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 )
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.