy. If Schoen and Daboll decide to move on from DJ, which is likely at this point, I am rooting for the next QB up. It's really that simple.
Same here. I root for him because he's our guy. When he's gone I'll root for the next guy.
One other thing, a lot of people bring up the concept of being in QB hell. Which is, I think is when you sign a mediocre QB to a big money contract. But there's another level of hell, and that's drafting and missing over and over again, like the Jets have done. They hope they're out now with Wilson but that remains to be seen.
The Giants' plan may be to draft one next year but the hit rate is less than 50%. They need to be prepared to draft another 2 years later.
he was offensive player of the week last year against NO. Barkley, Golladay and Toney were healthy, he had time to throw .... and that's what happened.
He won the OPOW twice.
He has ability, we've seen it.
Quote:
Not helping the argument
He won the OPOW twice.
He has ability, we've seen it.
Trubisky won OPOW three times. Will you carry a torch for him? We've seen him be as good as Mahomes for a single week.
Quote:
In comment 15826400 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Not helping the argument
He won the OPOW twice.
He has ability, we've seen it.
Trubisky won OPOW three times. Will you carry a torch for him? We've seen him be as good as Mahomes for a single week.
I'm not carrying a torch, I'm presenting a different viewpoint. Everything I've said is correct AFAIK.
If he's done it before he can do it again.
Quote:
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
I hate to nitpick, but just what does "set the bar as high as possible" mean - relative to him or the best of the NFL? Just what are you looking for? There is no way Jones is ever at Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, Jackson, Herbert, Burrow level. Jones is a mid-level, at best, QB.
He isn't going to be here next year, unless Schoen and Daboll do not like what they see in the NCAA and where the Giants pick in the draft. Tyrod was obviously signed because of Jones injury history and as that bridge QB. So it seems to me, they set up to move on from Jones already.
Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I am beginning to like Lamar Jackson in blue.
How about "great," instead of simply "good enough?" Why settle for anything less?
Kindly explain elite throwing skills because that can encompass many things: (or a combination)
Accurate and anticipation like Peyton
Cannon arm in Allen
Quick release like Rodgers/Marino
Strong and accurate - Brady
ad lib - Mahomes
In my view, I would categorize elite throwing as:
Quick release.
Accuracy from the pocket and on the move.
Sticking the ball in tight windows from the pocket.
Sticking the ball in tight windows on the move.
>>>>(Can also be called - throwing receivers open)
Making throws short, medium and long on the run (both directions).
Being able to apply velocity, touch, arc.
When needed:
Being able to make throws in inclement weather.
Quote:
In comment 15825958 Klaatu said:
Quote:
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
I hate to nitpick, but just what does "set the bar as high as possible" mean - relative to him or the best of the NFL? Just what are you looking for? There is no way Jones is ever at Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, Jackson, Herbert, Burrow level. Jones is a mid-level, at best, QB.
He isn't going to be here next year, unless Schoen and Daboll do not like what they see in the NCAA and where the Giants pick in the draft. Tyrod was obviously signed because of Jones injury history and as that bridge QB. So it seems to me, they set up to move on from Jones already.
Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I am beginning to like Lamar Jackson in blue.
How about "great," instead of simply "good enough?" Why settle for anything less?
There is an in between from good enough to great. Rodgers and Brady are great. Peyton Manning, John Elway and maybe Drew Brees.
Mahomes, Wilson and Jackson are very good. Herbert and Burrow also look like very good. Eli is likely in this category leaking into great.
Great is a lucky pick. Very good is probably findable.
Quote:
In comment 15825958 Klaatu said:
Quote:
"Good enough" for what? To maybe win their division or get a wild card spot, but never go any further? Why settle for that?
I want the bar set as high as possible for Jones. If he can't get over it, then the Giants should move on and look for someone who can.
I hate to nitpick, but just what does "set the bar as high as possible" mean - relative to him or the best of the NFL? Just what are you looking for? There is no way Jones is ever at Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes, Jackson, Herbert, Burrow level. Jones is a mid-level, at best, QB.
He isn't going to be here next year, unless Schoen and Daboll do not like what they see in the NCAA and where the Giants pick in the draft. Tyrod was obviously signed because of Jones injury history and as that bridge QB. So it seems to me, they set up to move on from Jones already.
Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I am beginning to like Lamar Jackson in blue.
How about "great," instead of simply "good enough?" Why settle for anything less?
Suppose you can't find "Great?" Then what do you do?