That was a performance. He was so incredibly good and accurate. He deserved all the criticism he got in first half as he was awful and not seeing the field well at all. But a franchise QB has that second half and saves the season. He willed us to victory.
Two of Jones INTs this year are off Barkley's hands.
In comment 16210276 widmerseyebrow said:
But if you want Josh Allen or other wizardry that's not going to happen - he's got limitations.
I think the bothers me most is when he's not getting any help and he missed a couple throws it's quickly pointed out.
This is not Madden.
Case in point: the long throw to Slayton today IMO should have been caught despite a tad underthrown because Slayton waited for the ball to land in his arms rather than be aggressive and high point the ball.
But if you want Josh Allen or other wizardry that's not going to happen - he's got limitations.
I think the bothers me most is when he's not getting any help and he missed a couple throws it's quickly pointed out.
This is not Madden.
Case in point: the long throw to Slayton today IMO should have been caught despite a tad underthrown because Slayton waited for the ball to land in his arms rather than be aggressive and high point the ball.
Slayton was running down the field with 3 steps on the guy, what is he supposed to do different? Jones had a great second half, but that play wasn’t on Slayton.
Time for Gray to step up...
Dr Doom, everybody
Quote:
and at a pretty high level.
But if you want Josh Allen or other wizardry that's not going to happen - he's got limitations.
I think the bothers me most is when he's not getting any help and he missed a couple throws it's quickly pointed out.
This is not Madden.
Case in point: the long throw to Slayton today IMO should have been caught despite a tad underthrown because Slayton waited for the ball to land in his arms rather than be aggressive and high point the ball.
Slayton was running down the field with 3 steps on the guy, what is he supposed to do different? Jones had a great second half, but that play wasn’t on Slayton.
not on slayton but a lot of wr's make that catch.
No, they are not
But if you want Josh Allen or other wizardry that's not going to happen - he's got limitations.
I think the bothers me most is when he's not getting any help and he missed a couple throws it's quickly pointed out.
This is not Madden.
Case in point: the long throw to Slayton today IMO should have been caught despite a tad underthrown because Slayton waited for the ball to land in his arms rather than be aggressive and high point the ball.
A better WR can also draw a pass interference call on a underthrow like that by not putting his hands up till the last 2nd and trick the DB into crashing into him with his head pointed down the field
Quote:
In comment 16210290 BillKo said:
Quote:
and at a pretty high level.
But if you want Josh Allen or other wizardry that's not going to happen - he's got limitations.
I think the bothers me most is when he's not getting any help and he missed a couple throws it's quickly pointed out.
This is not Madden.
Case in point: the long throw to Slayton today IMO should have been caught despite a tad underthrown because Slayton waited for the ball to land in his arms rather than be aggressive and high point the ball.
Slayton was running down the field with 3 steps on the guy, what is he supposed to do different? Jones had a great second half, but that play wasn’t on Slayton.
not on slayton but a lot of wr's make that catch.
Immediately thought of Reuben Randle who NEVER went up to fight for a ball except on slants.
It's not on Slayton...but when he feels the ball underthrown and he knows there's going to be a contested ball - fight for it.
Quote:
Then they're done.
Dr Doom, everybody
Huh??
Is he significanly hurt?
Seccondly, I was expection 7/8 wins and nottice all nut jobs on here crticizing Dabol and the coachign staff overall.
Thanks for the good laugh.
Maybe the Patrick Ewing Theory is a possibility with Saquon
Lawrence was terrible in the red zone. Jax should have won that game.
I wonder what his critics have to say about the wonder boys (Fields, Herbert and Burrows) who are all 0-2.
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Lawrence was terrible in the red zone. Jax should have won that game.
Someone beter than Zay Jones makeas that catch.
Why? The key to the season and the future isn't Barkley. It's Jones.
We can overcome Barkley. If Jones goes down, then the season is really over.
In other words, the QB is exceedingly more crucial than the RB.
Quote:
Then they're done.
Maybe the Patrick Ewing Theory is a possibility with Saquon
???
Quote:
Then they're done.
Maybe the Patrick Ewing Theory is a possibility with Saquon
The Knicks got worse without Ewing?
Quote:
In comment 16210304 giantstock said:
Quote:
Then they're done.
Maybe the Patrick Ewing Theory is a possibility with Saquon
???
The Patrick Ewing Theory: When Patrick Ewing got hurt, the Knicks played better without him in many instances (1999 Knicks made the NBA Finals after Ewing got hurt)
Sounds like you did not watch the Jacksonville game.
Quote:
In comment 16210304 giantstock said:
Quote:
Then they're done.
Maybe the Patrick Ewing Theory is a possibility with Saquon
The Knicks got worse without Ewing?
Never, but we won a Super Bowl the year after our best RB retired basically prime
Slayton was running down the field with 3 steps on the guy, what is he supposed to do different? Jones had a great second half, but that play wasn’t on Slayton.
It was underthrown. However, a smart WR easily draws the PI on that play. The CB had his back to the ball. All Slayton needed to do was stop and raise his hands. The CB would have plowed into him and the chains would have moved.
Quote:
In comment 16210343 BillT said:
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Lawrence was terrible in the red zone. Jax should have won that game.
Someone beter than Zay Jones makeas that catch.
You realize he failed 4 times in the RZ. He was terrible.
The Patrick Ewing Theory: When Patrick Ewing got hurt, the Knicks played better without him in many instances (1999 Knicks made the NBA Finals after Ewing got hurt)
It is true about Ewing. He also would celebrate a "monster game" even when the team lost.
Quote:
Slayton was running down the field with 3 steps on the guy, what is he supposed to do different? Jones had a great second half, but that play wasn’t on Slayton.
It was underthrown. However, a smart WR easily draws the PI on that play. The CB had his back to the ball. All Slayton needed to do was stop and raise his hands. The CB would have plowed into him and the chains would have moved.
This isn’t madden.
Slayton turned toward the ball and the receiver was turning back toward the QB when the ball was on its way down.
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Sounds like you did not watch the Jacksonville game.
I did watch. It was not a good game for Lawrence. He missed several throws, especially when they they had 1st goal (I think it was the first half, but not certain).
It's never a good day for a QB when your offense scores 9 points...
Quote:
In comment 16210350 dpinzow said:
Quote:
In comment 16210304 giantstock said:
Quote:
Then they're done.
Maybe the Patrick Ewing Theory is a possibility with Saquon
The Knicks got worse without Ewing?
Never, but we won a Super Bowl the year after our best RB retired basically prime
Shockey also got hurt late in the 2007 season and IIRC never played another game for us
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Sounds like you did not watch the Jacksonville game.
Didn’t watch him go 0-4 in the red zone. Yeah. I watched that.
They need Barkley back asap.
Quote:
In comment 16210309 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Slayton was running down the field with 3 steps on the guy, what is he supposed to do different? Jones had a great second half, but that play wasn’t on Slayton.
It was underthrown. However, a smart WR easily draws the PI on that play. The CB had his back to the ball. All Slayton needed to do was stop and raise his hands. The CB would have plowed into him and the chains would have moved.
This isn’t madden.
Slayton turned toward the ball and the receiver was turning back toward the QB when the ball was on its way down.
Slayton..like always...turned his head super early while tracking the ball.
Regardless, I do think Slayton made an amazing catch on the play he was ruled out of bounds...I think he got his shin down. Might be the best catch he's ever made.
Quote:
Then they're done.
Why? The key to the season and the future isn't Barkley. It's Jones.
We can overcome Barkley. If Jones goes down, then the season is really over.
In other words, the QB is exceedingly more crucial than the RB.
You're confusing "future" vs winning in 2023. Noo-- we can't "overcome Barkley" in 2023.
And as a result, posters such as you who have very little respect for the running game will then crush Jones.
All that play action will be done if SB is hurt. Case in point late in 2nd half the beaty play the faked handoff to SB going left and Dj went immediately right to Waller. The announcer responded "hwo do you defend that?"
Then later SB's hug run when the line id stuffed he spins and goes for something liek 12 yards. All those threats would be done - done done. And the Defense is going to paly for Jones to run.
What we have to realize is that lats year was a lot of fun even though the had no chance to win it all. A mostly run team could still be fun even if they aren't; going to win a tile. Vs a team that tries to be a pass team and juts doesn't have the OL, the Receivers, the RB - the Defense - to be that good. Joens is not Mahomes. The Giants NEED some running. And Matt Breida is not an "answer." He's a "weakness" vs quality teams.
Quote:
In comment 16210343 BillT said:
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Sounds like you did not watch the Jacksonville game.
Didn’t watch him go 0-4 in the red zone. Yeah. I watched that.
3 of those were on the money throws that the receiver couldn’t get down on, that Hyatt or Slayton would have came down with today. But not going to argue something like this when there’s a victory to dissect
Slayton..like always...turned his head super early while tracking the ball.
Regardless, I do think Slayton made an amazing catch on the play he was ruled out of bounds...I think he got his shin down. Might be the best catch he's ever made.
He had three steps on the corner, he didn’t turn his head too early. But not worth nitpicking
Quote:
In comment 16210352 section125 said:
Quote:
In comment 16210343 BillT said:
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Lawrence was terrible in the red zone. Jax should have won that game.
Someone beter than Zay Jones makeas that catch.
You realize he failed 4 times in the RZ. He was terrible.
Someone beter than Zay Jones makeas that catch.
They need Barkley back asap.
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0. The goal/hope is for Jones to produce without SB. Otherwise, Schoen made a mistake.
I just wish the first part of this test wasn't against San Fran.
DJ can easily throw a bomb down the field accurately.
So why are we trying to thread the needle when our wide receivers are four steps ahead of the cornerbacks by the first 20 yards?
So once we figured that out basically DJ could get a ton of yardage and Barkley had to be released cuz he was double teamed in a few cases until Hyatt and Slayton started burning the deep field
Quote:
Slayton..like always...turned his head super early while tracking the ball.
Regardless, I do think Slayton made an amazing catch on the play he was ruled out of bounds...I think he got his shin down. Might be the best catch he's ever made.
He had three steps on the corner, he didn’t turn his head too early. But not worth nitpicking
Fair enough...but underthrown balls like that are caught all the time. Santana Moss made a career out of it.
DJ can easily throw a bomb down the field accurately.
So why are we trying to thread the needle when our wide receivers are four steps ahead of the cornerbacks by the first 20 yards?
So once we figured that out basically DJ could get a ton of yardage and Barkley had to be released cuz he was double teamed in a few cases until Hyatt and Slayton started burning the deep field
Because it isn’t madden and you can’t just run four 9 routes every play?
DJ can easily throw a bomb down the field accurately.
So why are we trying to thread the needle when our wide receivers are four steps ahead of the cornerbacks by the first 20 yards?
So once we figured that out basically DJ could get a ton of yardage and Barkley had to be released cuz he was double teamed in a few cases until Hyatt and Slayton started burning the deep field
Offensive line must hold their blocks to let the intermediate and deep plays develop. That happened in the 2nd half today and is just as important as Jones finding the receivers
Campbell, Hyatt and Waller in the middle, with Hyatt and Slayton over the top. Can be a lethal combo when actually done right. Obviously Barkley but now he’s hurt.
We get Robinson back soon too.
Quote:
In comment 16210358 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16210352 section125 said:
Quote:
In comment 16210343 BillT said:
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Lawrence was terrible in the red zone. Jax should have won that game.
Someone beter than Zay Jones makeas that catch.
You realize he failed 4 times in the RZ. He was terrible.
Someone beter than Zay Jones makeas that catch.
It was 4 drives - but you clearly saw a different game. Lawrence threw the ball out the back of the EZ several times. One drive he could have ran in...but yeah it was the WRs fault.
Quote:
In comment 16210350 dpinzow said:
Quote:
In comment 16210304 giantstock said:
Quote:
Then they're done.
Maybe the Patrick Ewing Theory is a possibility with Saquon
???
The Patrick Ewing Theory: When Patrick Ewing got hurt, the Knicks played better without him in many instances (1999 Knicks made the NBA Finals after Ewing got hurt)
After Ewing was over-the-hill. That is the season when the Knicks got better. Barkley is not over-teh-hill.
Quote:
In comment 16210378 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
In comment 16210343 BillT said:
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Sounds like you did not watch the Jacksonville game.
Didn’t watch him go 0-4 in the red zone. Yeah. I watched that.
3 of those were on the money throws that the receiver couldn’t get down on, that Hyatt or Slayton would have came down with today. But not going to argue something like this when there’s a victory to dissect
Oh c'mon now - Lawrence was pretty mediocre in the game. He missed a ton of throws. There were at least three time where he tapped himself on the chest (ie, "my bad"). What the fuck game were you watching??
Again - they scored NINE fucking points. Against a defense that is not that good.
Quote:
In comment 16210385 section125 said:
Quote:
In comment 16210358 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16210352 section125 said:
Quote:
In comment 16210343 BillT said:
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Lawrence was terrible in the red zone. Jax should have won that game.
Someone beter than Zay Jones makeas that catch.
You realize he failed 4 times in the RZ. He was terrible.
Someone beter than Zay Jones makeas that catch.
It was 4 drives - but you clearly saw a different game. Lawrence threw the ball out the back of the EZ several times. One drive he could have ran in...but yeah it was the WRs fault.
Apparently Englsih isn't one of your top subjects.
You said 0-4. I identified in 1 instance I reference 1 WR. I'll repeat I reference`ONE WR and ONE play in end zone that would have been caught by someone better.
Then you stil hold onto 0-4 and you say WR's while I reference ONE WR and reference ONE TD that should have been caught.
English comprehension is what? Your 3rd or 4th langauge?
Quote:
In comment 16210417 BillT said:
Quote:
In comment 16210378 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
In comment 16210343 BillT said:
Quote:
Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close.
Sounds like you did not watch the Jacksonville game.
Didn’t watch him go 0-4 in the red zone. Yeah. I watched that.
3 of those were on the money throws that the receiver couldn’t get down on, that Hyatt or Slayton would have came down with today. But not going to argue something like this when there’s a victory to dissect
Oh c'mon now - Lawrence was pretty mediocre in the game. He missed a ton of throws. There were at least three time where he tapped himself on the chest (ie, "my bad"). What the fuck game were you watching??
Again - they scored NINE fucking points. Against a defense that is not that good.
They cored 9 poins against the DEFENDING CHAMP. They also had at least one WR that should have had a tD pass.
And yes sometimes QB's don't make perfect passes. LAwrence is NOT Mahomes. But he is certainly better than Jones. That's the crux.
put the best 3 receivers on the field and let him build chemistry, just like down the stretch last year.
i think those 3 best are hodgins and slayton, with hyatt instead of james. and with waller also on the field, that is a tough unit to defend if they can get in sync like they were in the 2nd half. they will put up numbers as long as the protection holds up.
Quote:
But there isn’t a benefit to him being out. Teams are going to play the option with Jones differently with Gary Brightwell. If teams aren’t worried about the running back part of the option, it’s going to be tough for the offense to repeat what it did today.
They need Barkley back asap.
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0. The goal/hope is for Jones to produce without SB. Otherwise, Schoen made a mistake.
I just wish the first part of this test wasn't against San Fran.
absurd take. Outrageous. It's also possible Tannehhill was better. But the circunstances are entirely different. To compare the 2 is silly.
You mean you can't tell the difference between for example the OL's and the Defenses of the 2 when Tannehhil did well vs what Jones has?
Unless you are laughably thinking this past game vs "The "Mighty Cardinals" is indicative of the many other opponents the Giants will be playing this year?
put the best 3 receivers on the field and let him build chemistry, just like down the stretch last year.
i think those 3 best are hodgins and slayton, with hyatt instead of james. and with waller also on the field, that is a tough unit to defend if they can get in sync like they were in the 2nd half. they will put up numbers as long as the protection holds up.
Let's be honest here. The Giants aren't as bad as the 1st 6 quarters.
And they are not as great as the last 2 quarters.
We have to realize that the Cards are a bad team. The Giants WR crew along with a subpar OL and possibly a hurt Barkley- those WR';s aren't that good to make this team any good.
+1. Rifdley should have had one. And prior Jones or soemone better could have had.
Quote:
both good and bad. he doesn't have allen's arm but he's also not as reckless with the ball.
put the best 3 receivers on the field and let him build chemistry, just like down the stretch last year.
i think those 3 best are hodgins and slayton, with hyatt instead of james. and with waller also on the field, that is a tough unit to defend if they can get in sync like they were in the 2nd half. they will put up numbers as long as the protection holds up.
Let's be honest here. The Giants aren't as bad as the 1st 6 quarters.
And they are not as great as the last 2 quarters.
We have to realize that the Cards are a bad team. The Giants WR crew along with a subpar OL and possibly a hurt Barkley- those WR';s aren't that good to make this team any good.
Now if Sb is healthy. Maybe miss SF then come back?
Then yes Giants can be good.
You are the epitome of jints central...Over 60, typing furiously with one finger on your keyboard, with your dial up internet.
"Eh we'll never win without our running back, you young whippersnappers. Why, I remember when we won the championship in 1956 running the Wing T! This forward pass is ruining the game.."
Just do us all a favor and don't log onto the internet ever again. Take your pills and stare out the window, fuckface
And people are allowed to be concerned about what they saw in the fourth quarter, and temper their expectations because it was the Cardinals.
Neither take is worthy of personal insults .
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0. The goal/hope is for Jones to produce without SB. Otherwise, Schoen made a mistake.
I just wish the first part of this test wasn't against San Fran.
absurd take. Outrageous. It's also possible Tannehhill was better. But the circunstances are entirely different. To compare the 2 is silly.
You mean you can't tell the difference between for example the OL's and the Defenses of the 2 when Tannehhil did well vs what Jones has?
Unless you are laughably thinking this past game vs "The "Mighty Cardinals" is indicative of the many other opponents the Giants will be playing this year?
The point is - which I thought was obvious - is that we don't want Jones to be the type of QB who needs a big time RB to optimize winning. Which is Tannehill because the Titans are built around Henry.
We want Jones to be the centerpiece and prove he doesn't need the bell cow RB.
Quote:
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0. The goal/hope is for Jones to produce without SB. Otherwise, Schoen made a mistake.
I just wish the first part of this test wasn't against San Fran.
absurd take. Outrageous. It's also possible Tannehhill was better. But the circunstances are entirely different. To compare the 2 is silly.
You mean you can't tell the difference between for example the OL's and the Defenses of the 2 when Tannehhil did well vs what Jones has?
Unless you are laughably thinking this past game vs "The "Mighty Cardinals" is indicative of the many other opponents the Giants will be playing this year?
The point is - which I thought was obvious - is that we don't want Jones to be the type of QB who needs a big time RB to optimize winning. Which is Tannehill because the Titans are built around Henry.
We want Jones to be the centerpiece and prove he doesn't need the bell cow RB.
barkley had 63 yards on 3.7 ypc today.
where he made a difference was passing game, especially the td. he was 6/7 for 29 yards rec and the td. long of 10. doesnt have a 20 yard play yet this year.
since the houston game last year theyve won w/o barkley being a bellcow rb today included. against minny he ran 9 times for 53 yards while catching 5/6 for 59.
without a #1 wr thats barkleys best usage imo. the bellcow type gameplans that deflate the ball take everyone else somewhat out of rhythym. it makes things easier on defenses as opposed to the up tempo spread attack.
Quote:
In comment 16210576 giantstock said:
Quote:
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0. The goal/hope is for Jones to produce without SB. Otherwise, Schoen made a mistake.
I just wish the first part of this test wasn't against San Fran.
absurd take. Outrageous. It's also possible Tannehhill was better. But the circunstances are entirely different. To compare the 2 is silly.
You mean you can't tell the difference between for example the OL's and the Defenses of the 2 when Tannehhil did well vs what Jones has?
Unless you are laughably thinking this past game vs "The "Mighty Cardinals" is indicative of the many other opponents the Giants will be playing this year?
The point is - which I thought was obvious - is that we don't want Jones to be the type of QB who needs a big time RB to optimize winning. Which is Tannehill because the Titans are built around Henry.
We want Jones to be the centerpiece and prove he doesn't need the bell cow RB.
barkley had 63 yards on 3.7 ypc today.
where he made a difference was passing game, especially the td. he was 6/7 for 29 yards rec and the td. long of 10. doesnt have a 20 yard play yet this year.
since the houston game last year theyve won w/o barkley being a bellcow rb today included. against minny he ran 9 times for 53 yards while catching 5/6 for 59.
without a #1 wr thats barkleys best usage imo. the bellcow type gameplans that deflate the ball take everyone else somewhat out of rhythym. it makes things easier on defenses as opposed to the up tempo spread attack.
But the thing is the defenses key on Barkley. A lot of our offense starts with a fake to Barkley which freezes the LBs because they are told to make sure they stop him. The announcers even pointed this out, specifically opening up space for Waller
the 2nd half today looked a lot like the version of the offense we were all hoping to see, which was basically the wild card game spread tempo but adding waller and hyatt in place of the less explosive players from last year.
since the houston game last year theyve won w/o barkley being a bellcow rb today included. against minny he ran 9 times for 53 yards while catching 5/6 for 59.
without a #1 wr thats barkleys best usage imo. the bellcow type gameplans that deflate the ball take everyone else somewhat out of rhythym. it makes things easier on defenses as opposed to the up tempo spread attack.
To be fair, they’re 4-6-1 since the Houston game, none of those against the defenses they’ll need to beat to be a serious contender. The current version of the Giants needs a healthy Barkley.
That's a new dimension from last year.
Quote:
since the houston game last year theyve won w/o barkley being a bellcow rb today included. against minny he ran 9 times for 53 yards while catching 5/6 for 59.
without a #1 wr thats barkleys best usage imo. the bellcow type gameplans that deflate the ball take everyone else somewhat out of rhythym. it makes things easier on defenses as opposed to the up tempo spread attack.
To be fair, they’re 4-6-1 since the Houston game, none of those against the defenses they’ll need to beat to be a serious contender. The current version of the Giants needs a healthy Barkley.
5 of those losses are to philly/dallas though right? im not excusing them, that's clearly a level they arent on yet - but almost all of those games have been defined by the OL being unable to hold up and in the philly games also getting gashed for 200+ yards on the ground.
barkley is their most talented player, so yes they need him, like any team needs their most talented players. my point isn't that barkley is insignificant it's that it is mistating things to act like the offense runs through it's "bellcow" rb when he hasn't even hit 20 carries in 11 games and counting.
Quote:
But there isn’t a benefit to him being out. Teams are going to play the option with Jones differently with Gary Brightwell. If teams aren’t worried about the running back part of the option, it’s going to be tough for the offense to repeat what it did today.
They need Barkley back asap.
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0.
As usual, you spout complete bullshit.
If he can’t “get it done” without SB, he’s not “tannehill 2.0”. Tannehill can’t get it done WITH Henry!
Then again, how do you figure your boy Herbert, who is 0-2 WITH eckler, Williams and Keenan?
🤷♂️
Quote:
In comment 16210418 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
But there isn’t a benefit to him being out. Teams are going to play the option with Jones differently with Gary Brightwell. If teams aren’t worried about the running back part of the option, it’s going to be tough for the offense to repeat what it did today.
They need Barkley back asap.
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0.
As usual, you spout complete bullshit.
If he can’t “get it done” without SB, he’s not “tannehill 2.0”. Tannehill can’t get it done WITH Henry!
Then again, how do you figure your boy Herbert, who is 0-2 WITH eckler, Williams and Keenan?
🤷♂️
Or are you giving Herbert the usual excuse of a poor OL and Defense?
Because it’s not like Jones has those same excuses. Oh, wait…
Quote:
In comment 16210418 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
But there isn’t a benefit to him being out. Teams are going to play the option with Jones differently with Gary Brightwell. If teams aren’t worried about the running back part of the option, it’s going to be tough for the offense to repeat what it did today.
They need Barkley back asap.
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0.
As usual, you spout complete bullshit.
If he can’t “get it done” without SB, he’s not “tannehill 2.0”. Tannehill can’t get it done WITH Henry!
Then again, how do you figure your boy Herbert, who is 0-2 WITH eckler, Williams and Keenan?
🤷♂️
I’ve got an idea - let’s give Hebert the same “test”; he should have the giants OL, defense and no SB (and no Williams and Allen, of course). How would he do?
We know how this will go - You’ll trip all over yourself giving him the excuses that Jones never gets because you’re narrative gets in the way…
Do the same for your boys Lawrence and Jackson.
Hell even Mahomes would struggle with that scenario (no, I’m not saying Jones is anything close to him, just making the point that your “test” would be tough for any QB in the league). And your boy Allen has shown signs of hero ball, and that’s with guys like Diggs. He looked good today, but that was vs LV, who’s only slightly better than AZ.
🤷♂️
You are the epitome of jints central...Over 60, typing furiously with one finger on your keyboard, with your dial up internet.
"Eh we'll never win without our running back, you young whippersnappers. Why, I remember when we won the championship in 1956 running the Wing T! This forward pass is ruining the game.."
Just do us all a favor and don't log onto the internet ever again. Take your pills and stare out the window, fuckface
Yeah right my typos are English comprehnsion. Idiot.
So he is among the highest paid RB's in all of football and yet when the Giants don't have him, it means nothing? -- Idiot.
And let me alos add - I don't take advise from idiots like you. Ohh did I make another typo? I guess though I spelled idiot right when referrign to you?
You're too sturpid to understand that for some teams running backs are very important.
Quote:
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0. The goal/hope is for Jones to produce without SB. Otherwise, Schoen made a mistake.
I just wish the first part of this test wasn't against San Fran.
absurd take. Outrageous. It's also possible Tannehhill was better. But the circunstances are entirely different. To compare the 2 is silly.
You mean you can't tell the difference between for example the OL's and the Defenses of the 2 when Tannehhil did well vs what Jones has?
Unless you are laughably thinking this past game vs "The "Mighty Cardinals" is indicative of the many other opponents the Giants will be playing this year?
The point is - which I thought was obvious - is that we don't want Jones to be the type of QB who needs a big time RB to optimize winning. Which is Tannehill because the Titans are built around Henry.
We want Jones to be the centerpiece and prove he doesn't need the bell cow RB.
You can't change the point of my post- (that SB being hurt for a significant amount of time would ensure that the Giants are going nowhere) -just becuase it doesn't fit your narrative.
There is a reason why the Giants gave Barkjley all that money for a RB vs let's say an OL or pass rusher etc. Because they NEED him THIS YEAR.
Like it or not the Giants NEED Barkley this year.
The OL is NOT good enough.
Other than the Tight End, the Receivers are NOT good enough.
Without Barkley the RB's are NOT good enough.
And if you think what the Defense has shown so far IS GOOD ENOUGH then I have a very large bridge to sell you.
This is TOO MUCH to overcome (if it was just 1 oer 2 things but it's multiple). While the Receivers are better than last year, they are not championship caliber. If the Defense was something you could lock onto -- but it ISN"T either.
So he is among the highest paid RB's in all of football and yet when the Giants don't have him, it means nothing? -- Idiot.
And let me alos (also) add - I don't take advise (advice) from idiots like you. Ohh did I make another typo? I guess though I spelled idiot right when referrign (referring) to you?
You're too sturpid (stupid) to understand that for some teams running backs are very important.
Quote:
In comment 16210763 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
since the houston game last year theyve won w/o barkley being a bellcow rb today included. against minny he ran 9 times for 53 yards while catching 5/6 for 59.
without a #1 wr thats barkleys best usage imo. the bellcow type gameplans that deflate the ball take everyone else somewhat out of rhythym. it makes things easier on defenses as opposed to the up tempo spread attack.
To be fair, they’re 4-6-1 since the Houston game, none of those against the defenses they’ll need to beat to be a serious contender. The current version of the Giants needs a healthy Barkley.
5 of those losses are to philly/dallas though right? im not excusing them, that's clearly a level they arent on yet - but almost all of those games have been defined by the OL being unable to hold up and in the philly games also getting gashed for 200+ yards on the ground.
barkley is their most talented player, so yes they need him, like any team needs their most talented players. my point isn't that barkley is insignificant it's that it is mistating things to act like the offense runs through it's "bellcow" rb when he hasn't even hit 20 carries in 11 games and counting.
Using the phraase "bellcow" though IS misleading in the case you refer to. Anytime the Giants do a play-action pass, they are nearly all the time faking to SB.
Don't you think that opens things up a bit more for Jones and the Receviers? So whats the point getting so wrapped up in wordsmith regarding 'BELLCOW?"
Quote:
Yeah right my typos are English comprehnsion (comprehension). Idiot.
So he is among the highest paid RB's in all of football and yet when the Giants don't have him, it means nothing? -- Idiot.
And let me alos (also) add - I don't take advise (advice) from idiots like you. Ohh did I make another typo? I guess though I spelled idiot right when referrign (referring) to you?
You're too sturpid (stupid) to understand that for some teams running backs are very important.
Thanks. Feel better now that I don't use spellcheck? I guess this means that my point that SB is needed goes down the drain because I don't use spellcheck?
Quote:
In comment 16210418 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
But there isn’t a benefit to him being out. Teams are going to play the option with Jones differently with Gary Brightwell. If teams aren’t worried about the running back part of the option, it’s going to be tough for the offense to repeat what it did today.
They need Barkley back asap.
Well, this is the test. If Jones can't get it done without SB, he's Tannehill, 2.0.
As usual, you spout complete bullshit.
If he can’t “get it done” without SB, he’s not “tannehill 2.0”. Tannehill can’t get it done WITH Henry!
Then again, how do you figure your boy Herbert, who is 0-2 WITH eckler, Williams and Keenan?
🤷♂️
Herbert had Ekeler this week?
More proof that the pom-pom posse doesn’t pay attention to the other 31 teams in the NFL.
Quote:
In comment 16210924 giantstock said:
Quote:
Yeah right my typos are English comprehnsion (comprehension). Idiot.
So he is among the highest paid RB's in all of football and yet when the Giants don't have him, it means nothing? -- Idiot.
And let me alos (also) add - I don't take advise (advice) from idiots like you. Ohh did I make another typo? I guess though I spelled idiot right when referrign (referring) to you?
You're too sturpid (stupid) to understand that for some teams running backs are very important.
Thanks. Feel better now that I don't use spellcheck? I guess this means that my point that SB is needed goes down the drain because I don't use spellcheck?
Yes, it absolutely does weaken your argument when you fail to communicate it properly. And it says a lot about you that you lack any concern for those who have to decipher your alphabet soup posts.
I like how Hodgins answered this question. It says a lot, we really have a good one in Jones. DG got a lot wrong, but he certainly got that right.
His calmness and pose. Just his confidence in himself and you only act like that when you're confident. You can't be posed and sit there leading a team if you're not confident in yourself. He's confident because he prepares his ass off and throughout the whole week he's one of the hardest workers. He sits there and makes sure the wide receivers are on the same page as him. When we get that look— like on that touchdown he looked at me before to be ready. He knew it was coming. That's just how prepared he is.
I like how Hodgins answered this question. It says a lot, we really have a good one in Jones. DG got a lot wrong, but he certainly got that right.
Quote:
On QB Daniel Jones's ability to lead the comeback today:
His calmness and pose. Just his confidence in himself and you only act like that when you're confident. You can't be posed and sit there leading a team if you're not confident in yourself. He's confident because he prepares his ass off and throughout the whole week he's one of the hardest workers. He sits there and makes sure the wide receivers are on the same page as him. When we get that look— like on that touchdown he looked at me before to be ready. He knew it was coming. That's just how prepared he is.
For the record, the argument has never been as simple as whether Jones is confident or not. It's always been whether Jones's performance starts to unravel when his confidence gets rattled. And I think that assessment gained some validity in the first six quarters of the season.
IMO, coming out of the half and connecting on a deep shot to open the second half was an important moment that seemed to restore DJ's confidence in the second half, and he was a completely different QB as a result.
Quote:
Once and for all puts to bed the silly notion some people hang onto that Jones is not mentally tough or confident. That was one of the better halves you will see from a QB under what had to be tremendous pressure after week one and that first half.
I like how Hodgins answered this question. It says a lot, we really have a good one in Jones. DG got a lot wrong, but he certainly got that right.
Quote:
On QB Daniel Jones's ability to lead the comeback today:
His calmness and pose. Just his confidence in himself and you only act like that when you're confident. You can't be posed and sit there leading a team if you're not confident in yourself. He's confident because he prepares his ass off and throughout the whole week he's one of the hardest workers. He sits there and makes sure the wide receivers are on the same page as him. When we get that look— like on that touchdown he looked at me before to be ready. He knew it was coming. That's just how prepared he is.
For the record, the argument has never been as simple as whether Jones is confident or not. It's always been whether Jones's performance starts to unravel when his confidence gets rattled. And I think that assessment gained some validity in the first six quarters of the season.
IMO, coming out of the half and connecting on a deep shot to open the second half was an important moment that seemed to restore DJ's confidence in the second half, and he was a completely different QB as a result.
Oddly some people here have made an incredible big deal about his confidence.
For the record, the argument has never been as simple as whether Jones is confident or not. It's always been whether Jones's performance starts to unravel when his confidence gets rattled. And I think that assessment gained some validity in the first six quarters of the season.
IMO, coming out of the half and connecting on a deep shot to open the second half was an important moment that seemed to restore DJ's confidence in the second half, and he was a completely different QB as a result.
Agreed on this. If that Hyatt shot fell incomplete the boat race might have continued. That play seemed to ignite the team on both sides of the ball
Quote:
In comment 16210929 guitarguybs12 said:
Quote:
In comment 16210924 giantstock said:
Quote:
Yeah right my typos are English comprehnsion (comprehension). Idiot.
So he is among the highest paid RB's in all of football and yet when the Giants don't have him, it means nothing? -- Idiot.
And let me alos (also) add - I don't take advise (advice) from idiots like you. Ohh did I make another typo? I guess though I spelled idiot right when referrign (referring) to you?
You're too sturpid (stupid) to understand that for some teams running backs are very important.
Thanks. Feel better now that I don't use spellcheck? I guess this means that my point that SB is needed goes down the drain because I don't use spellcheck?
Yes, it absolutely does weaken your argument when you fail to communicate it properly. And it says a lot about you that you lack any concern for those who have to decipher your alphabet soup posts.
I'm such a terrible person.
And with all the insults that get thrown about -- the horror of me making typos – that makes things “inconvenient” is so terrible after another insult gets tossed about.
Hey if my argument gets weakened- so what? You're either going to agree or not anyway.
I have had instances when I write long novel posts only for it to get lost into cyberspace in which I have had to retype. Easier to just not go through it other than minimal review.
I'll try to do better. But in terms of Barkley, how can anyone try to downplay how his injury would more-than-likely hurt this team if he is out for a significant amount of time?
There is no question if you want to win titles, passing is much more important but that doesn’t mean for a particular team running isn’t the better option. – And winning a playoff game last year was a lot better than a lot of teams who have had much better passing but haven’t either gotten into the playoffs or don’t win any playoff game.
Ofc there might be some fans that don’t give a shit unless you win a championship. Those fans are infuriating.
Quote:
In comment 16210931 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16210929 guitarguybs12 said:
Quote:
In comment 16210924 giantstock said:
Quote:
Yeah right my typos are English comprehnsion (comprehension). Idiot.
So he is among the highest paid RB's in all of football and yet when the Giants don't have him, it means nothing? -- Idiot.
And let me alos (also) add - I don't take advise (advice) from idiots like you. Ohh did I make another typo? I guess though I spelled idiot right when referrign (referring) to you?
You're too sturpid (stupid) to understand that for some teams running backs are very important.
Thanks. Feel better now that I don't use spellcheck? I guess this means that my point that SB is needed goes down the drain because I don't use spellcheck?
Yes, it absolutely does weaken your argument when you fail to communicate it properly. And it says a lot about you that you lack any concern for those who have to decipher your alphabet soup posts.
I'm such a terrible person.
And with all the insults that get thrown about -- the horror of me making typos – that makes things “inconvenient” is so terrible after another insult gets tossed about.
Hey if my argument gets weakened- so what? You're either going to agree or not anyway.
I have had instances when I write long novel posts only for it to get lost into cyberspace in which I have had to retype. Easier to just not go through it other than minimal review.
I'll try to do better. But in terms of Barkley, how can anyone try to downplay how his injury would more-than-likely hurt this team if he is out for a significant amount of time?
There is no question if you want to win titles, passing is much more important but that doesn’t mean for a particular team running isn’t the better option. – And winning a playoff game last year was a lot better than a lot of teams who have had much better passing but haven’t either gotten into the playoffs or don’t win any playoff game.
Ofc there might be some fans that don’t give a shit unless you win a championship. Those fans are infuriating.
It seemed to me that you were the one to insult someone first by sarcastically asking Section125 if English is their 3rd or 4th language, which brings me to my next point. Just because you don't consider something you say to be insulting does not mean that is not insulting to the other party. Maybe Section was not insulted by that, but you don't seem to consider that it matters what the receiving party thinks during your conversation.
Quote:
In comment 16211073 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16210931 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16210929 guitarguybs12 said:
Quote:
In comment 16210924 giantstock said:
Quote:
Yeah right my typos are English comprehnsion (comprehension). Idiot.
So he is among the highest paid RB's in all of football and yet when the Giants don't have him, it means nothing? -- Idiot.
And let me alos (also) add - I don't take advise (advice) from idiots like you. Ohh did I make another typo? I guess though I spelled idiot right when referrign (referring) to you?
You're too sturpid (stupid) to understand that for some teams running backs are very important.
Thanks. Feel better now that I don't use spellcheck? I guess this means that my point that SB is needed goes down the drain because I don't use spellcheck?
Yes, it absolutely does weaken your argument when you fail to communicate it properly. And it says a lot about you that you lack any concern for those who have to decipher your alphabet soup posts.
I'm such a terrible person.
And with all the insults that get thrown about -- the horror of me making typos – that makes things “inconvenient” is so terrible after another insult gets tossed about.
Hey if my argument gets weakened- so what? You're either going to agree or not anyway.
I have had instances when I write long novel posts only for it to get lost into cyberspace in which I have had to retype. Easier to just not go through it other than minimal review.
I'll try to do better. But in terms of Barkley, how can anyone try to downplay how his injury would more-than-likely hurt this team if he is out for a significant amount of time?
There is no question if you want to win titles, passing is much more important but that doesn’t mean for a particular team running isn’t the better option. – And winning a playoff game last year was a lot better than a lot of teams who have had much better passing but haven’t either gotten into the playoffs or don’t win any playoff game.
Ofc there might be some fans that don’t give a shit unless you win a championship. Those fans are infuriating.
It seemed to me that you were the one to insult someone first by sarcastically asking Section125 if English is their 3rd or 4th language, which brings me to my next point. Just because you don't consider something you say to be insulting does not mean that is not insulting to the other party. Maybe Section was not insulted by that, but you don't seem to consider that it matters what the receiving party thinks during your conversation.
SO the post here section123 is not insulting me with his sarcasm? See below So, as you say "something you say to be insulting does not mean that is not insulting to the other party."
Your post shouldn't apply to only me, right? So, I was insulted first, right?
****** "It was 4 drives - but you clearly saw a different game. Lawrence threw the ball out the back of the EZ several times. One drive he could have ran in...but yeah it was the WRs fault."
Quote:
In comment 16211100 steve in ky said:
Quote:
Once and for all puts to bed the silly notion some people hang onto that Jones is not mentally tough or confident. That was one of the better halves you will see from a QB under what had to be tremendous pressure after week one and that first half.
I like how Hodgins answered this question. It says a lot, we really have a good one in Jones. DG got a lot wrong, but he certainly got that right.
Quote:
On QB Daniel Jones's ability to lead the comeback today:
His calmness and pose. Just his confidence in himself and you only act like that when you're confident. You can't be posed and sit there leading a team if you're not confident in yourself. He's confident because he prepares his ass off and throughout the whole week he's one of the hardest workers. He sits there and makes sure the wide receivers are on the same page as him. When we get that look— like on that touchdown he looked at me before to be ready. He knew it was coming. That's just how prepared he is.
For the record, the argument has never been as simple as whether Jones is confident or not. It's always been whether Jones's performance starts to unravel when his confidence gets rattled. And I think that assessment gained some validity in the first six quarters of the season.
IMO, coming out of the half and connecting on a deep shot to open the second half was an important moment that seemed to restore DJ's confidence in the second half, and he was a completely different QB as a result.
Oddly some people here have made an incredible big deal about his confidence.
They have made a big deal about how his performance suffers when his confidence wanes.
That's not the same thing as DJ not having confidence in the first place. It's that he appears to lose confidence sometimes when things around him go poorly.
You couldn't see a difference in DJ's general disposition (as well as his level of play) between the 2nd quarter yesterday and the 3rd quarter?
DJ's confidence, along with most of the team, it seemed, was seriously fading in the first half of the game yesterday. It was like the shellacking they took in week 1 carried over to the first half of yesterday's game. Then they came out to start the second half and immediately took a shot downfield and connected. The confidence of the entire unit improved from there. And DJ seems to play better when he's got that swagger, which is how I viewed the second half yesterday.
So I don't see those comments about DJ's confidence actually being statements about DJ lacking confidence. It's about how his performance fluctuates as a function of his confidence, which exists on a spectrum (as it does for all of us).
I'm not sure if that's too nuanced a take or if I'm just applying my POV to the way that I've read those posts. Hopefully what I'm trying to say here makes sense.
I was talked down to, wasn't I? And after you make your mini comment about how one can be insulted even if you don't think so-- now all of a sudden this no longer applies?
So, he creates the arrogance to talk down to me and yet I'm only supposed to "evenly' reply back by talking near exactly back down to him?
And if you want to talk about degrees of insult - reading comprehension and 3rd 4th language—how bad is that bad if initially you were talked down to? I just want to add you are the one that started our conversation about who was insulted. I’m just responding I was talked down to at first. I realize you don’t give a shit that I get talked down to but I do. Which is why your point about insults also applies to being talked down to, right?
It seems to me that you want to hold me to 1 standard, and him to another. I didn’t start talking down to him. He started it with me. But that’s not your concern, right?
To further this, he started it by talking down to me and yet I can't up the ante a bit? What I said to him was so harmful in which he completely ignored my point and reiterated 0-4 as he talked down to me?
Nice try.
We're not in a law classs.
And as I told you - I was talked down to. Then I upped the ante. I told you that, right? It's right there for you to se, isn't it? So, why ask me again? Again it seems liek 2 standards here.
Now that I've answered your question, when are you going to answer any of mine?
Or is this just 1 way with you?
Got to go. This was fun.
Quote:
You were insulted, yes or no?
Got to go. This was fun.
I wish you meant it, but you don't.
I love it. I answered you twice and yet you don't answer one fucking question of minre and you pretend like you are being fair.
The THIRD TIME. THIS IS NOT A LAW WEBSITE. Nor do I report to you. I said I was talked down to. Not insulted. I said I upped the ante.
At a certain point hoew thick do you have to be to not understand this?
Ohh - did I now insult you? poor baby.
How many times do I have to say I was talked down to?
Quote:
In comment 16211687 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
You were insulted, yes or no?
Got to go. This was fun.
I wish you meant it, but you don't.
I'm glad to know that what you wish won't happen. Anytime I can further add to this please let me know.
You are one of the most arrogant posters on here. It was laughable when you speak of "that says a lot about you," yet you are such an arrogant poster it's a joke.
Your slamming of Daniel Jones last year knew no bounds of lunacy.
They have made a big deal about how his performance suffers when his confidence wanes.
That's not the same thing as DJ not having confidence in the first place. It's that he appears to lose confidence sometimes when things around him go poorly.
You couldn't see a difference in DJ's general disposition (as well as his level of play) between the 2nd quarter yesterday and the 3rd quarter?
DJ's confidence, along with most of the team, it seemed, was seriously fading in the first half of the game yesterday. It was like the shellacking they took in week 1 carried over to the first half of yesterday's game. Then they came out to start the second half and immediately took a shot downfield and connected. The confidence of the entire unit improved from there. And DJ seems to play better when he's got that swagger, which is how I viewed the second half yesterday.
So I don't see those comments about DJ's confidence actually being statements about DJ lacking confidence. It's about how his performance fluctuates as a function of his confidence, which exists on a spectrum (as it does for all of us).
I'm not sure if that's too nuanced a take or if I'm just applying my POV to the way that I've read those posts. Hopefully what I'm trying to say here makes sense.
I think I am the "people" and this explains well my main points.
I'd add to this that it is the frequency of it that has me concerned. I certainly saw many of the greats have off games, get hit one too many times etc.
But with Jones it is a bit too much of a Jekyll and Hyde thing and this game was the PERFECT. Example.
He did his full range in one game. Was he the first player to do that? No.
But he spends far more time rattled or "off" his game than I have seen of any QB with any kind of long term success.
And I know everyone wants to just toss out the pre-BD times but it does matter that he looked THAT bad. You can say no one could play well in those circumstances while also acknowledging that it was 100% possible for a great QB to play batter than horrible.
That is the nuance, propensity to lose confidence and when he does the way his game can absolutely crater.
And again, it is intellectually dishonest to not acknowledge how the Jekyll and Hyde thing affects the team around you as the field general. That is literally what we witnessed today.
You are missing throws, making bad decisions, the team around you plays tighter (HELLO drops). Less energy for your blockers that might feel like it doesn't matter if that give that little extra effort etc.
You hit the throws you play with confidence and voila all of a sudden your team isn't making it "impossible" for you to do well.
Many of you act like this teammates thing is something completely outside of Jones that he can only be victimized by. But he is the most important player on the team, if the team is underachieving the most important player is a good place to look. Some of you only want to do that on the achieving side and that is both insane and intellectually dishonest.
Who made that claim yesterday NGD?
Quote:
In comment 16211719 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211687 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
You were insulted, yes or no?
Got to go. This was fun.
I wish you meant it, but you don't.
I'm glad to know that what you wish won't happen. Anytime I can further add to this please let me know.
You are one of the most arrogant posters on here. It was laughable when you speak of "that says a lot about you," yet you are such an arrogant poster it's a joke.
Your slamming of Daniel Jones last year knew no bounds of lunacy.
Show me where I slammed Daniel Jones last year.
In fact, show me any posts from last year where I was not consistently projecting a higher contract value for him than most of his supposed supporters, including you.
Let me know how forecasting a higher value for a player translates to slamming that player. 2020 and 2021? You're damn right I slammed Jones, and his play - along with every other player on the team, for that matter - merited it. But last year? My only criticism/concern was whether the Giants could afford to give DJ the supporting parts he needs, and give him the contract that he was earning (inflated to reflect actual NFL QB trends), and also continue to rebuild the roster as Schoen and Daboll saw fit, rather than getting stuck with what they inherited.
That's the problem with the DJFC: anything less than a thorough ballwashing is considered "slamming" poor Danny.
Who made that claim yesterday NGD?
I said he had time to make a throw and you said he couldn't possibly find a receiver because two ran into each other.
When there were other receivers that went out. Somehow you can't understand that you are the one saying something ridiculous there?
No - but I insulted you. And it felt good because you are deliberately ignoring questions and answers I put forth to you. It's all one-way, isn't it???
Let me further explain things to you - you are being deliberately deceptive. I told you on my post at 12:54 PM that it was YOU who had initiated our current conversation. - And you continue to do so.
As a result, I was NOT complaining. YOU brought up the subject. All I told Gatorade was that for a site that posters insult as much - how big of a deal are my typos? You've twisted this into I am "complaining?!!!! LMAO. Now you are trying to turn this into "me complaining." Unreal.
So, 1- you don’t answer my questions. 2- You ignore my answers then retype the same question. And now 3- you turn this into me complaining? This is so laughable. Who do you think you are? LMAO.
I am fine being insulted and talked down so long as I can reply in kind. So, what makes you think I was complaining?
BTW, can you answer a question once (just once?) or are you so desperate that you feel a need to be in control of conversations and it’s all about winning? I’m just wondering, do you feel that you are so above-it-all? Otherwise, why haven’t you answered a question while I have answered yours?
Quote:
It causes our WRs to run into each other - making it his fault as well.
Who made that claim yesterday NGD?
I said he had time to make a throw and you said he couldn't possibly find a receiver because two ran into each other.
When there were other receivers that went out. Somehow you can't understand that you are the one saying something ridiculous there?
Yes it’s absolutely ridiculous to claim what he should have done when….
1. You didn’t see what was happening downfield
2. You didn’t see the receivers running into each other.
3. You had no clue if they were even open.
But it didn’t stop you from blaming Jones right off the bat. And when people told you what happened - you STILL blamed him even though you still didn’t see what was going on.
So yes ridiculous is a very fair term.
Quote:
Did I insult you with any of my comments?
No - but I insulted you. And it felt good because you are deliberately ignoring questions and answers I put forth to you. It's all one-way, isn't it???
Let me further explain things to you - you are being deliberately deceptive. I told you on my post at 12:54 PM that it was YOU who had initiated our current conversation. - And you continue to do so.
As a result, I was NOT complaining. YOU brought up the subject. All I told Gatorade was that for a site that posters insult as much - how big of a deal are my typos? You've twisted this into I am "complaining?!!!! LMAO. Now you are trying to turn this into "me complaining." Unreal.
So, 1- you don’t answer my questions. 2- You ignore my answers then retype the same question. And now 3- you turn this into me complaining? This is so laughable. Who do you think you are? LMAO.
I am fine being insulted and talked down so long as I can reply in kind. So, what makes you think I was complaining?
BTW, can you answer a question once (just once?) or are you so desperate that you feel a need to be in control of conversations and it’s all about winning? I’m just wondering, do you feel that you are so above-it-all? Otherwise, why haven’t you answered a question while I have answered yours?
Actually I am not insulted. The reason is that I do not take you seriously (not intended to be an insult)
Quote:
In comment 16211756 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16211719 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211687 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
You were insulted, yes or no?
Got to go. This was fun.
I wish you meant it, but you don't.
I'm glad to know that what you wish won't happen. Anytime I can further add to this please let me know.
You are one of the most arrogant posters on here. It was laughable when you speak of "that says a lot about you," yet you are such an arrogant poster it's a joke.
Your slamming of Daniel Jones last year knew no bounds of lunacy.
Show me where I slammed Daniel Jones last year.
.
Ohh my God!!!
Is this a joke??
Wow!!! You were tearing him apart for example for anyone saying his OL sucked. Matter of fact you argued that the OL in the past was pretty decent and then youoften used Joe Burrow as an exampel tat he had bad OL's then oyu woudl blast the posters that supported Jones.
Then you slammed his game for example vs CHicago because he didn't throw for many yards.
You are so full of crap.
Quote:
In comment 16211972 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211756 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16211719 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211687 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
You were insulted, yes or no?
Got to go. This was fun.
I wish you meant it, but you don't.
I'm glad to know that what you wish won't happen. Anytime I can further add to this please let me know.
You are one of the most arrogant posters on here. It was laughable when you speak of "that says a lot about you," yet you are such an arrogant poster it's a joke.
Your slamming of Daniel Jones last year knew no bounds of lunacy.
Show me where I slammed Daniel Jones last year.
.
Ohh my God!!!
Is this a joke??
Wow!!! You were tearing him apart for example for anyone saying his OL sucked. Matter of fact you argued that the OL in the past was pretty decent and then youoften used Joe Burrow as an exampel tat he had bad OL's then oyu woudl blast the posters that supported Jones.
Then you slammed his game for example vs CHicago because he didn't throw for many yards.
You are so full of crap.
The OL post and Burrow comparison was 2021.
The Chicago game was because you said his performance was "great" or some other superlative, and I said that your standards were too low if that qualifies as great.
Want to keep testing your memory against mine?
Quote:
In comment 16211975 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
Did I insult you with any of my comments?
No - but I insulted you. And it felt good because you are deliberately ignoring questions and answers I put forth to you. It's all one-way, isn't it???
Let me further explain things to you - you are being deliberately deceptive. I told you on my post at 12:54 PM that it was YOU who had initiated our current conversation. - And you continue to do so.
As a result, I was NOT complaining. YOU brought up the subject. All I told Gatorade was that for a site that posters insult as much - how big of a deal are my typos? You've twisted this into I am "complaining?!!!! LMAO. Now you are trying to turn this into "me complaining." Unreal.
So, 1- you don’t answer my questions. 2- You ignore my answers then retype the same question. And now 3- you turn this into me complaining? This is so laughable. Who do you think you are? LMAO.
I am fine being insulted and talked down so long as I can reply in kind. So, what makes you think I was complaining?
BTW, can you answer a question once (just once?) or are you so desperate that you feel a need to be in control of conversations and it’s all about winning? I’m just wondering, do you feel that you are so above-it-all? Otherwise, why haven’t you answered a question while I have answered yours?
Actually I am not insulted. The reason is that I do not take you seriously (not intended to be an insult)
Nor do I take you serious Chris. You're a joke that refuses to answer questions, ignores answers yet still seems to want to keep posting to me. I enjoy the comedy of your double-standard criteria too. So while you don't feel insulted, I still feel good that I insulted to you beuause it was well-deserved in which you all but asked for it.
Ohh Chris BTW- are you going to tell me that I am "complaining" again? I love how you twist things. LOL.
Quote:
In comment 16212023 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16211972 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211756 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16211719 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211687 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
You were insulted, yes or no?
Got to go. This was fun.
I wish you meant it, but you don't.
I'm glad to know that what you wish won't happen. Anytime I can further add to this please let me know.
You are one of the most arrogant posters on here. It was laughable when you speak of "that says a lot about you," yet you are such an arrogant poster it's a joke.
Your slamming of Daniel Jones last year knew no bounds of lunacy.
Show me where I slammed Daniel Jones last year.
.
Ohh my God!!!
Is this a joke??
Wow!!! You were tearing him apart for example for anyone saying his OL sucked. Matter of fact you argued that the OL in the past was pretty decent and then youoften used Joe Burrow as an exampel tat he had bad OL's then oyu woudl blast the posters that supported Jones.
Then you slammed his game for example vs CHicago because he didn't throw for many yards.
You are so full of crap.
The OL post and Burrow comparison was 2021.
The Chicago game was because you said his performance was "great" or some other superlative, and I said that your standards were too low if that qualifies as great.
Want to keep testing your memory against mine?
SO last year you never said a thing about the rotten OL? hahaha so full of crap if you try to pull that off.
And I said the game was great?? I didn't. But we agree then that the Chcago game was good now? SO passing yards not important for a qb to play a good game? I said a QB's job is to win.
SY was talking about a crummy OL and crummy WR's as was PFF having Giants OL at the bottom- you are trying to suggest you weren't bitching about Jones?
I can't believe you are tring to pull this horsecrap.
I'm crushed.
But you do make me laugh. TY for that.
Quote:
In comment 16212051 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16212023 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16211972 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211756 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16211719 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211687 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
You were insulted, yes or no?
Got to go. This was fun.
I wish you meant it, but you don't.
I'm glad to know that what you wish won't happen. Anytime I can further add to this please let me know.
You are one of the most arrogant posters on here. It was laughable when you speak of "that says a lot about you," yet you are such an arrogant poster it's a joke.
Your slamming of Daniel Jones last year knew no bounds of lunacy.
Show me where I slammed Daniel Jones last year.
.
Ohh my God!!!
Is this a joke??
Wow!!! You were tearing him apart for example for anyone saying his OL sucked. Matter of fact you argued that the OL in the past was pretty decent and then youoften used Joe Burrow as an exampel tat he had bad OL's then oyu woudl blast the posters that supported Jones.
Then you slammed his game for example vs CHicago because he didn't throw for many yards.
You are so full of crap.
The OL post and Burrow comparison was 2021.
The Chicago game was because you said his performance was "great" or some other superlative, and I said that your standards were too low if that qualifies as great.
Want to keep testing your memory against mine?
SO last year you never said a thing about the rotten OL? hahaha so full of crap if you try to pull that off.
And I said the game was great?? I didn't. But we agree then that the Chcago game was good now? SO passing yards not important for a qb to play a good game? I said a QB's job is to win.
SY was talking about a crummy OL and crummy WR's as was PFF having Giants OL at the bottom- you are trying to suggest you weren't bitching about Jones?
I can't believe you are tring to pull this horsecrap.
No, I said the OL still sucked in 2022 and DJ was playing better in spite of that, so maybe the OL wasn't quite the excuse that his supporters thought it was in 2020 and 2021. But the post that I made about the OL not being a massive liability compared to other bad OL units across the league was in 2021. And that was the same post that included the comparison to the Bengals' OL.
And no, the Chicago game from last year still does not belong in the "great game" column for DJ. It never belonged there. It was a win by the Giants, and not all wins are going to be beautiful QB performances, so there's no complaints about it on my end. But I'm not going to just pretend that the Chicago game last season was anywhere near the second half of yesterday's game.
Your standards are still too low. The team's job is to win. The QB's job is to play QB.
[quote] Incredible game by him. He’s a very high level passer and can run. I watched the Jacksonville game and yeah they were playing the Chiefs and you can kill me for this if you like but he’s better than Lawrence. Lawrence missed like four passes to the end zone at close range. Didn’t lead then to a single TD. I know one game but today it wasn’t close. [/quote
Didn't you know every pass should be perfect or the QB stinks?]
Quote:
In comment 16212059 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16212051 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16212023 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16211972 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211756 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16211719 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16211687 ChrisRick said:
Quote:
You were insulted, yes or no?
Got to go. This was fun.
I wish you meant it, but you don't.
I'm glad to know that what you wish won't happen. Anytime I can further add to this please let me know.
You are one of the most arrogant posters on here. It was laughable when you speak of "that says a lot about you," yet you are such an arrogant poster it's a joke.
Your slamming of Daniel Jones last year knew no bounds of lunacy.
Show me where I slammed Daniel Jones last year.
.
Ohh my God!!!
Is this a joke??
Wow!!! You were tearing him apart for example for anyone saying his OL sucked. Matter of fact you argued that the OL in the past was pretty decent and then youoften used Joe Burrow as an exampel tat he had bad OL's then oyu woudl blast the posters that supported Jones.
Then you slammed his game for example vs CHicago because he didn't throw for many yards.
You are so full of crap.
The OL post and Burrow comparison was 2021.
The Chicago game was because you said his performance was "great" or some other superlative, and I said that your standards were too low if that qualifies as great.
Want to keep testing your memory against mine?
SO last year you never said a thing about the rotten OL? hahaha so full of crap if you try to pull that off.
And I said the game was great?? I didn't. But we agree then that the Chcago game was good now? SO passing yards not important for a qb to play a good game? I said a QB's job is to win.
SY was talking about a crummy OL and crummy WR's as was PFF having Giants OL at the bottom- you are trying to suggest you weren't bitching about Jones?
I can't believe you are tring to pull this horsecrap.
No, I said the OL still sucked in 2022 and DJ was playing better in spite of that, so maybe the OL wasn't quite the excuse that his supporters thought it was in 2020 and 2021. But the post that I made about the OL not being a massive liability compared to other bad OL units across the league was in 2021. And that was the same post that included the comparison to the Bengals' OL.
And no, the Chicago game from last year still does not belong in the "great game" column for DJ. It never belonged there. It was a win by the Giants, and not all wins are going to be beautiful QB performances, so there's no complaints about it on my end. But I'm not going to just pretend that the Chicago game last season was anywhere near the second half of yesterday's game.
Your standards are still too low. The team's job is to win. The QB's job is to play QB.
What's laughable is that PFF had the OL near the bottom in 2021 and you trashed it. You were trashing PFF a ton. yet in 2022 PFF still had the Giants OL near the bottom and now you're saying ng that you miraculously agreed that they went from "decent" to "suck" even though the Giants went from a miserable team to a playoff team? Someone like you trashing Jones a lot by down playing the pathetic OL? LMAO. You were NOT supporting Jones the 1st couple of months. You crack me up. Of all people – you-
LMAO - - i can’t believe you -- "Mr. Sunshine" one of the most arrogant posters on here is trying to pass that you weren't dumping on Jones after ripping posters for using the OL as an excuse etc. And how passing is so important.
I even tried to be civil with you on this thread and you in your “usual” nice warm manner chose to remain an arrogant pr^*k with me (oops Chris is gonna say I’m complaining again.!) . Which is fine. But you stating here you weren’t dumping on Jones – then change so much. - Shit -you can’t even admit that the Chicago game was a good game by DJ- or will you now? Instead d you bring up points that stays away from the question to you. You are trying to pass that posters said he played great. And compare it to his latest game. These points you make deliberately avoid the question.
So you are just skidding away from the question I’ve asked you – which maybe you agree with? I asked you if you agree it was a good game and that a QB can have a good game even if he doesn't pass for many yards. Instead you avoid the question by saying that YOU had “NO COMPLAINTS.” That is NOT the same thing.
Is it gonna kill you to say it—he played a good game vs Chicago and that he played well even without passing for many yards?
As for the OL, you obviously missed the entire point of my post about it in 2021, despite the fact that you seem to remember the post itself fairly well. My point was not that the OL was decent in 2021. It was that it was not uniquely bad.
The underlying metrics, in terms of time-to-throw and pressure rates, weren't materially different from the teams that were supposedly near the middle of the league in terms of the OL rankings. And that most of the top QBs were getting similar time-to-throw and had similar pressure rates. That was the entire post - it was a suggestion that bad OL play was more or less the norm leaguewide, and therefore shouldn't be considered a valid excuse for DJ if other QBs were thriving behind similarly bad OLs.
Thus, for 2022, when DJ demonstrated tremendous improvement, my point of view was the same as 2021: that those OL excuses were invalid, and always had been.
You seem to think you have me painted into some sort of inconsistent corner, but my stance has never changed. The OL has sucked but a lot of NFL OLs suck. Good QBs, in the modern NFL, must be able to overcome some level of OL ineptitude in order to succeed. DJ was not able to do that in 2020 or 2021. He was in 2022. Unlike you, I actually give credit to DJ instead of acting like he's a passive passenger aboard the OL.