I know many think Cowherd isn't worth the time, but yesterday he played an interview with 49ers owner Jed Yost talking about the moment Shanahan admitted to him that the 3rd string QB (Purdy) was probably the best QB on the team. As Cowherd points out, good teams are honest about evaluations of their own players and don't triple down on bad picks to *prove* they got it right.
This is quite a contrast to what the Giants have done, as Cowherd points out, and a contrast to what many here insist: [b}that Joe Schoen can't admit to Mara and to the public that signing Daniel Jones to a ludicrously large contract was a mistake.[/b} It is better to move on as soon as possible, than to quadruple down on a failure.
I recorded this Cowherd section and linked here. Video and audio isn't good, sorry, but the content is worth it.
Cowherd-02-02-2024-49ers vs Giants player eval - (
New Window )
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
Cowherd knows well Giants fans want out from Jones so he is putting out click bait.
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
This is the offseason to make the pivot. They better do it. It is absurd the Giants haven't drafted a QB since 2019.
The Giants' culture has been one of half measures and scapegoating. It's tough to imagine all oars are pulling in the same direction in that building.
This year? Can't get rid of Jones because of his contract. But in this draft or next, the Giants could easily spend a high pick on a QB, and then cut Jones next offseason with a much smaller cap hit.
Giants don't have a Brock Purdy. DeVito isn't that level, so 1. it's not a clear situation where the 3rd QB is the best and 2. Giants can't realistically get rid of Jones.
In short, it's a conclusion made before the process is allowed to unwind
The Giants' culture has been one of half measures and scapegoating. It's tough to imagine all oars are pulling in the same direction in that building.
Scapegoating😂😂😂
Same BS different day
Just a matter of time before you play the race card again
Quote:
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation…
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
And you have literally NO IDEA if that conversation had or has not taken place
But continue on with narratives
Good job
There is an incredible amount of luck in building a good franchise. The hiring decisions are unlikely to work out, getting lucky enough to be in the right spot to get the right players (imagine if the Chiefs traded up for Paxton Lynch when they wanted to), etc. If Lynch/Shanahan failed through no fault of York's, he'd still be viewed as a clown.
Shanahan didn't go public with what he discussed with ownership or did I miss something. He just got rid of Lance.
Quote:
Even if they aren't directly influencing roster decisions, they do create the culture with how they hire/fire coaches and front office people.
The Giants' culture has been one of half measures and scapegoating. It's tough to imagine all oars are pulling in the same direction in that building.
Scapegoating😂😂😂
Same BS different day
Just a matter of time before you play the race card again
Yep- exactly!!!
Quote:
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation…
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
Here we go! Manhattan, big on the darts, short on the alternatives. What would you have done last year? Jones is making middle of the road QB money, and the detractors year after year come up short on identifying all the available QB's we should have turned to. They are short, because there aren't any.
Last year we could have rolled the dice on Lamarr, but it was known the Ravens would match. Can't wait for your alternative, even with hindsight being 20/20.
I get that it sucks to suck. But just crapping on things, at this point, just adds to the lame ass, over-confident fan diatribes, that are actually super devoid of detail and long on "this sucks we need new management". Management actually did go outside of their doors this time, and we're into year 3, QB's are hard to find... we might be able to do it this year, but the Tommy devito wins didn't help.
The Giants' culture has been one of half measures and scapegoating. It's tough to imagine all oars are pulling in the same direction in that building.
Quote:
In comment 16387590 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation…
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
Here we go! Manhattan, big on the darts, short on the alternatives. What would you have done last year? Jones is making middle of the road QB money, and the detractors year after year come up short on identifying all the available QB's we should have turned to. They are short, because there aren't any.
Last year we could have rolled the dice on Lamarr, but it was known the Ravens would match. Can't wait for your alternative, even with hindsight being 20/20.
I get that it sucks to suck. But just crapping on things, at this point, just adds to the lame ass, over-confident fan diatribes, that are actually super devoid of detail and long on "this sucks we need new management". Management actually did go outside of their doors this time, and we're into year 3, QB's are hard to find... we might be able to do it this year, but the Tommy devito wins didn't help.
Jones' deal is not middling. It is high and prohibitive. You don't pay middle of the road QBs 90% of Mahomes money. The middle tier shouldn't get paid on a scale with elites. They should get paid a fraction of elites, becaue they have a fraction of the probability of winning a Super Bowl. You don't go incrementally down from Mahomes and decide, yea Daniel Jones is the 10th highest paid QB at $45M, let's give him that. That's management malpractice. And for the record I wouldn't have signed Daniel Jones to that deal. I knew it was bad. And I wouldn't have tagged him either. The move was to let him become an unrestricted free agent.
Quote:
Asked why he shouldn’t be dismissed alongside Baalke and Kelly, York answered, “I own this football team. You don’t dismiss owners. I’m sorry that that’s the fact and that’s the case, but that’s the fact.”
There is an incredible amount of luck in building a good franchise. The hiring decisions are unlikely to work out, getting lucky enough to be in the right spot to get the right players (imagine if the Chiefs traded up for Paxton Lynch when they wanted to), etc. If Lynch/Shanahan failed through no fault of York's, he'd still be viewed as a clown.
York got eviscerated to the point of embarrassment to where he was almost pushed out by his own family.
You make your own luck by stacking good decisions and not being an idiot and control freak.
Quote:
In comment 16387590 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation…
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
And you have literally NO IDEA if that conversation had or has not taken place
But continue on with narratives
Good job
You are right, we don't know if Schoen and Mara had that conversation this season. But we have stuck with Jones well beyond his expiration date, and this fact alone makes this post relevant. We never should have given him that deal.
and I don't see him doing that if he hasn't already.
Quote:
In comment 16387601 Manhattan said:
Quote:
In comment 16387590 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation…
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
And you have literally NO IDEA if that conversation had or has not taken place
But continue on with narratives
Good job
You are right, we don't know if Schoen and Mara had that conversation this season. But we have stuck with Jones well beyond his expiration date, and this fact alone makes this post relevant. We never should have given him that deal.
So then why push a narrative that you have no idea if it is factual?
For those who are opposed to “just drafting a QB without knowing they are a franchise QB”, NO ONE knows that for sure at draft time. That’s why so many don’t pan out. You do your evaluation and then roll the dice. No guarantees.
They didn't fire the oline coach because Neal, or any of the lineman not named Thomas, is a mistake. He got fired because not one player showed any improvement whatsoeever...Let Bricillo have a go and really find out.
So then why push a narrative that you have no idea if it is factual?
First of all, I am not pushing a *narrative*.
The point Cowherd is making is self-evident. Good teams make speedy evaluations. Bad teams stick with failures for years. The 49ers are the former. the Giants are the latter. We'll see what the 2024 Giants decide to do, but for the last 7 years they've been the team that can't evaluate and try to prove failed picks can turn it around.
Lets talk Purdy for a moment. How do we think he would have done playing behind an OL with Ezedu at LT, Neal at RT and Lemieux and McKethan at the OGs and without McCaffrey, Samuel and Kittle.
The reality is that even if the Giants wanted to find a new QB this year it appears they are pretty much out of luck. They aren't going to get one of the top three guys which means they'll be looking at best at the second-tier guys all of whom have their issues and are at best developmental types. They likely could even have to trade up back into the first round to get one of those guys.
The reality is that the Jones is going to be the guy next year and while the Giants surely will try and find a developmental guy the real question is what's the best plan to build up the rest of the team around Jones.
Lets talk Purdy for a moment. How do we think he would have done playing behind an OL with Ezedu at LT, Neal at RT and Lemieux and McKethan at the OGs and without McCaffrey, Samuel and Kittle.
The reality is that even if the Giants wanted to find a new QB this year it appears they are pretty much out of luck. They aren't going to get one of the top three guys which means they'll be looking at best at the second-tier guys all of whom have their issues and are at best developmental types. They likely could even have to trade up back into the first round to get one of those guys.
The reality is that the Jones is going to be the guy next year and while the Giants surely will try and find a developmental guy the real question is what's the best plan to build up the rest of the team around Jones.
Jones put up historically bad performance numbers for a QB on a mega deal. Deal with it. Yes, teams would move on from him after he was outplayed by Tyrod Taylor and Tommy Pizza Boy the undrafted FA. Jones was so bad, he should never see an NFL field again.
It's all about the guarantees. Not total salary.
Anyway, this discussion doesn't happen if they didn't luck out with Purdy. Look at what they did with Lance and what they gave up to get him.
Quote:
if Jerry Jones has had that conversation with himself about Dak Prescott. Just to review, does anyone really think Schoen told ownership, "I don't think Jones can be a franchise QB but I'm going to give him a $160M contract anyway?"
It's all about the guarantees. Not total salary.
Anyway, this discussion doesn't happen if they didn't luck out with Purdy. Look at what they did with Lance and what they gave up to get him.
Unlucky with Lance, lucky with Purdy, keep taking big swings and you eventually find a guy. Stand still with mediocrity and you give Daniel Jones a mega deal. The 49ers played it right, the Giants played it wrong. I don't see how you can draw any other conclusion.
Quote:
In comment 16387601 Manhattan said:
Quote:
In comment 16387590 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation…
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
Here we go! Manhattan, big on the darts, short on the alternatives. What would you have done last year? Jones is making middle of the road QB money, and the detractors year after year come up short on identifying all the available QB's we should have turned to. They are short, because there aren't any.
Last year we could have rolled the dice on Lamarr, but it was known the Ravens would match. Can't wait for your alternative, even with hindsight being 20/20.
I get that it sucks to suck. But just crapping on things, at this point, just adds to the lame ass, over-confident fan diatribes, that are actually super devoid of detail and long on "this sucks we need new management". Management actually did go outside of their doors this time, and we're into year 3, QB's are hard to find... we might be able to do it this year, but the Tommy devito wins didn't help.
Jones' deal is not middling. It is high and prohibitive. You don't pay middle of the road QBs 90% of Mahomes money. The middle tier shouldn't get paid on a scale with elites. They should get paid a fraction of elites, becaue they have a fraction of the probability of winning a Super Bowl. You don't go incrementally down from Mahomes and decide, yea Daniel Jones is the 10th highest paid QB at $45M, let's give him that. That's management malpractice. And for the record I wouldn't have signed Daniel Jones to that deal. I knew it was bad. And I wouldn't have tagged him either. The move was to let him become an unrestricted free agent.
So after a season where he led the team to the 2nd round of playoffs, you wouldn't have signed him? This is where hindsight and fatigue sets in. . You would have rolled the dice on Mayfield, or some-one like that? When you get into the names, your argument starts to breakdown, where you make the argument that we start a rebuild after a playoff appearance with one of the younger teams in the league.
He's expensive this year, next year 11th.
Quote:
In comment 16387627 RAIN said:
Quote:
In comment 16387601 Manhattan said:
Quote:
In comment 16387590 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation…
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
Here we go! Manhattan, big on the darts, short on the alternatives. What would you have done last year? Jones is making middle of the road QB money, and the detractors year after year come up short on identifying all the available QB's we should have turned to. They are short, because there aren't any.
Last year we could have rolled the dice on Lamarr, but it was known the Ravens would match. Can't wait for your alternative, even with hindsight being 20/20.
I get that it sucks to suck. But just crapping on things, at this point, just adds to the lame ass, over-confident fan diatribes, that are actually super devoid of detail and long on "this sucks we need new management". Management actually did go outside of their doors this time, and we're into year 3, QB's are hard to find... we might be able to do it this year, but the Tommy devito wins didn't help.
Jones' deal is not middling. It is high and prohibitive. You don't pay middle of the road QBs 90% of Mahomes money. The middle tier shouldn't get paid on a scale with elites. They should get paid a fraction of elites, becaue they have a fraction of the probability of winning a Super Bowl. You don't go incrementally down from Mahomes and decide, yea Daniel Jones is the 10th highest paid QB at $45M, let's give him that. That's management malpractice. And for the record I wouldn't have signed Daniel Jones to that deal. I knew it was bad. And I wouldn't have tagged him either. The move was to let him become an unrestricted free agent.
So after a season where he led the team to the 2nd round of playoffs, you wouldn't have signed him? This is where hindsight and fatigue sets in. . You would have rolled the dice on Mayfield, or some-one like that? When you get into the names, your argument starts to breakdown, where you make the argument that we start a rebuild after a playoff appearance with one of the younger teams in the league.
He's expensive this year, next year 11th.
Yes. I let him test the market. You are damn fucking right. Because I am mature enough to see that the coach and scheme led that team, not Jones, who led the league in throws behind the LOS, had awful underlying pass numbers, and only threw 15TDs. I never give that guy $90M. And guess what? That position was proven to be correct as Mayfield was the deal of the century and Jones was one of the worst bombs in the history of the position. What the hell are you defending? Jones got paid mega bucks and was worse than the 32nd ranked QB in the league and threw 2 TDs.
Quote:
In comment 16387609 clatterbuck said:
Quote:
if Jerry Jones has had that conversation with himself about Dak Prescott. Just to review, does anyone really think Schoen told ownership, "I don't think Jones can be a franchise QB but I'm going to give him a $160M contract anyway?"
It's all about the guarantees. Not total salary.
Anyway, this discussion doesn't happen if they didn't luck out with Purdy. Look at what they did with Lance and what they gave up to get him.
Unlucky with Lance, lucky with Purdy, keep taking big swings and you eventually find a guy. Stand still with mediocrity and you give Daniel Jones a mega deal. The 49ers played it right, the Giants played it wrong. I don't see how you can draw any other conclusion.
We saw the 49ers in their championship and playoff games with Garoppolo. They didn't trust him. We knew they'd eventually move on and it was expected they'd do it with Lance given ALL the assets they gave up to acquire him. They scouted him. They put premium choices in him. Purdy was a fringe QB in college and is in a terrific situation. Good for him and SF. But you act like they did this all intentionally.
When you already dropped three #1s on a qb that hasn’t proved himself. Some teams (ahem) wouldn’t draft a qb to avoid undue pressure on the presumed incumbent.
1--- In fact the 49ers success has been without taking a QB early. They wish they never would have reached for Lance, and remain highly successfull while we have posters on here clamoring that a QB MUST BE taken. For a team in REBUILD that a QB "must be taken" is laughable.
2--- The OP should be posting the below link and speak about why reaching for a QB in the manner they did was so bad. So this is something the Giants need to avoid.
3--- There has to be an understanding that the Giants are in Rebuild and that there are other positions on the football field other than QB (which below Lynch speaks of getting "rough and tough players."). You have to move beyond that football is a one-player sport which in fact the 49ers have shown football is not a 1-player sport.
4---- Not sure if the OP is suggesting/implying that the 49ers wouldn’t move quickly of getting rid of the OL players that were part of the worst unit in the NFL. The "worst in the NFL" - how does that not supposed to get addressed quickly? If we are all in agreement with that then yes getting an OL in round 1 we should be in agreement that that is highly beneficial and a priority too if value is near all others. And yes-- the Giants should move quickly to remove these OL mistakes.
5--- As stated and which the 49ers understand; -- football is more than just a 1 player sport.
6--- Bottomline-- get a QB only if you love him. The Giants are NOT getting the top 3. Unless the Bears are moronic all 3 1st pciks will not be traded and the Qbs will be gone. So if Giants love a QB outside the 1st 3 - great otherwise do the 49ewr way and get "rough and tough" players (i.e. - the trenches.).
https://bayareasportshub.com/2022/09/04/san-francisco-49ers-john-lynch-has-learned-to-draft-thick-strong-tough-players-to-aid-49ers-imposing-strategy/
Quote:
In comment 16387627 RAIN said:
Quote:
In comment 16387601 Manhattan said:
Quote:
In comment 16387590 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation…
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
Here we go! Manhattan, big on the darts, short on the alternatives. What would you have done last year? Jones is making middle of the road QB money, and the detractors year after year come up short on identifying all the available QB's we should have turned to. They are short, because there aren't any.
Last year we could have rolled the dice on Lamarr, but it was known the Ravens would match. Can't wait for your alternative, even with hindsight being 20/20.
I get that it sucks to suck. But just crapping on things, at this point, just adds to the lame ass, over-confident fan diatribes, that are actually super devoid of detail and long on "this sucks we need new management". Management actually did go outside of their doors this time, and we're into year 3, QB's are hard to find... we might be able to do it this year, but the Tommy devito wins didn't help.
Jones' deal is not middling. It is high and prohibitive. You don't pay middle of the road QBs 90% of Mahomes money. The middle tier shouldn't get paid on a scale with elites. They should get paid a fraction of elites, becaue they have a fraction of the probability of winning a Super Bowl. You don't go incrementally down from Mahomes and decide, yea Daniel Jones is the 10th highest paid QB at $45M, let's give him that. That's management malpractice. And for the record I wouldn't have signed Daniel Jones to that deal. I knew it was bad. And I wouldn't have tagged him either. The move was to let him become an unrestricted free agent.
So after a season where he led the team to the 2nd round of playoffs, you wouldn't have signed him? This is where hindsight and fatigue sets in. . You would have rolled the dice on Mayfield, or some-one like that? When you get into the names, your argument starts to breakdown, where you make the argument that we start a rebuild after a playoff appearance with one of the younger teams in the league.
He's expensive this year, next year 11th.
This is where making an honest evaluation comes in. The Vikings were a terrible team, one that other bad QBs lit up. When he went up again Philadelphia it was a bloodbath. The evaluations on the 22 season were not honest ones by the FO or the vast majority of the fanbase.
Quote:
When is a 7th rd choice a big swing?
When you already dropped three #1s on a qb that hasn’t proved himself. Some teams (ahem) wouldn’t draft a qb to avoid undue pressure on the presumed incumbent.
And when should they have drafted a QB, but didn’t? In the draft that hasn’t happened yet?
Before they back up the brinks truck for Purdy next year.
So after a season where he led the team to the 2nd round of playoffs, you wouldn't have signed him? This is where hindsight and fatigue sets in. . You would have rolled the dice on Mayfield, or some-one like that? When you get into the names, your argument starts to breakdown, where you make the argument that we start a rebuild after a playoff appearance with one of the younger teams in the league.
He's expensive this year, next year 11th.
This is where making an honest evaluation comes in. The Vikings were a terrible team, one that other bad QBs lit up. When he went up again Philadelphia it was a bloodbath. The evaluations on the 22 season were not honest ones by the FO or the vast majority of the fanbase.
And he faced the Vikings with a collection of skill position players who’re probably the worst we’ve seen in a postseason game this century. Also, please stop with Eagles game eliminating the Vikings game. It’s nonsense. Infinitely better QBs than Daniel Jones have gotten massacred in postseason games. That happens when you play a team a lot better than yours.
We need to move on at QB, but this idea that it was somehow obvious that they should’ve tossed Jones overboard after ‘22 is asinine.
Before they back up the brinks truck for Purdy next year.
Precisely. If the 49ers are ahead of the curve, they wouldn't pay Purdy as they can easily find another QB in the 7th round. Since they're that good, you know.
Quote:
So after a season where he led the team to the 2nd round of playoffs, you wouldn't have signed him? This is where hindsight and fatigue sets in. . You would have rolled the dice on Mayfield, or some-one like that? When you get into the names, your argument starts to breakdown, where you make the argument that we start a rebuild after a playoff appearance with one of the younger teams in the league.
He's expensive this year, next year 11th.
This is where making an honest evaluation comes in. The Vikings were a terrible team, one that other bad QBs lit up. When he went up again Philadelphia it was a bloodbath. The evaluations on the 22 season were not honest ones by the FO or the vast majority of the fanbase.
And he faced the Vikings with a collection of skill position players who’re probably the worst we’ve seen in a postseason game this century. Also, please stop with Eagles game eliminating the Vikings game. It’s nonsense. Infinitely better QBs than Daniel Jones have gotten massacred in postseason games. That happens when you play a team a lot better than yours.
We need to move on at QB, but this idea that it was somehow obvious that they should’ve tossed Jones overboard after ‘22 is asinine.
Only asinine to those who were drinking the Kool aid. DJ did what he's always done: beat a bad defense and then looked like a UDFA against a good one. DJ would be a HOFer.if the Giants could play Washington 17 games, alas they have to play real teams too.
Even if you don't think he should have been "tossed overboard" there was no reason to give him the contact they did.
Quote:
In comment 16387601 Manhattan said:
Quote:
In comment 16387590 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation…
‘You fucked up. You trusted us!’
No, it's:
"We've made a mistake. We can't win a trophy with Daniel Jones as QB."
If you can't communicate this, if you don't know how to thread this needle, you have no business having a top management job.
Here we go! Manhattan, big on the darts, short on the alternatives. What would you have done last year? Jones is making middle of the road QB money, and the detractors year after year come up short on identifying all the available QB's we should have turned to. They are short, because there aren't any.
Last year we could have rolled the dice on Lamarr, but it was known the Ravens would match. Can't wait for your alternative, even with hindsight being 20/20.
I get that it sucks to suck. But just crapping on things, at this point, just adds to the lame ass, over-confident fan diatribes, that are actually super devoid of detail and long on "this sucks we need new management". Management actually did go outside of their doors this time, and we're into year 3, QB's are hard to find... we might be able to do it this year, but the Tommy devito wins didn't help.
Jones' deal is not middling. It is high and prohibitive. You don't pay middle of the road QBs 90% of Mahomes money. The middle tier shouldn't get paid on a scale with elites. They should get paid a fraction of elites, becaue they have a fraction of the probability of winning a Super Bowl. You don't go incrementally down from Mahomes and decide, yea Daniel Jones is the 10th highest paid QB at $45M, let's give him that. That's management malpractice. And for the record I wouldn't have signed Daniel Jones to that deal. I knew it was bad. And I wouldn't have tagged him either. The move was to let him become an unrestricted free agent.
This take makes no sense at all. Let DJ go to free agency and do what at QB last year? The fact of the matter is Schoen didn’t have much choice. We didn’t have another starter on the roster. That is a fact. We weren’t drafting high enough to even sniff a starter, so that wasn’t an option. Paying DJ in the upper third of the league really wasn’t far off the mark at all after the season he had and it is at least structured so that if it looked like a bad decision after the 24’ season, we could break ties without crippling the cap. Schoen did what he had to do. I hope we come away with a new starter in the upcoming draft but I don’t think we can give away the farm to get one of the top three. This team has too many holes.
49'ers are a good team because they've nailed the draft and have a loaded roster. Even with that, my guess is they'll come up shy again because the team on the other side has a QB who is far and a way better than they got.
Let's not sensationalize this. NYG need to get better, period. We will never have all of the pieces to with a championship while Jones is behind center, but that doesn't mean move on at all cost just to make a change. If we can't get a legit franchise guy then we are better off targeting a developmental guy who we can pull the trigger in favor of if Mr. Jones refuses to push the ball down field. I have a hard time evaluating the Daniels, McCarthy's, Penix's, and Nix's of the world. But I'd rather get a difference maker at 6 and invest less draft capital in developing a Spencer Rattler type than reaching for one of the others if they don't grade out at a top 10 player. Yes, it may mean pushing the answer at QB down the road. But guess what--? So is drafting a QB who isn't a franchise player and in that case you piss away a premium pick.
To be fair though, Jones isn't a good QB.
We need to move on at QB, but this idea that it was somehow obvious that they should’ve tossed Jones overboard after ‘22 is asinine.
The Giants weren't deciding to toss him overboard, though. His contract was expiring. Agreed the Eagle game he was, essentially, no longer a Giant. He was a free agent. The decision to toss him overboard has been made by Schoen a year earlier when he declined his 5th year option.
The question to ask is: "If Jones had put up this exact career in Atlanta or Houston or Denver, would it have made sense to pay him 4/$160?"
Paying Daniel Jones is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen the Giants do, and that's saying something. The Giants, as well as the fans and media that supported the decision, were thinking based on sentimentality and blind optimism. Like children. Pathetic.
This take makes no sense at all. Let DJ go to free agency and do what at QB last year? The fact of the matter is Schoen didn’t have much choice. We didn’t have another starter on the roster. That is a fact. We weren’t drafting high enough to even sniff a starter, so that wasn’t an option. Paying DJ in the upper third of the league really wasn’t far off the mark at all after the season he had and it is at least structured so that if it looked like a bad decision after the 24’ season, we could break ties without crippling the cap. Schoen did what he had to do. I hope we come away with a new starter in the upcoming draft but I don’t think we can give away the farm to get one of the top three. This team has too many holes.
Actually I am making the most sense. I have said all this but I'll repeat myself for your benefit.
1. You don't pay a QB a mega contract (and yes $90M is mega) because you have no choice. That is just lazy analysis, sorry. It's the NFL, there are always choices, You have free agency, you have trades, you have the draft. The 49ers got a better QB in the 7th round of the draft recently. Last year you could have had Minshew or Mayfield, both better than Jones. And in fact, we found out, QBs on our roster were better than Jones.
2. You don't pay a mediocre (or bad) QB on an incrementally descending scale from elites. That's how you lose forever. Daniel Jones is not 85% or 90% of Mahomes or Burrow or Allen. He's 15% of them and needs to be paid that way. The salaries should descend in a slope not a straight line. How bad was the Jones contract? It's become a punchline in the media. Just yesterday on the PFF NFL Podcast (34:30 minutes in) they joked about Mayfield needing to get paid more than $45M bc of the Daniel Jones contract. They say Jordan Love will ask for at least $50M just because of the Daniel Jones contract and his agents will use it as a reference, he threw more TDs in 2023 than Jones threw in the last two seasons. The host says: "That Daniel Jones contract, like every single GM talking about re-upping a QB is getting that thrown in their face in these negotiations already. The GM has his price and the first counter is 'look at this Daniel Jones contract, my guy is way better than that tool'".
Quote:
In comment 16387646 Manhattan said:
This take makes no sense at all. Let DJ go to free agency and do what at QB last year? The fact of the matter is Schoen didn’t have much choice. We didn’t have another starter on the roster. That is a fact. We weren’t drafting high enough to even sniff a starter, so that wasn’t an option. Paying DJ in the upper third of the league really wasn’t far off the mark at all after the season he had and it is at least structured so that if it looked like a bad decision after the 24’ season, we could break ties without crippling the cap. Schoen did what he had to do. I hope we come away with a new starter in the upcoming draft but I don’t think we can give away the farm to get one of the top three. This team has too many holes.
Actually I am making the most sense. I have said all this but I'll repeat myself for your benefit.
1. You don't pay a QB a mega contract (and yes $90M is mega) because you have no choice. That is just lazy analysis, sorry. It's the NFL, there are always choices, You have free agency, you have trades, you have the draft. The 49ers got a better QB in the 7th round of the draft recently. Last year you could have had Minshew or Mayfield, both better than Jones. And in fact, we found out, QBs on our roster were better than Jones.
2. You don't pay a mediocre (or bad) QB on an incrementally descending scale from elites. That's how you lose forever. Daniel Jones is not 85% or 90% of Mahomes or Burrow or Allen. He's 15% of them and needs to be paid that way. The salaries should descend in a slope not a straight line. How bad was the Jones contract? It's become a punchline in the media. Just yesterday on the PFF NFL Podcast (34:30 minutes in) they joked about Mayfield needing to get paid more than $45M bc of the Daniel Jones contract. They say Jordan Love will ask for at least $50M just because of the Daniel Jones contract and his agents will use it as a reference, he threw more TDs in 2023 than Jones threw in the last two seasons. The host says: "That Daniel Jones contract, like every single GM talking about re-upping a QB is getting that thrown in their face in these negotiations already. The GM has his price and the first counter is 'look at this Daniel Jones contract, my guy is way better than that tool'".
No, you’re really not making the most sense. No one expected Purdy to perform like he has or all 32 teams would have drafted him. Mayfield had performed way worse than Jones did in 22’ so again, no one would have looked at that as an upgrade to DJ. You have the benefit of looking back on the 23’ season to tell us all what “ you would have done”. It must be nice to be so much smarter than the professionals. However, in your revisionist evaluations, you fail to accept that DJ was working behind maybe the worst O-line in NFL history in 23’. You want to argue that the O-line should have been better addressed prior to 23’ I’m with you but your take on the rest of this? Nope.
The real credit York deserves is correctly setting up his football operations where the GM (Lynch) reports to HC (Shanahan) who reports to Owner (York).
It' so refreshing that Shanahan spoke directly to the owner about this critical situation.
Unlike the stodgy, tedious structure too many teams continue to utilize in the NFL...
Quote:
t.
This take makes no sense at all. Let DJ go to free agency and do what at QB last year? The fact of the matter is Schoen didn’t have much choice. We didn’t have another starter on the roster. That is a fact. We weren’t drafting high enough to even sniff a starter, so that wasn’t an option. Paying DJ in the upper third of the league really wasn’t far off the mark at all after the season he had and it is at least structured so that if it looked like a bad decision after the 24’ season, we could break ties without crippling the cap. Schoen did what he had to do. I hope we come away with a new starter in the upcoming draft but I don’t think we can give away the farm to get one of the top three. This team has too many holes.
OFc he had a choice. They should not have signed him last year for that money.
The team shoudl have recognized that last year was an anomaly and re-laoded on rebuidling.
When you are rebuidling - you can get by with backup QB's. The whole point of a rebuild is know thta in year 1 and probably year tow you are not goign ot be successful. So, worrying about a QB that wasn't "that good" shouldn't have prevented thenm from playing more hardball.
The same with Barkley.
Quote:
In comment 16387646 Manhattan said:
Quote:
t.
This take makes no sense at all. Let DJ go to free agency and do what at QB last year? The fact of the matter is Schoen didn’t have much choice. We didn’t have another starter on the roster. That is a fact. We weren’t drafting high enough to even sniff a starter, so that wasn’t an option. Paying DJ in the upper third of the league really wasn’t far off the mark at all after the season he had and it is at least structured so that if it looked like a bad decision after the 24’ season, we could break ties without crippling the cap. Schoen did what he had to do. I hope we come away with a new starter in the upcoming draft but I don’t think we can give away the farm to get one of the top three. This team has too many holes.
OFc he had a choice. They should not have signed him last year for that money.
The team shoudl have recognized that last year was an anomaly and re-laoded on rebuidling.
When you are rebuidling - you can get by with backup QB's. The whole point of a rebuild is know thta in year 1 and probably year tow you are not goign ot be successful. So, worrying about a QB that wasn't "that good" shouldn't have prevented thenm from playing more hardball.
The same with Barkley.
That’s a reasonable point although I would argue that I at least felt like Jones had turned a corner. Most on the board felt similarly. Turns out it was likely a bad move but I don’t think that was obvious after 22’. I do hope we draft a new QB I’m just not in favor of giving up a ton of capital on a team that has so many needs.
Here's a question. Would the Giants have won 10 games in 2022 with Mayfield or Minshew at QB? Highly unlikely; Tyrod Taylor, no way; DeVito - HA! Would the Giants have even won one of their first 5 this year with Taylor or DeVito? Not likely given the comeback in Az. Would the Giants have finished 5-7 in the games that Jones didn't play this year. My guess is they very likely would have won 7 if not 8 (Buffalo, the Jets and the Rams) with Jones.
Can the Giants do better at QB than Jones. Absolutely and I'm guessing that in the next few years the Giants will be looking hard in the draft and in FA to find that guy. But right now they don't have that guy and really don't have many good options and teams just don't get rid of the guy they have until they have somebody better. That would be really stupid.
Let me familiarize you with the NFL draft. - ( New Window )
I asked myself that question and everything else being equal my guess would be that any of Atlanta, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, and very likely Las Vegas would take Jones in a hearttbeat and would also think that teams like Denver and Seattle might take him also depending how they resolve their QB situations.
Here's a question. Would the Giants have won 10 games in 2022 with Mayfield or Minshew at QB? Highly unlikely; Tyrod Taylor, no way; DeVito - HA! Would the Giants have even won one of their first 5 this year with Taylor or DeVito? Not likely given the comeback in Az. Would the Giants have finished 5-7 in the games that Jones didn't play this year. My guess is they very likely would have won 7 if not 8 (Buffalo, the Jets and the Rams) with Jones.
Can the Giants do better at QB than Jones. Absolutely and I'm guessing that in the next few years the Giants will be looking hard in the draft and in FA to find that guy. But right now they don't have that guy and really don't have many good options and teams just don't get rid of the guy they have until they have somebody better. That would be really stupid.
In the next few YEARS? How many more HCs and GMs are we going to go through before then?
My friend, it will take as long as it takes. But franchise QBs don't grow on trees. They're actually really rare. So you don't give up the guy you have UNTIL you have something better. And right now the Giants don't have anybody better. So what's your point!
Quote:
Is there a team in the league that A- would trade for Daniel Jones as a starter even if his contract wouldn’t allow, and B-Would any other team consider Jones a franchise QB after 6 years of let’s be honest pitiful injury plagued team. I mean the guy has taken out more head coaches in 6 years, it’s got to be some sort of a record.
I asked myself that question and everything else being equal my guess would be that any of Atlanta, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, and very likely Las Vegas would take Jones in a hearttbeat and would also think that teams like Denver and Seattle might take him also depending how they resolve their QB situations.
Factoring in his contract, which is a running joke among players league wide (and maybe even in his own locker room), no team is taking Jones in a heartbeat…
This is the same sentence you repeated for an entire year leading up to 2022. Verbatim. And now you have done it every single day since the Seattle game. We will time check this when you finally leave the board for good this time.
Quote:
In comment 16387715 JFIB said:
Quote:
In comment 16387646 Manhattan said:
Quote:
t.
This take makes no sense at all. Let DJ go to free agency and do what at QB last year? The fact of the matter is Schoen didn’t have much choice. We didn’t have another starter on the roster. That is a fact. We weren’t drafting high enough to even sniff a starter, so that wasn’t an option. Paying DJ in the upper third of the league really wasn’t far off the mark at all after the season he had and it is at least structured so that if it looked like a bad decision after the 24’ season, we could break ties without crippling the cap. Schoen did what he had to do. I hope we come away with a new starter in the upcoming draft but I don’t think we can give away the farm to get one of the top three. This team has too many holes.
OFc he had a choice. They should not have signed him last year for that money.
The team shoudl have recognized that last year was an anomaly and re-laoded on rebuidling.
When you are rebuidling - you can get by with backup QB's. The whole point of a rebuild is know thta in year 1 and probably year tow you are not goign ot be successful. So, worrying about a QB that wasn't "that good" shouldn't have prevented thenm from playing more hardball.
The same with Barkley.
That’s a reasonable point although I would argue that I at least felt like Jones had turned a corner. Most on the board felt similarly. Turns out it was likely a bad move but I don’t think that was obvious after 22’. I do hope we draft a new QB I’m just not in favor of giving up a ton of capital on a team that has so many needs.
Yes but I was arguing a counterpoint a lot last year. I can recall arguing with "colin" quite a bit. I felt the team should have pivoted - there should have been no expectation this year of success as I saw it. I told Eirc that I felt this way before the seaosn started too.
I feel the same this upcoming year and probably the following year. That's what happens when you delay a rebuild. The only quick fix for a rebuild imo is if you hit a home run with the QB. But the Giants aren't going to be able to get the top 3 guys .- So the home run chance is very limited like aksing a .190 hitter to blast a home run vs a prime Bob Gibson.
I will say this- imo they won't be bad at all next year if they get Fields (I dont think ti would take a lot to get him if Bears wihs to trade him.). But he has a ceiling.
The problem with the Giants is that their best player, Barkley, is in the declining part of his career. Posters think a WR will fix this. It won't unless they get Fields then it will be "pretty good." Aside from that - you can't have a consistent passing attack with a subpar QB and a horrific OL and then each year your other star offensive player is declining.
If they don't get Fields, what's yoru projection for this year assumign they don't get the top 3 QB's in teh draft? It won't be a playoff team wihtotu Fields and I wouldn't og after him if I were teh Giants.
Quote:
Even healthy, Jones's presence on the 2024 Giants would be a net negative.
This is the same sentence you repeated for an entire year leading up to 2022. Verbatim. And now you have done it every single day since the Seattle game. We will time check this when you finally leave the board for good this time.
Not verbatim. I underestimated the dollar amount. I never imagined someone could be so stupid. I learned my lesson; I'll never underestimate the Giants' (or the fans') capacity for stupidity ever again.
But there remains holdouts on BBI.
My friend, it will take as long as it takes. But franchise QBs don't grow on trees. They're actually really rare. So you don't give up the guy you have UNTIL you have something better. And right now the Giants don't have anybody better. So what's your point!
Just humor me. How many years are you comfortable giving Jones to demonstrate he's barely an average QB? Six? Seven? Ten?
Quote:
In the next few YEARS? How many more HCs and GMs are we going to go through before then?
My friend, it will take as long as it takes. But franchise QBs don't grow on trees. They're actually really rare. So you don't give up the guy you have UNTIL you have something better. And right now the Giants don't have anybody better. So what's your point!
Jones wasn't even the best QB on the Giants in 2023. Finding someone better won't be hard unless they actively choose not to. In which case someone new will find Jones' replacement
The point Cowherd is making is self-evident. Good teams make speedy evaluations.
Lets not make blanket statements when your own words can work both for an against you.
One can cherry pick when speedy evaluations have helped and also have hurt.
How many speedy QB evaluations have the Browns made over the years? Wouldn't they qualify as a team that is okay with cutting bait on a QB and going to another guy in an effort to win? I challenge you to count how many starting QBs they have had over the past 20 years.
How about the speedy evaluation the Chargers made on Drew Brees?
Now, this is not to say the Giants have no fucking clue... because I would agree with that statement. BUT there is a balance between making quick decisions and letting a player develop.
When it comes to Jones, they need to move on. He has had enough time.
They needed to move on from Eli two years before his retirement.
I truly believe the Mara's are putting their thumbs on the sale when it comes to some of these decisions.
What do we think a GM will do when the owner says something like this... "It is your decision, but I like Daniel"
2.0 X $80,000,000
Quote:
Is there a team in the league that A- would trade for Daniel Jones as a starter even if his contract wouldn’t allow, and B-Would any other team consider Jones a franchise QB after 6 years of let’s be honest pitiful injury plagued team. I mean the guy has taken out more head coaches in 6 years, it’s got to be some sort of a record.
I asked myself that question and everything else being equal my guess would be that any of Atlanta, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, and very likely Las Vegas would take Jones in a hearttbeat and would also think that teams like Denver and Seattle might take him also depending how they resolve their QB situations.
Nobody is taking Jones in a heartbeat. He's one foot out of the NFL. Yes, some team might add him on the cheap as a backup. Please look at his stats in 2023. They are awful. Most of his stats in his *good* year, 2022, do not support the idea that he is a good downfield passer. he's very limited. Teams know it. Just the Maras and some fans, and perhaps Joe Schoen, don't seem to get it.
Jones wasn't even the best QB on the Giants in 2023. Finding someone better won't be hard unless they actively choose not to. In which case someone new will find Jones' replacement
One thing I think I learned in school and doubled down at work is comparing apples to oranges doesn't work. So let's compare. Jones in his 5 games played one of the toughest schedules in Giants history with opponents that had something like a .600 winning percentage. In the remaining games it was something like closer to .400. In his 5 games the Giants D gave up over 30 PPG; in the remaining games it was 21 PPG; in his 5 games Jones operated behind an OL that included Ezudu and Neal at the tackles; Lemieux, Glowinski and McKethan at OG and Bredeson playing out of position at C; a unit that was historically bad. (And if you can't admit that we really don't have much to talk about) Pretty much the rest of the year it was Thomas at LT, Pugh at LG, Schmitz cack at C; Bredeson back at his natural OG postion and Phillips/Peart at RT. Through the first 5 games Saquon, Waller, Wan'Dale and Hyatt barely played whereas all played most of the rest of the schedule. Other than that it is an absolutely fair comparison!
Quote:
In comment 16387772 Scooter185 said:
Jones wasn't even the best QB on the Giants in 2023. Finding someone better won't be hard unless they actively choose not to. In which case someone new will find Jones' replacement
One thing I think I learned in school and doubled down at work is comparing apples to oranges doesn't work. So let's compare. Jones in his 5 games played one of the toughest schedules in Giants history with opponents that had something like a .600 winning percentage. In the remaining games it was something like closer to .400. In his 5 games the Giants D gave up over 30 PPG; in the remaining games it was 21 PPG; in his 5 games Jones operated behind an OL that included Ezudu and Neal at the tackles; Lemieux, Glowinski and McKethan at OG and Bredeson playing out of position at C; a unit that was historically bad. (And if you can't admit that we really don't have much to talk about) Pretty much the rest of the year it was Thomas at LT, Pugh at LG, Schmitz cack at C; Bredeson back at his natural OG postion and Phillips/Peart at RT. Through the first 5 games Saquon, Waller, Wan'Dale and Hyatt barely played whereas all played most of the rest of the schedule. Other than that it is an absolutely fair comparison!
5 Years. 59 Starts. 22-36-1 Record.
How about them apples?
How about them apples?
Last I heard it was a team game but I'll play!
In the last three years the Giants have had a 16-19-1 (.458) record with a playoff appearance and a playoff win with Jones starting. Without him they're 5-12 (.294).
But that's not the point. The question is who gives the Giants the best chance to win games going forward. And the Giants appear to have said pretty emphatically that its Jones. At the same time, though, nobody but nobody on this site is saying don't go looking for an upgrade at QB. Just don't get rid of your best option at the position without a better option.
Quote:
My friend, it will take as long as it takes. But franchise QBs don't grow on trees. They're actually really rare. So you don't give up the guy you have UNTIL you have something better. And right now the Giants don't have anybody better. So what's your point!
Just humor me. How many years are you comfortable giving Jones to demonstrate he's barely an average QB? Six? Seven? Ten?
How many years are you going to ignore that historically bad oline play is not part of the eval at QB?
You guys are super simplistic in this regard, and have few actual names or plans for that matter as alternatives. Nothing really except … Kenny Pickett and Malik Willis. Top picks you would have rushed and wasted first round picks. I have a memory.
Jones was beat to a pulp last year, full stop. He may go route of David Carr and be damaged goods. That is real.
Our ineffectiveness to draft and coach oline is far worse than our two year commitment to jones, whom given draft position and lack of alternatives at QB is fairly mute. Still haven’t heard the failures in years past to replace him with a name.
And Manhattan,mature? Not mature I guess. I’m fairly reasonable. Your take is a retrospective one, and full credit if you got it right.
Terps, please stick around here next year if he plays well. I’ll be rooting for Daniel’s or McCarthy, if we take this year, because we are in range.
Quote:
5 Years. 59 Starts. 22-36-1 Record.
How about them apples?
Last I heard it was a team game but I'll play!
In the last three years the Giants have had a 16-19-1 (.458) record with a playoff appearance and a playoff win with Jones starting. Without him they're 5-12 (.294).
But that's not the point. The question is who gives the Giants the best chance to win games going forward. And the Giants appear to have said pretty emphatically that its Jones. At the same time, though, nobody but nobody on this site is saying don't go looking for an upgrade at QB. Just don't get rid of your best option at the position without a better option.
The QB that gives the Giants the chance going forward is The Player To Be Named Later. That is what offseason are for.
When your current best option is a losing QB, your option has no value so don't concern yourself with it.
What would be the reaction around here if the Giants traded a 2 for a QB, went to a SB, ditched the QB, then traded three 1s and a 3 to draft another QB who hung around for a couple of years before Wentzing out as a bust? And it's not exactly the case they knew Purdy was the real deal and just played peek-a-boo with the rest of the league until the 7th round. They were lucky, incredibly, gob-smackingly, lucky. Not Good.
And further moral to the story: Be wary of drafting a QB from North Dakota State in the first round.
Quote:
5 Years. 59 Starts. 22-36-1 Record.
How about them apples?
Last I heard it was a team game but I'll play!
In the last three years the Giants have had a 16-19-1 (.458) record with a playoff appearance and a playoff win with Jones starting. Without him they're 5-12 (.294).
But that's not the point. The question is who gives the Giants the best chance to win games going forward. And the Giants appear to have said pretty emphatically that its Jones. At the same time, though, nobody but nobody on this site is saying don't go looking for an upgrade at QB. Just don't get rid of your best option at the position without a better option.
Sine you are cherrypicking time frames. In 2023 the Giants were 1-5 with Daniel Jones and 5-6 without him.
Since (sp) you are cherry picking (sp) time frames. In 2023 the Giants were 1-5 with Daniel Jones and 5-6 without him. [/quote]
They were. But again its apples to oranges. I believe you can make a pretty good argument that they start the season 0-5 without Jones and finish with 7-8 wins with him based on the way he played in 2022.
Quote:
In comment 16387888 ThomasG said:
Quote:
5 Years. 59 Starts. 22-36-1 Record.
How about them apples?
Last I heard it was a team game but I'll play!
In the last three years the Giants have had a 16-19-1 (.458) record with a playoff appearance and a playoff win with Jones starting. Without him they're 5-12 (.294).
But that's not the point. The question is who gives the Giants the best chance to win games going forward. And the Giants appear to have said pretty emphatically that its Jones. At the same time, though, nobody but nobody on this site is saying don't go looking for an upgrade at QB. Just don't get rid of your best option at the position without a better option.
Sine you are cherrypicking time frames. In 2023 the Giants were 1-5 with Daniel Jones and 5-6 without him.
Dallas, San Fran, Miami, Cardinals, Bills, Seahawks.
Quote:
.
We need to move on at QB, but this idea that it was somehow obvious that they should’ve tossed Jones overboard after ‘22 is asinine.
The Giants weren't deciding to toss him overboard, though. His contract was expiring. Agreed the Eagle game he was, essentially, no longer a Giant. He was a free agent. The decision to toss him overboard has been made by Schoen a year earlier when he declined his 5th year option.
The question to ask is: "If Jones had put up this exact career in Atlanta or Houston or Denver, would it have made sense to pay him 4/$160?"
Paying Daniel Jones is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen the Giants do, and that's saying something. The Giants, as well as the fans and media that supported the decision, were thinking based on sentimentality and blind optimism. Like children. Pathetic.
It’s interesting that around free agency time, NFL contract announcements always need the nuance of guaranteed money. But in the case of this one particular contract, 4 years/160 million is regurgitated ad infinitum. The guaranteed money in the deal is middle of the pack at the position. It was literally the smallest guarantee of any current QB who signed a multi year deal under age of 30.
They liked him enough that they didn’t want him to get away, but they didn’t love him enough to make a serious commitment. If they were drafting high enough, they’d draft his replacement. His contract doesn’t prevent that. They still might draft his replacement or competition elsewhere in the draft.
The style of the structure matters less then the people you have in place.
Quote:
In comment 16387679 Toth029 said:
Quote:
When is a 7th rd choice a big swing?
When you already dropped three #1s on a qb that hasn’t proved himself. Some teams (ahem) wouldn’t draft a qb to avoid undue pressure on the presumed incumbent.
And when should they have drafted a QB, but didn’t? In the draft that hasn’t happened yet?
SF drafted Lance in ‘21 after spending 3 #1 picks; they then drafted Purdy in the following draft
NYG drafted Jones in 2019, and haven’t drafted a QB since then.
They are not the same.
How many years are you going to ignore that historically bad oline play is not part of the eval at QB?
You guys are super simplistic in this regard, and have few actual names or plans for that matter as alternatives. Nothing really except … Kenny Pickett and Malik Willis. Top picks you would have rushed and wasted first round picks. I have a memory.
Jones was beat to a pulp last year, full stop. He may go route of David Carr and be damaged goods. That is real.
Our ineffectiveness to draft and coach oline is far worse than our two year commitment to jones, whom given draft position and lack of alternatives at QB is fairly mute. Still haven’t heard the failures in years past to replace him with a name.
And Manhattan,mature? Not mature I guess. I’m fairly reasonable. Your take is a retrospective one, and full credit if you got it right.
Terps, please stick around here next year if he plays well. I’ll be rooting for Daniel’s or McCarthy, if we take this year, because we are in range.
Alas, you are wrong on my view. I have said scores and scores of times the OL is a problem, too. However, we diverge at this point because I see the OL and Jones as problems. Of course, Jones is going to get more of my attention because he's the QB and the highest paid player.
I will ask the simple question again - how many years do you need to feel Jones deserves to prove himself? Six (this year)? Seven? Eight? Nine? Ten?
Because right now, I think we are close to unchartered waters with the number of chances we are giving our first round QB...
Quote:
In comment 16387700 shockeyisthebest8056 said:
Quote:
.
We need to move on at QB, but this idea that it was somehow obvious that they should’ve tossed Jones overboard after ‘22 is asinine.
The Giants weren't deciding to toss him overboard, though. His contract was expiring. Agreed the Eagle game he was, essentially, no longer a Giant. He was a free agent. The decision to toss him overboard has been made by Schoen a year earlier when he declined his 5th year option.
The question to ask is: "If Jones had put up this exact career in Atlanta or Houston or Denver, would it have made sense to pay him 4/$160?"
Paying Daniel Jones is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen the Giants do, and that's saying something. The Giants, as well as the fans and media that supported the decision, were thinking based on sentimentality and blind optimism. Like children. Pathetic.
It’s interesting that around free agency time, NFL contract announcements always need the nuance of guaranteed money. But in the case of this one particular contract, 4 years/160 million is regurgitated ad infinitum. The guaranteed money in the deal is middle of the pack at the position. It was literally the smallest guarantee of any current QB who signed a multi year deal under age of 30.
They liked him enough that they didn’t want him to get away, but they didn’t love him enough to make a serious commitment. If they were drafting high enough, they’d draft his replacement. His contract doesn’t prevent that. They still might draft his replacement or competition elsewhere in the draft.
3 years for $81M is still an absurdity for a player of Jones's quality. Unforgivably stupid.
Quote:
In comment 16387888 ThomasG said:
Quote:
5 Years. 59 Starts. 22-36-1 Record.
How about them apples?
Last I heard it was a team game but I'll play!
In the last three years the Giants have had a 16-19-1 (.458) record with a playoff appearance and a playoff win with Jones starting. Without him they're 5-12 (.294).
But that's not the point. The question is who gives the Giants the best chance to win games going forward. And the Giants appear to have said pretty emphatically that its Jones. At the same time, though, nobody but nobody on this site is saying don't go looking for an upgrade at QB. Just don't get rid of your best option at the position without a better option.
Sine you are cherrypicking time frames. In 2023 the Giants were 1-5 with Daniel Jones and 5-6 without him.
Who did they beat? Their toughest games were early in the season. And best offensive player didn't return until midseason (Thomas). Taylor and DeVito didn't have a guard playing LT.
I will ask the simple question again - how many years do you need to feel Jones deserves to prove himself? Six (this year)? Seven? Eight? Nine? Ten?
bw I have never seen you as dense but c'mon man no one is saying give Jones another chance what we are saying that right now he's the best option the Giants have at the most important position in pro sports and you don't simply get rid of your best option unless you have something better to relace it and right now the Giants don't have that. DSo he'll get 'chances' until something better comes along.
bw I have never seen you as dense but c'mon man no one is saying give Jones another chance what we are saying that right now he's the best option the Giants have at the most important position in pro sports and you don't simply get rid of your best option unless you have something better to relace it and right now the Giants don't have that. DSo he'll get 'chances' until something better comes along.
Saying that Jones is our "best option" is like your lawyer telling you that your best option is to plead guilty and serve five years in jail.
Quote:
I will ask the simple question again - how many years do you need to feel Jones deserves to prove himself? Six (this year)? Seven? Eight? Nine? Ten?
bw I have never seen you as dense but c'mon man no one is saying give Jones another chance what we are saying that right now he's the best option the Giants have at the most important position in pro sports and you don't simply get rid of your best option unless you have something better to relace it and right now the Giants don't have that. DSo he'll get 'chances' until something better comes along.
Jones' ranks in 2023:
RANKINGS AMONG NFL STARTERS:
TD% (below 32nd)
INT% (below 32nd)
SUCC% (30th)
Y/A (31st)
Y/G (32nd)
QB Rate (below 32nd)
QBR (30th)
Sack% (below 32nd)
Jones is not the best option if Schoen makes any kind of effort at all. Cousins would be a massive upgrade. Minshew would be a fair upgrade. So would Brisset or Tyrod. Jones cannot function in a downfield passing offense.
Jones is the best option if you don't try at all to replace him.
Quote:
bw I have never seen you as dense but c'mon man no one is saying give Jones another chance what we are saying that right now he's the best option the Giants have at the most important position in pro sports and you don't simply get rid of your best option unless you have something better to relace it and right now the Giants don't have that. DSo he'll get 'chances' until something better comes along.
Saying that Jones is our "best option" is like your lawyer telling you that your best option is to plead guilty and serve five years in jail.
... and that's for shoplifting.
Quote:
bw I have never seen you as dense but c'mon man no one is saying give Jones another chance what we are saying that right now he's the best option the Giants have at the most important position in pro sports and you don't simply get rid of your best option unless you have something better to relace it and right now the Giants don't have that. DSo he'll get 'chances' until something better comes along.
Saying that Jones is our "best option" is like your lawyer telling you that your best option is to plead guilty and serve five years in jail.
And that's why we call things "A rebuild." You are stuck with lesser options for a while.
Quote:
In comment 16387907 Snorkels said:
Quote:
In comment 16387888 ThomasG said:
Quote:
5 Years. 59 Starts. 22-36-1 Record.
How about them apples?
Last I heard it was a team game but I'll play!
In the last three years the Giants have had a 16-19-1 (.458) record with a playoff appearance and a playoff win with Jones starting. Without him they're 5-12 (.294).
But that's not the point. The question is who gives the Giants the best chance to win games going forward. And the Giants appear to have said pretty emphatically that its Jones. At the same time, though, nobody but nobody on this site is saying don't go looking for an upgrade at QB. Just don't get rid of your best option at the position without a better option.
Sine you are cherrypicking time frames. In 2023 the Giants were 1-5 with Daniel Jones and 5-6 without him.
Who did they beat? Their toughest games were early in the season. And best offensive player didn't return until midseason (Thomas). Taylor and DeVito didn't have a guard playing LT.
This is what the defense of Daniel Jones has come to? The schedule breakdown?
Wake the fuck up. If we have to now dissect the schedule to find excuses as to why an UDFA rookie QB and a career backup outperformed our $40M/per QB it should sound alarm bells for every single Giants fan on the planet. The excuse train is infuriating. There should have been a MASSIVE drop off in the play of the QB when Jones went out. There wasn’t. And THAT is a fucking problem whether you idiots want to acknowledge it or not. The Daniel Jones excuse list at this point wouldn’t fit on a CVS receipt. They’d have to change the roll 3 or 4 times
But without the F-word
The excuses for Jones are so old & tiresome.
The excuses for Jones are so old & tiresome.
We can and likely will continue to talk about this every day. However, both Daboll and Schoen's jobs are tied to what they do with the QB position THIS YEAR.
The only way they keep their jobs are if one of these occur..
1. They find a new QB who plays well and we make the playoffs again.
2. They roll with Jones again and somehow he miraculously turns the corner.
3. They stay with Jones and we get the same performance but they keep their jobs because sticking with Jones is what they were urged to do by Mara.
Unless Mara is putting his thumb on the scale, they are taking a HUGE risk staying with Jones as the starter. We all know due to cap reasons he will be on the team this year.
This team needs a starter who is not currently on this roster.
"He's in there with our early-morning workout people. He's in there by 6:30. He's already getting his workout in every day. So, he's going to work hard at it."
We gave up on Brown sooner than this.
However, not the Giants fault. Neal was rated by almost every NFL team as the top offensive lineman coming out of the 22’ draft. Just bad luck, I guess. However, his foot speed was questionable. If there was going to be an area of weakness in Neal’s play, it was going to be pass blocking speed rushers.
Guess what? It wasn’t only speed rushers who Neal had difficulty with!!!