Say what you want about stats, but Jones left it all out there this year while Jackson refused to suit up in the playoffs. It's just classless for these fools to feel the need to broadcast their opinions on Twitter.
Why would an owner or GM want to give Jackson what he's demanding when he's often hurt and made a business decision to sit out? How is that relevant to what the Giants wanted to pay DJ?
Twitter needs to rot in hell - (
New Window )
The score to their game this past season.
The vitriol to Jones getting money (like all QB's do in the market) is odd. Not one peep about the rapist Watson getting one and screwing the market, or Murray getting one that's too high for his accolades. Jones eats the criticism and I don't get it. I may be wrong but it's likely a race thing. They're mad a black QB isn't getting his "share" despite being offered over $250M over 5 years and declining it.
I don't think this is true. They hate Dak Prescott too, look at all the drama in Dallas.
I didn’t want to pay over $35m but the money he got is what it is. Citing what beats said about his value is no different than citing a BBIers. Leading up to the deal we were told he wanted $50m, $45m, more guaranteed, wouldn’t sign a deal until the summer if tagged, that the 2 parties were far apart, no they were close, no a deal may not get done, etc. Picking and choosing what the beats say and using it to form an argument is pretty laughable.
The Giants don’t care what you think of Daniel Jones’ contract. Joe Schoen:
‘All we care about is inside these walls’
I don't believe it trumps theirs. It is the mob that thinks just because the Giants front office believes something and they do that all dissenting opinions are invalid. That the existence of my disagreement is wrong because of this. Before we see this actually play out.
Even the best franchises can be wrong in individual decisions and it is quite possible for a "less informed" party to analyze information and be right even when others have better data, more experience, etc.
The example of retail traders are quite relevant. On the whole they are going to do much worse than the pros. But the pros are wrong all the time, the best are wrong all the time. Hitting at a 55% clip in that tough problem space will make you rich. And I know plenty of retail traders that are just plain better than pros and have higher hit rates and better approaches.
People around here want to act like the Giants can't get things wrong because they are "pros" that other opinions are invalid because of that. And that is BS. ESPECIALLY because over the last 10 years the average person here has been right about way more than them. Ignoring that data is kind of insane actually.
You can't blame someone for thinking this is a ludacrous contract. He's getting $40M per year, 40 MILLION! He had 15 passing TD's last year. The Giants are paying him for what they hope he will do.
You have to understand why people think this is nuts, but for a player in the league to say something on social media is crazy. Hopefully it comes back to bite them kind of like how Ronde Barber did with Eli.
If Jones completely bombs in 2023, NYG will be in position to draft a QB in what is supposed to be a strong QB class. He’ll have a big cap hit in 2024, but they can insert a cheap QB and move off Jones the next year.
If Jones continues to produce at a similar level and the Giants win 9-10 games, I think Jones is the QB until an opportunity arises to improve the position. Similar to KC with Alex Smith.
If Jones takes another step and produces with strong passing numbers, then the deal will look fine down the line.
I think Schoen protected himself from all avenues. NYG made a large commitment to Jones, but it wasn’t a commitment where he’s the guy the next 5 years no matter what. So, yes I think they overpaid, but I also think they are protected.
It’s different than Seattle because they have a top 10 pick.
See the article in the WSJ? They were making fun of the deal and making a joke on inflation. That doesn't really happen on "fair deals"
Our own beat writer said we were willing to pay him more than the league.
This situation is not even helpful to Jones letting him get this much leverage in the negotiation.
You go on this errant Lamar Jackson rant. But Jackson won an MVP. Being a "good guy" shouldn't be the reason you get overpaid. This isn't a good situation
For instance if Jones doesn't take a step forward I'd rather franchise and get away from him next year instead of him having a massive cap hit. Then you take more of a flyer on a QB (or a few) in the draft next year, or even this year (one of the things that this commitment to Jones really prevents Vs. the tag where you can more easily justify this flyer) I don't expect the Giants to do this due to their general attitude around Jones but I hope to be surprised. IE Hurts with Wentz in place.
The Seattle situation is different but again, it is the job of the Giants GM to conduct a negotiation where benchmarks are strongly employed. If anything Geno had more of a reason to push for a bigger commitment because Seattle could draft a QB and didn't get it.
Jones took a step forward and absolutely deserves his shot to take another one. But he shouldn't have been paid as if he already took that step forward. That is the kind of move that could put us right back in the gutter in 2024 if not 2023 (if one of the oft-injured players we are betting on is absent for an extended period)
My blueprint would have been this:
Franchise DJ
Cut KG after June 1st
Let Saquon go and capitalize on the deep RB draft this year to bring in young talent
Frontload extensions for AT and Dex where you trade getting them rich one year earlier for a more reasonable contract.
That sets up your team much better going forward. It seems like we are gambling on the same core that had an easy schedule and good injury luck continuing in that direction instead of a longer term view and I think those are the same mistakes of the past when we bet on another Eli run. I really do not think we've seen nearly enough from Jones to bet on a run from him. Even a short term run.
I m wondering if the critics believe putting Hurts on the Giants that day, and Daniel on the Eagles would have altered the results
This. I was going to post this. The outcome of the game would not have changed if you flipped QBs..absolutely not. I'd take it a step further...take any QB, Mahomes, Allen, Burrow...Herbert..and stick them on those 2020/2021 Giants teams..and each would statistically have their worst seasons by a landslide. The Giants have had a historically bad roster, and for some reason Jone's is the lightning rod for many fans..which is normal..but you have to see the forest through the fucking trees at some point.
Quote:
And people are speaking out because they actually think it is ridiculous.
See the article in the WSJ? They were making fun of the deal and making a joke on inflation. That doesn't really happen on "fair deals"
Our own beat writer said we were willing to pay him more than the league.
This situation is not even helpful to Jones letting him get this much leverage in the negotiation.
You go on this errant Lamar Jackson rant. But Jackson won an MVP. Being a "good guy" shouldn't be the reason you get overpaid. This isn't a good situation
🤔 you might be a little confused. The structure of the deal is MORE than fair for both sides. Jackson won league MVP. But last year, Jackson was far from the most valuable player on his team, forget about the league. Talented and athletic? Sure. Jones was selfless. Confident. Athletic. Talented. Balled out with a sub-par set of skill players and earned the respect of both Daboll and Schoen who didn’t have any ties to him whatsoever. Kid is a leader. But yeah… an upper-middle class QB. contract is ridiculous! Puh-leeease! Down in front!
He should really shed the selfless thing when he fires his agent to get more from the Giants and gets vastly overpaid from his production on the field. Most here seem to think the deal is fair when the majority outside of this fan base don'.t Wonder why that is?
Quote:
In comment 16058696 Toth029 said:
I m wondering if the critics believe putting Hurts on the Giants that day, and Daniel on the Eagles would have altered the results
This. I was going to post this. The outcome of the game would not have changed if you flipped QBs..absolutely not. I'd take it a step further...take any QB, Mahomes, Allen, Burrow...Herbert..and stick them on those 2020/2021 Giants teams..and each would statistically have their worst seasons by a landslide. The Giants have had a historically bad roster, and for some reason Jone's is the lightning rod for many fans..which is normal..but you have to see the forest through the fucking trees at some point.
Oh jesus. The historically bad thing was ridiculous enough when it was applied to just regular bad Giants teams with quite frankly horrendous coaching. Now you want to look at a playoff roster and call it historically bad? We are just going to chalk this up to a herculean effort by a player that never raised the talent level on his team in the past? You have to be kidding me.
There are a lot of ways this could go.
Quote:
In comment 16058963 joeinpa said:
Quote:
In comment 16058696 Toth029 said:
I m wondering if the critics believe putting Hurts on the Giants that day, and Daniel on the Eagles would have altered the results
This. I was going to post this. The outcome of the game would not have changed if you flipped QBs..absolutely not. I'd take it a step further...take any QB, Mahomes, Allen, Burrow...Herbert..and stick them on those 2020/2021 Giants teams..and each would statistically have their worst seasons by a landslide. The Giants have had a historically bad roster, and for some reason Jone's is the lightning rod for many fans..which is normal..but you have to see the forest through the fucking trees at some point.
Oh jesus. The historically bad thing was ridiculous enough when it was applied to just regular bad Giants teams with quite frankly horrendous coaching. Now you want to look at a playoff roster and call it historically bad? We are just going to chalk this up to a herculean effort by a player that never raised the talent level on his team in the past? You have to be kidding me.
You sure do have a lot to say for a guy that said he was “done with this conversation now”…
I don't think anyone was laughing at any one of those deals. All of those guys deserved to get paid and got overpaid. The argument against Jones is that he didn't deserve to get paid.
In house scouting tells you everything.
They know the little details that make a "motherfucker" who he is. I say this to you as if we were in the bar.
.
Quote:
did you like Daks, Murrays, Wilson’s, or Watsons contract? Those were all laughed at too. If laughing is the benchmark then there you go, he’s just like everyone else not named Mahomes or Allen.
I don't think anyone was laughing at any one of those deals. All of those guys deserved to get paid and got overpaid. The argument against Jones is that he didn't deserve to get paid.
Ohh plenty were, myself included on some of them. Jones is either going to be really good or just ok. So it’ll either be a good deal or a kinda crappy one and can move on after half. It’s a fairly safeguarded deal.
Quote:
In comment 16059077 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
did you like Daks, Murrays, Wilson’s, or Watsons contract? Those were all laughed at too. If laughing is the benchmark then there you go, he’s just like everyone else not named Mahomes or Allen.
I don't think anyone was laughing at any one of those deals. All of those guys deserved to get paid and got overpaid. The argument against Jones is that he didn't deserve to get paid.
Ohh plenty were, myself included on some of them. Jones is either going to be really good or just ok. So it’ll either be a good deal or a kinda crappy one and can move on after half. It’s a fairly safeguarded deal.
I am ok with the Jones deal and I understand why we did it. Doesn't change the fact that he's paid on projection whereas all the guys you listed were paid on production. People thought it was crazy to give Watson a fully gtd contract, but nobody was laughing that they got Watson.
Quote:
In comment 16058696 Toth029 said:
I m wondering if the critics believe putting Hurts on the Giants that day, and Daniel on the Eagles would have altered the results
This. I was going to post this. The outcome of the game would not have changed if you flipped QBs..absolutely not. I'd take it a step further...take any QB, Mahomes, Allen, Burrow...Herbert..and stick them on those 2020/2021 Giants teams..and each would statistically have their worst seasons by a landslide. The Giants have had a historically bad roster, and for some reason Jone's is the lightning rod for many fans..which is normal..but you have to see the forest through the fucking trees at some point.
Please stop with the “historically bad roster” nonsense. It absolutely had glaring weak spots, but if you want to believe that Daniel a Jones was the ONLY reason they won 10 games, then o have a bridge or 2 to sell you.
dak was a running joke for the first 2 years of his negotiations w/ the cowboys when it leaked that he turned down 30m, and people thought that number was crazy. then he ended up extending for 40m per.
here's a 2014 article from a philly site linking to some other analyst article calling eli the most overpaid player in the nfl. in 2014.
https://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2014/7/1/5861038/eli-manning-most-overpaid-player-nfl-new-york-giants
spoiler alert, there's a super majority of people out there, writers/players/fans of other teams (and some supposed "fans of this team included), who just don't understand $ and consider anyone getting paid vast sums of it to be overpaid. players dont get paid what they deserve, they get paid what the market dictates.
Why did ‘nutty’ Dak Prescott turn down $30 million? - ( New Window )
There was no “he’s garbage compared to by boy Tua” or anything like that.
People need to pay attention to what’s going on in their own house and shut up about others.
I don't disagree with this point. I'm just arguing that they didn't get laughed at when signed.
This is what comes along with paying him what he could be vs what he's shown (understanding his supporting cast was dog shit)
#2 is the real reason. He wants a 100% guaranteed contract like the Browns gave Watson.
We know from free agent history in all US sports that there is always at least one dumb owner. But IMO no contract in any sport caused the anger and uniformity of resolve among other owners than Watson getting 230M fully guaranteed like a MLB or NBA contract.
The NFL owners have been successfully working at weakening/braking the NFLPA since 1987 to ensure that fully guaranteed doesn't happen and then the owner of the Browns Jimmy Haslam broke the seal. Karma for the other NFL owners for adding another criminal scum bag to the club.
IMO there is 100% no doubt collusion among the NFL owners going on about not offering any other fully guaranteed contracts. Maybe someone who understands CBAs and labor laws can explain if Jackson has any chance to prove collusion. My guess is no. So I think either he comes off that demand or he will wind up playing on the tag for the Ravens.
I know who Tyreek Hill is at least.
I think he has a lot to prove and he’s a winner. Also has less miles on his body than all of the others. Can’t stand him or the situation, but he can very easily earn that contract assuming there’s no more legal issues.
Quote:
out of them. What the hell is his motivation for getting beat up 17+ games a year and lift all them weights? More spa money?
I think he has a lot to prove and he’s a winner. Also has less miles on his body than all of the others. Can’t stand him or the situation, but he can very easily earn that contract assuming there’s no more legal issues.
Less miles and a fantastic massage therapy program to work all those muscles
His injuries, his effort in rehabbing those injuries, and him flat out choosing not to play has most likely really hurt him with how the Ravens view him. By all reports he's a good guy, but those 3 factors alone would worry me in giving him a big contract let alone a guaranteed one.
The Ravens are also one of the smartest teams in the league and their actions are pretty telling.
See the article in the WSJ? They were making fun of the deal and making a joke on inflation. That doesn't really happen on "fair deals"
Our own beat writer said we were willing to pay him more than the league.
This situation is not even helpful to Jones letting him get this much leverage in the negotiation.
You go on this errant Lamar Jackson rant. But Jackson won an MVP. Being a "good guy" shouldn't be the reason you get overpaid. This isn't a good situation
Awwww poor baby. The guy you didn't like, Jones, got signed to a big contract that he is getting overpaid (I don't like it either). It's one thing to complain about the contract but you're going after a Giants poster(s) calling it a "rant?"
You diminish everything you've said about Jones and your accusatory rant comment just turns you into a clown.
#2 is the real reason. He wants a 100% guaranteed contract like the Browns gave Watson.
And to add to #2, teams would have to give up 2 firsts just for the "privilege" to give him that guaranteed contract.
I thought this article had some interesting takes and insights on the situation.
Lying, tampering and compromise: NFL agents sound off on Lamar Jackson mess
Quote:
Slayton responded to Brisker with all but a simple image.
The score to their game this past season.
The vitriol to Jones getting money (like all QB's do in the market) is odd. Not one peep about the rapist Watson getting one and screwing the market, or Murray getting one that's too high for his accolades. Jones eats the criticism and I don't get it. I may be wrong but it's likely a race thing. They're mad a black QB isn't getting his "share" despite being offered over $250M over 5 years and declining it.
Many in the media, and here, suffer from Jones derangement syndrome.
The manner in which they go after this kid at every turn is fascinating. The coach of the year has hitched his wagon to a quarterback he did not draft.
The coach of the year had every opportunity to move on, yet he did not. In fact he endorsed a contract well beyond what Jones’ critics could have ever imagined, and it is not sitting well with them.
Back in September a big part of the quarterback debate was, this new FO did not believe in him, that debate has been settled
But no problem, we will now change the debate to “The FO were wrong “
It s kind of similar to the Jones will never win a play off game. Daniel with a superior team shredded the Vikings, but to his critics the only play off game that mattered was the Eagle game, a game where the Giants were overwhelmed
I m wondering if the critics believe putting Hurts on the Giants that day, and Daniel on the Eagles would have altered the results
The debate on Jones continues, but truth is the only people that really matter have spoken
IMO you are missing the point. You have to recognize the type of poster you are - which is a ton positive. I used to have arguments with you with Gettleman. I felt right away DG should have been in rebuild mode - you were extremely skeptical that I expressed that I knew they would suck in his 1st year. Because you look at things in a very positive light.
Well, what happens to the posters that want to share their "negative" opinion/outlook? Posters such as yourself will be in denial to some degree that someone could have predicted accurately the future outcome that you don’t necessarily share. But those of us that make negative posts are members of this site too.
SO yeah, what’s going to happen is just what you say above. Some of us think the Giants reached a bit too far with Jones. IS that so bad? And if we run out to be right, posters such as yourself will be skeptical of us posters that would have been right.
***However, I agree with you and anyone else that thinks in the future we can win. We just have to do a much better job of nailing our draft picks and Free Agents. I'm not counting the Giants out but imo this made the job tougher getting giants to be that eventual Super Bowl contender. But if they nail the draft picks . . .
Quote:
Slayton responded to Brisker with all but a simple image.
The score to their game this past season.
The vitriol to Jones getting money (like all QB's do in the market) is odd. Not one peep about the rapist Watson getting one and screwing the market, or Murray getting one that's too high for his accolades. Jones eats the criticism and I don't get it. I may be wrong but it's likely a race thing. They're mad a black QB isn't getting his "share" despite being offered over $250M over 5 years and declining it.
I don't think this is true. They hate Dak Prescott too, look at all the drama in Dallas.
So why is Brisker making a big fuss about Jones getting paid while (Lamar) the "MVP" in his statement is not getting his big pay day. He didn't just call Jones trash. He said why's this guy getting this money while Lamar isn't his.
I m not saying other black QB's don't get criticized - they do, at least Dak does. Murray doesn't but should. Watson got nothing from these guys and got more money than any other player in league history. What's he won? They may not come right out and say it's a race thing, but decrying Jones for getting his money and his agents agreeing to a deal just because Lamar hasn't got paid yet (which is HIS fault) is foolish and quite truthfully, ignorant.
Quote:
In comment 16058696 Toth029 said:
Quote:
Slayton responded to Brisker with all but a simple image.
The score to their game this past season.
The vitriol to Jones getting money (like all QB's do in the market) is odd. Not one peep about the rapist Watson getting one and screwing the market, or Murray getting one that's too high for his accolades. Jones eats the criticism and I don't get it. I may be wrong but it's likely a race thing. They're mad a black QB isn't getting his "share" despite being offered over $250M over 5 years and declining it.
Many in the media, and here, suffer from Jones derangement syndrome.
The manner in which they go after this kid at every turn is fascinating. The coach of the year has hitched his wagon to a quarterback he did not draft.
The coach of the year had every opportunity to move on, yet he did not. In fact he endorsed a contract well beyond what Jones’ critics could have ever imagined, and it is not sitting well with them.
Back in September a big part of the quarterback debate was, this new FO did not believe in him, that debate has been settled
But no problem, we will now change the debate to “The FO were wrong “
It s kind of similar to the Jones will never win a play off game. Daniel with a superior team shredded the Vikings, but to his critics the only play off game that mattered was the Eagle game, a game where the Giants were overwhelmed
I m wondering if the critics believe putting Hurts on the Giants that day, and Daniel on the Eagles would have altered the results
The debate on Jones continues, but truth is the only people that really matter have spoken
IMO you are missing the point. You have to recognize the type of poster you are - which is a ton positive. I used to have arguments with you with Gettleman. I felt right away DG should have been in rebuild mode - you were extremely skeptical that I expressed that I knew they would suck in his 1st year. Because you look at things in a very positive light.
Well, what happens to the posters that want to share their "negative" opinion/outlook? Posters such as yourself will be in denial to some degree that someone could have predicted accurately the future outcome that you don’t necessarily share. But those of us that make negative posts are members of this site too.
SO yeah, what’s going to happen is just what you say above. Some of us think the Giants reached a bit too far with Jones. IS that so bad? And if we run out to be right, posters such as yourself will be skeptical of us posters that would have been right.
***However, I agree with you and anyone else that thinks in the future we can win. We just have to do a much better job of nailing our draft picks and Free Agents. I'm not counting the Giants out but imo this made the job tougher getting giants to be that eventual Super Bowl contender. But if they nail the draft picks . . .
I do tend to be more positive, although I have the capacity to be critical as well.
But I engage with people of opposite opinions all the time, I don’t think I ever indicated they don’t belong here. I just debate their reasoning.
Quote:
In comment 16058963 joeinpa said:
Quote:
In comment 16058696 Toth029 said:
Quote:
Slayton responded to Brisker with all but a simple image.
The score to their game this past season.
The vitriol to Jones getting money (like all QB's do in the market) is odd. Not one peep about the rapist Watson getting one and screwing the market, or Murray getting one that's too high for his accolades. Jones eats the criticism and I don't get it. I may be wrong but it's likely a race thing. They're mad a black QB isn't getting his "share" despite being offered over $250M over 5 years and declining it.
Many in the media, and here, suffer from Jones derangement syndrome.
The manner in which they go after this kid at every turn is fascinating. The coach of the year has hitched his wagon to a quarterback he did not draft.
The coach of the year had every opportunity to move on, yet he did not. In fact he endorsed a contract well beyond what Jones’ critics could have ever imagined, and it is not sitting well with them.
Back in September a big part of the quarterback debate was, this new FO did not believe in him, that debate has been settled
But no problem, we will now change the debate to “The FO were wrong “
It s kind of similar to the Jones will never win a play off game. Daniel with a superior team shredded the Vikings, but to his critics the only play off game that mattered was the Eagle game, a game where the Giants were overwhelmed
I m wondering if the critics believe putting Hurts on the Giants that day, and Daniel on the Eagles would have altered the results
The debate on Jones continues, but truth is the only people that really matter have spoken
IMO you are missing the point. You have to recognize the type of poster you are - which is a ton positive. I used to have arguments with you with Gettleman. I felt right away DG should have been in rebuild mode - you were extremely skeptical that I expressed that I knew they would suck in his 1st year. Because you look at things in a very positive light.
Well, what happens to the posters that want to share their "negative" opinion/outlook? Posters such as yourself will be in denial to some degree that someone could have predicted accurately the future outcome that you don’t necessarily share. But those of us that make negative posts are members of this site too.
SO yeah, what’s going to happen is just what you say above. Some of us think the Giants reached a bit too far with Jones. IS that so bad? And if we run out to be right, posters such as yourself will be skeptical of us posters that would have been right.
***However, I agree with you and anyone else that thinks in the future we can win. We just have to do a much better job of nailing our draft picks and Free Agents. I'm not counting the Giants out but imo this made the job tougher getting giants to be that eventual Super Bowl contender. But if they nail the draft picks . . .
I do tend to be more positive, although I have the capacity to be critical as well.
But I engage with people of opposite opinions all the time, I don’t think I ever indicated they don’t belong here. I just debate their reasoning.
Sure you do engage classy all posters. I don't think you are critical much of the team though, in fact I think it rare. My point is not that you look to shut other posters down; it's just that you seemed to create this verbiage "Jones derangement syndrome," as if those that criticize Jones and/or Mgmt which are not so happy about the deal are nuts. Similar when we argued about Gettleman. You seemed shocked/skeptical how I could have thought the Giants weren't going to be any good.
All I'm saying is - that it's not a "syndrome" to believe that the Giants overpaid and be unhappy a bit about this deal. It's a valid point which can be debated. Its not nuts to be skeptical. You make it seem like that it is.
No one has stopped him. He’s posted more than anyone on this topic. Look at his profile, it’s nothing but DJ threads.
Quote:
In comment 16059252 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16058963 joeinpa said:
Quote:
In comment 16058696 Toth029 said:
Quote:
Slayton responded to Brisker with all but a simple image.
The score to their game this past season.
The vitriol to Jones getting money (like all QB's do in the market) is odd. Not one peep about the rapist Watson getting one and screwing the market, or Murray getting one that's too high for his accolades. Jones eats the criticism and I don't get it. I may be wrong but it's likely a race thing. They're mad a black QB isn't getting his "share" despite being offered over $250M over 5 years and declining it.
Many in the media, and here, suffer from Jones derangement syndrome.
The manner in which they go after this kid at every turn is fascinating. The coach of the year has hitched his wagon to a quarterback he did not draft.
The coach of the year had every opportunity to move on, yet he did not. In fact he endorsed a contract well beyond what Jones’ critics could have ever imagined, and it is not sitting well with them.
Back in September a big part of the quarterback debate was, this new FO did not believe in him, that debate has been settled
But no problem, we will now change the debate to “The FO were wrong “
It s kind of similar to the Jones will never win a play off game. Daniel with a superior team shredded the Vikings, but to his critics the only play off game that mattered was the Eagle game, a game where the Giants were overwhelmed
I m wondering if the critics believe putting Hurts on the Giants that day, and Daniel on the Eagles would have altered the results
The debate on Jones continues, but truth is the only people that really matter have spoken
IMO you are missing the point. You have to recognize the type of poster you are - which is a ton positive. I used to have arguments with you with Gettleman. I felt right away DG should have been in rebuild mode - you were extremely skeptical that I expressed that I knew they would suck in his 1st year. Because you look at things in a very positive light.
Well, what happens to the posters that want to share their "negative" opinion/outlook? Posters such as yourself will be in denial to some degree that someone could have predicted accurately the future outcome that you don’t necessarily share. But those of us that make negative posts are members of this site too.
SO yeah, what’s going to happen is just what you say above. Some of us think the Giants reached a bit too far with Jones. IS that so bad? And if we run out to be right, posters such as yourself will be skeptical of us posters that would have been right.
***However, I agree with you and anyone else that thinks in the future we can win. We just have to do a much better job of nailing our draft picks and Free Agents. I'm not counting the Giants out but imo this made the job tougher getting giants to be that eventual Super Bowl contender. But if they nail the draft picks . . .
I do tend to be more positive, although I have the capacity to be critical as well.
But I engage with people of opposite opinions all the time, I don’t think I ever indicated they don’t belong here. I just debate their reasoning.
Sure you do engage classy all posters. I don't think you are critical much of the team though, in fact I think it rare. My point is not that you look to shut other posters down; it's just that you seemed to create this verbiage "Jones derangement syndrome," as if those that criticize Jones and/or Mgmt which are not so happy about the deal are nuts. Similar when we argued about Gettleman. You seemed shocked/skeptical how I could have thought the Giants weren't going to be any good.
All I'm saying is - that it's not a "syndrome" to believe that the Giants overpaid and be unhappy a bit about this deal. It's a valid point which can be debated. Its not nuts to be skeptical. You make it seem like that it is.
The derangement comment more about the media
Quote:
In comment 16059328 joeinpa said:
Quote:
In comment 16059252 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16058963 joeinpa said:
Quote:
In comment 16058696 Toth029 said:
Quote:
Slayton responded to Brisker with all but a simple image.
The score to their game this past season.
The vitriol to Jones getting money (like all QB's do in the market) is odd. Not one peep about the rapist Watson getting one and screwing the market, or Murray getting one that's too high for his accolades. Jones eats the criticism and I don't get it. I may be wrong but it's likely a race thing. They're mad a black QB isn't getting his "share" despite being offered over $250M over 5 years and declining it.
Many in the media, and here, suffer from Jones derangement syndrome.
The manner in which they go after this kid at every turn is fascinating. The coach of the year has hitched his wagon to a quarterback he did not draft.
The coach of the year had every opportunity to move on, yet he did not. In fact he endorsed a contract well beyond what Jones’ critics could have ever imagined, and it is not sitting well with them.
Back in September a big part of the quarterback debate was, this new FO did not believe in him, that debate has been settled
But no problem, we will now change the debate to “The FO were wrong “
It s kind of similar to the Jones will never win a play off game. Daniel with a superior team shredded the Vikings, but to his critics the only play off game that mattered was the Eagle game, a game where the Giants were overwhelmed
I m wondering if the critics believe putting Hurts on the Giants that day, and Daniel on the Eagles would have altered the results
The debate on Jones continues, but truth is the only people that really matter have spoken
IMO you are missing the point. You have to recognize the type of poster you are - which is a ton positive. I used to have arguments with you with Gettleman. I felt right away DG should have been in rebuild mode - you were extremely skeptical that I expressed that I knew they would suck in his 1st year. Because you look at things in a very positive light.
Well, what happens to the posters that want to share their "negative" opinion/outlook? Posters such as yourself will be in denial to some degree that someone could have predicted accurately the future outcome that you don’t necessarily share. But those of us that make negative posts are members of this site too.
SO yeah, what’s going to happen is just what you say above. Some of us think the Giants reached a bit too far with Jones. IS that so bad? And if we run out to be right, posters such as yourself will be skeptical of us posters that would have been right.
***However, I agree with you and anyone else that thinks in the future we can win. We just have to do a much better job of nailing our draft picks and Free Agents. I'm not counting the Giants out but imo this made the job tougher getting giants to be that eventual Super Bowl contender. But if they nail the draft picks . . .
I do tend to be more positive, although I have the capacity to be critical as well.
But I engage with people of opposite opinions all the time, I don’t think I ever indicated they don’t belong here. I just debate their reasoning.
Sure you do engage classy all posters. I don't think you are critical much of the team though, in fact I think it rare. My point is not that you look to shut other posters down; it's just that you seemed to create this verbiage "Jones derangement syndrome," as if those that criticize Jones and/or Mgmt which are not so happy about the deal are nuts. Similar when we argued about Gettleman. You seemed shocked/skeptical how I could have thought the Giants weren't going to be any good.
All I'm saying is - that it's not a "syndrome" to believe that the Giants overpaid and be unhappy a bit about this deal. It's a valid point which can be debated. Its not nuts to be skeptical. You make it seem like that it is.
The derangement comment more about the media
You were very right about DG, just took me longer to see it
Here were Schoen's choices:
1. Tag Jones, lose Barkley and have limited cap space to improve the team.
2. Tag Barkley and let Jones test free agency (running the risk of having to start over with a new QB)
3. Pay Jones the contract he received, thus allowing the team to tag Jones and have the cash they need THIS year to improve the team.
I think it's clear why Schoen rightfully chose Option #3.
Well said
Quote:
When people pile in on NBD. It is a fair take here on the contract based on data and analytics. Important we let such thoughts be shared.
No one has stopped him. He’s posted more than anyone on this topic. Look at his profile, it’s nothing but DJ threads.
Don't be mean to NBD please.
Quote:
In comment 16059333 English Alaister said:
Quote:
When people pile in on NBD. It is a fair take here on the contract based on data and analytics. Important we let such thoughts be shared.
No one has stopped him. He’s posted more than anyone on this topic. Look at his profile, it’s nothing but DJ threads.
Don't be mean to NBD please.
NBD is a big boy. He doesn’t need you to scold posters for being “mean” to him. He brings a lot of it on himself.
Wait. Who’s NBD?
lol, being a bass player I frequent a bass players' website where "NBD" is a common phrase - means "new bass day."
He called something rich above and then foisted this nugget of shit out there:
Ignoring facts probably isn't the issue at hand, INVENTING them is, especially when it is done by a self-proclaimed world renown expert in analytics.
Inventing facts like Jones has a personality problem and the wrong psychological makeup to be a leader based on how he picked a chair at a press conference (and yes folks, he's actually said that and stood by it). Inventing facts like saying his body language is one that doesn't have swagger, so he'll never command a team.
The psychological disorder seems to lie with NBD - the guy who responds about his "CEO" and business experience if anyone challenges him. He can't take the heat without having to proclaim himself as successful and an expert in his field, and yet psychoanalyzes others??
He was wrong about Jones and his way of coping with it is to barrage the board with posts telling everyone else they have no clue what the hell they are talking about and shouldn't be exciting to have Jones in the fold. As he would say - that's "rich".
Quote:
You are doubling down on your belief, when it is clearly in direct contrast to the opinions of those in charge of evaluating and determining the direction of the franchise.
The Giants don’t care what you think of Daniel Jones’ contract. Joe Schoen:
‘All we care about is inside these walls’
I don't believe it trumps theirs. It is the mob that thinks just because the Giants front office believes something and they do that all dissenting opinions are invalid. That the existence of my disagreement is wrong because of this. Before we see this actually play out.
People around here want to act like the Giants can't get things wrong because they are "pros" that other opinions are invalid because of that. And that is BS. ESPECIALLY because over the last 10 years the average person here has been right about way more than them. Ignoring that data is kind of insane actually.
First.
You have nothing more than wild speculation that Mara is meddling with THIS staff. It might be true. I can't waste my time on that.
It is the foundation of most of your criticisms.
I will not speak about previous staffs. This staff exceeded expectations with a roster that was widely considered one of the league's worst.
FACT.
For me, they deserve the benefit of the doubt until they do not.
If we are dealing with a competent head coach, no one knows more about a player. He reviews the film, interacts with him on the daily. How he handles adversity. How he handles success. How he navigates relationships. How he prepares, ect. Much more than that. Not worth my time to list these things as they should be obvious.
The fact that you think your data is more relevant forces me to conclude that I have overestimated your intelligence based on your previous posts here.
I have been wrong before.