They asked him to put a percentage on the Giants taking a first round QB, he put it high, just above 75%.
He said Jones is tracking to be ready for week 1 and could be leaving the seat warm for the drafted QB.
It's lying season. Going to be a lot of noise the next 8 weeks.
Link - (
New Window )
Quote:
Is there is no price to steep for a franchise changing QB. What is CJ Stroud worth to the Texans now? Think they think he’d be worth 2 or 3 1sts? How about Patrick Mahomes? Josh Allen? THE guy is worth everything.
Agreed. Wrote this in a few threads.
Now someone’s opinion on the QB is one thing..but if the giants view one of these QBs as “the guy” there is NO realistic trade package that is too step.
As devils advocate, maybe that guy exists at 6? Idk , but i trust the front office to be objective.
Maybe he does. Maybe he doesn't at 1 but exists at 15? That is the crapshoot this is.
Quote:
This after just a mere 12 months have passed from signing Daniel Jones into what was labeled as an A-grade contract for the Giants.
How can that be?
Poor play, a 2nd neck injury and a torn ACL. It’s not that complicated.
We re-grade drafts after 3 years. What's the re-grade on the Jones deal after 12 months?
Quote:
In comment 16409802 Big Rick in FL said:
Quote:
In comment 16409748 GoDeep13 said:
Quote:
Is there is no price to steep for a franchise changing QB. What is CJ Stroud worth to the Texans now? Think they think he’d be worth 2 or 3 1sts? How about Patrick Mahomes? Josh Allen? THE guy is worth everything.
That's why I don't understand the people that don't want us to trade up. We don't even have to look at other teams. Just look at our previous starting QB. No one gives a shit what we gave up and they wouldn't care even if we gave up double the original trade.
Sure the QB could end up being a bust. So could the players you draft with the picks you didn't trade.
Here are our 2 most recent 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks. Pretend we've never seen any of them play in the NFL. Just going off of them as draft prospects. Would you trade these guys for the #1 pick? This is similar to what you'd be trading for a QB. I know my answer.
Evan Neal, Deonte Banks, Wan'Dale, JMS, Jalin Hyatt & Josh Ezeudu.
Your analysis assumes that you are certain that trading up will net the next Patrick Holmes, Josh Allen, or Lamar Jackson. (And Baltimore actually passed on drafting Jackson twice.)
As this article notes, most trade ups for QBs fail. Link - ( New Window )
Idk if this reply was meant for me, but I'm not assuming a QB we trade up for is the next Mahomes/Allen/Lamar. I've stated numerous times the QB could be a bust, but he could also end up being a great QB. I'm willing to take that chance.
That's fine. I respect your opinion. I'm not willing to take that chance, not given the cost to do so.
Quote:
This after just a mere 12 months have passed from signing Daniel Jones into what was labeled as an A-grade contract for the Giants.
How can that be?
Poor play, a 2nd neck injury and a torn ACL. It’s not that complicated.
The issue I have with citing the ACL is that it's a well studied injury with a good recovery prognosis for a QB of Jones's age and physical condition.
The neck injury: they felt good enough after the first neck injury to 120 times in 2022 and then pay him. They felt good enough after the second neck injury to put him back on the field against the Raiders before he tore the ACL.
Joe Burrow just finished a season out injured for the second time in his career too. Are the Bengals thinking of moving on?
If the Giants really believe in Jones an ACL injury shouldn't kill that belief, right?
Not all that interesting.
Tell us how he'll play. That is the opinion we want to hear.
Drafting a QB at 6 I can buy, but trading away draft capital and absorbing the DJ contract and expecting the team to all of the sudden have different results is crazy. The Giants operate the cap differently than most teams. They are not a kick the can down the road type of team. If we trade up I don’t see a way for this team to improve under the current situation.
This is totally different than when we drafted Eli. We didn’t have a high salary QB and we had FA money and a solid team. The teams that generally trades up for a QB early in the draft usually crash and burn. They trade away picks and don’t have the ability to build the roster. The QB talent may be there this year but our team isn’t ready to aid in the success. Look at last years draft, Carolina traded away players and picks and many thought Young was the clear #1. The Giants are Carolina 2.0 if we trade up imo. Shitty roster will get the QB killed.
Drafting a QB at 6 I can buy, but trading away draft capital and absorbing the DJ contract and expecting the team to all of the sudden have different results is crazy.
The contract is what it is. You can't pass up on a QB that you evaluate and think can be a solution because you gave out a mistake contract. That's how you make giving the bad contract *worse*, by allowing it to influence what you do going forward.
Until then, I fully expect "we really tried to make a deal to trade up but oh gosh, the asking price was just soooo steep. We have full confidence in Daniel Jones to be our franchise qb." when trade down or they take a wideout or some o-lineman in round 1 and spend a 3rd or 4th round pick on a qb from East Bumfuck State.
Drafting a QB at 6 I can buy, but trading away draft capital and absorbing the DJ contract and expecting the team to all of the sudden have different results is crazy. The Giants operate the cap differently than most teams. They are not a kick the can down the road type of team. If we trade up I don’t see a way for this team to improve under the current situation.
This is totally different than when we drafted Eli. We didn’t have a high salary QB and we had FA money and a solid team. The teams that generally trades up for a QB early in the draft usually crash and burn. They trade away picks and don’t have the ability to build the roster. The QB talent may be there this year but our team isn’t ready to aid in the success. Look at last years draft, Carolina traded away players and picks and many thought Young was the clear #1. The Giants are Carolina 2.0 if we trade up imo. Shitty roster will get the QB killed.
You overvalue draft pick volume. It is the quality of the picks not the quantity.
And the best QBs may get drafted more often in the first round but that doesn't mean they typically go in perfect order. In a deep QB draft QB3 may very well be QB1.
Lastly, drafting a QB isn't about making the Super Bowl in Year 1. It's about being a team that consistently competes for them over his career.
his lips were touched by the hand of God
Quote:
In comment 16409945 ThomasG said:
Quote:
This after just a mere 12 months have passed from signing Daniel Jones into what was labeled as an A-grade contract for the Giants.
How can that be?
Poor play, a 2nd neck injury and a torn ACL. It’s not that complicated.
The issue I have with citing the ACL is that it's a well studied injury with a good recovery prognosis for a QB of Jones's age and physical condition.
The neck injury: they felt good enough after the first neck injury to 120 times in 2022 and then pay him. They felt good enough after the second neck injury to put him back on the field against the Raiders before he tore the ACL.
Joe Burrow just finished a season out injured for the second time in his career too. Are the Bengals thinking of moving on?
If the Giants really believe in Jones an ACL injury shouldn't kill that belief, right?
This regime never FULLY believed in Jones, hence the deal structure. It’s really not that complicated. And everything that could go wrong went wrong.
Joe Burrow is a million times better QB than Jones. I cited poor play first. That’s obvious. If the injuries are taken as an opportunity to save face and a built in excuse to draft a QB, so be it. We all got to where we wanted to get to regardless. A new rookie QB.
Hopefully we get the guy we want and don’t settle.
Quote:
In comment 16409731 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Until proven otherwise this is the regime that gave Jones 4/$160M.
Hyperbole. You're smart enough to know how they structured the deal. They're out after 2024 relatively unscathed. It was a hedged bet that lost but still...hedged.
They hedged, but the possibility that he's the QB all four years of the deal is still real. They hedged, but they want to be right.
And that's if Schoen and Daboll are the ones making the call. Look above to Sean's post. We know who's actually making the call.
Go terps you're almost like the Alex Jones of BBI for reasonable members. You like to fear monger everyone into believing your conspiracy based rhetoric is fact. Namely Mara is a puppet master and Schoen won't pivot, adapt or budge off the Jones contract. And this is someone that worries Mara may have been meddling, but potentially is learning to be more hands off in recent years letting our GM create an inner circle of utmost NFL scouting and personnel minds.
I think you're an intelligent person and good poster but your boogeyman, fear mongering rhetoric gets a little old. I think everyone gets what you believe. Why do you have to keep repeating it so repetitively though?
Tom Brady, Drew Brees and Payton Manning all rolled into one... doesn't matter.
Game One he is sitting on the bench watching Daniel Jones at QB.
After that, it's anyone's guess. It all depends on what Daniel Jones does behind center.
Quote:
Is there is no price to steep for a franchise changing QB. What is CJ Stroud worth to the Texans now? Think they think he’d be worth 2 or 3 1sts? How about Patrick Mahomes? Josh Allen? THE guy is worth everything.
True but those are after the facts examples. In fact Mahomes and Allen were not the top choices at their positions in their drafts.
I think the best answer is this, if you feel you have a potential guy to be a Mahomes or an Allen then you make efforts to get them.
The absolute best scenario for us would be:
We get a QB (whichever one is not important at the moment) and we see Jones rehab nicely and he begins the season as the starter. With that he looks ok to pretty decent early on and some teams elsewhere have QB injuries.. We trade Jones before the deadline and move our rookie into the starting position for the rest of the season.
That would be best case scenario.
The trade won’t happen because Jones has no value unless it is to a team with an injured starter and a backup worse than Jones.
Seeing what the Saints just did with Carr shows how impactful when these guarantees kicked in. This was not some massive commitment to Jones.
Quote:
In comment 16409734 Danny Kanell said:
Quote:
In comment 16409731 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Until proven otherwise this is the regime that gave Jones 4/$160M.
Hyperbole. You're smart enough to know how they structured the deal. They're out after 2024 relatively unscathed. It was a hedged bet that lost but still...hedged.
They hedged, but the possibility that he's the QB all four years of the deal is still real. They hedged, but they want to be right.
And that's if Schoen and Daboll are the ones making the call. Look above to Sean's post. We know who's actually making the call.
Go terps you're almost like the Alex Jones of BBI for reasonable members. You like to fear monger everyone into believing your conspiracy based rhetoric is fact. Namely Mara is a puppet master and Schoen won't pivot, adapt or budge off the Jones contract. And this is someone that worries Mara may have been meddling, but potentially is learning to be more hands off in recent years letting our GM create an inner circle of utmost NFL scouting and personnel minds.
I think you're an intelligent person and good poster but your boogeyman, fear mongering rhetoric gets a little old. I think everyone gets what you believe. Why do you have to keep repeating it so repetitively though?
Whose dupe are you?
Yes please
You cant split the baby and try to hold onto assets and get the top QB.
If your going in, go all in.
You cant split the baby and try to hold onto assets and get the top QB.
If your going in, go all in.
I do too. I'm fine doing it when you're on the clock, but taking the leftovers rubs me the wrong way.
You cant split the baby and try to hold onto assets and get the top QB.
If your going in, go all in.
was buffalo wrong to move up to pick #7 for qb3?
of course they will try to move up for whoever they like best but if chicago decides caleb is it there is no trade they will accept. same with washington and whoever they like best.
it's not impossible that more than 1 guy makes the grade or that different teams grade players differently. nobody will know until picks start getting made.
You cant split the baby and try to hold onto assets and get the top QB.
If your going in, go all in.
Bears would cost will be cost prohibitive, IF they decided to sell it, which I doubt after listening to Poles talk about Fields.
Quote:
trade up to 3 and take the guy available move. If your gonna move get to 1 and really have your pick.
You cant split the baby and try to hold onto assets and get the top QB.
If your going in, go all in.
I do too. I'm fine doing it when you're on the clock, but taking the leftovers rubs me the wrong way.
was stroud leftovers last year? by the time the draft rolls around it may be that bryce was a more consensus qb1 than caleb. as prospects id probably still take bryce over this years class but im a big bryce believer.
Quote:
And trade away a bunch of draft capital to get the 3rd best QB? I think the Bears are going QB, Washington is going QB, NE should go QB but may trade if the guy they want it gone.
Drafting a QB at 6 I can buy, but trading away draft capital and absorbing the DJ contract and expecting the team to all of the sudden have different results is crazy.
The contract is what it is. You can't pass up on a QB that you evaluate and think can be a solution because you gave out a mistake contract. That's how you make giving the bad contract *worse*, by allowing it to influence what you do going forward.
Eli's last 6-8 years were wasted because we had no talent around him. Was he a bad QB all of the sudden? His best year was 2011 and he had a great supporting cast. Over 500 more passing yards that year compared to any other year.
The supporting cast matters. We have no supporting cast, It is setting up a QB for failure. Look at just about every HOF QB and you can see a clear cast of players that helped them get to where they are. They are not dealing with the worst units. Mahomes has Kelce and a great OL, Burrow has great WRs, Montana had Rice, Brady and Gronk, Allen has Diggs. Very rare to see a QB successful without a complimentary piece or 2 or 3. We have no OL, No RB, No TE and No real threat at WR. Thats way too many holes for a QB to be successful and then trading away draft picks to get a QB. I dont see how it can be a successful in a trade up scenario.
These guys had Jones for over a year and gave him a big contract. They saw him day in and day out and said he's our guy.
My point is if a guy at QB falls to you at 6 by all means take the QB. Trading up to 1 is going to cost too much especially with the cap ramifications of having Jones contract. The rookie savings is lost.
Quote:
In comment 16409993 Rudy5757 said:
Quote:
And trade away a bunch of draft capital to get the 3rd best QB? I think the Bears are going QB, Washington is going QB, NE should go QB but may trade if the guy they want it gone.
Drafting a QB at 6 I can buy, but trading away draft capital and absorbing the DJ contract and expecting the team to all of the sudden have different results is crazy.
The contract is what it is. You can't pass up on a QB that you evaluate and think can be a solution because you gave out a mistake contract. That's how you make giving the bad contract *worse*, by allowing it to influence what you do going forward.
Eli's last 6-8 years were wasted because we had no talent around him. Was he a bad QB all of the sudden? His best year was 2011 and he had a great supporting cast. Over 500 more passing yards that year compared to any other year.
The supporting cast matters. We have no supporting cast, It is setting up a QB for failure. Look at just about every HOF QB and you can see a clear cast of players that helped them get to where they are. They are not dealing with the worst units. Mahomes has Kelce and a great OL, Burrow has great WRs, Montana had Rice, Brady and Gronk, Allen has Diggs. Very rare to see a QB successful without a complimentary piece or 2 or 3. We have no OL, No RB, No TE and No real threat at WR. Thats way too many holes for a QB to be successful and then trading away draft picks to get a QB. I dont see how it can be a successful in a trade up scenario.
These guys had Jones for over a year and gave him a big contract. They saw him day in and day out and said he's our guy.
My point is if a guy at QB falls to you at 6 by all means take the QB. Trading up to 1 is going to cost too much especially with the cap ramifications of having Jones contract. The rookie savings is lost.
When can we stop comparing Jones' situation to all-time greats? Two things can be true, the supporting cast can be subpar, and Jones can be (and is) a bad quarterback. And we are at the point where he is holding us back. Great QBs don't play as poorly as Jones played in 2023. They just don't. The same players you mention, were all able to produce when they lost great pieces, or had less than desirable circumstances. They've been mentioned before, I won't detail them here. But QB talent matters. More than context, which is also important.
To answer your questions. Yes, Eli had a precipitous drop in the latter half of his career. He wasn't the same player in 2018 that he was in 2011. He declined. It happens to most QBs.
And by the same logic you use when you say:
"These guys had Jones for over a year and gave him a big contract. They saw him day in and day out and said he's our guy."
Well if they now decide he is not the guy, shouldn't you listen? Were they right when they gave him the *limited commitment* contract? But then wrong to pivot away from him (if they do) after a disastrous performance by him? You can't have it both ways. Don't tell us they said he was the guy, so he's the guy, even if they have decided to move away. And for the record, I never thought Daniel Jones was a good QB, and felt the contract was a huge error, and moving away post haste is the correct move.
Only after failing to find a leather helmet wearing drop kicker.
IF there's a guy the Giants wants is still on the board at 3, that's when the Giants should pull the trigger. If they make the trade in advance, their intel on what the top two are going to do better be darn good.
Much depends on NE's approach to the draft. If they get a top vet prior, they'll probably be fielding offers prior, so it may require a leap of faith to make the deal before hand.
Quote:
In comment 16410084 Dankbeerman said:
Quote:
trade up to 3 and take the guy available move. If your gonna move get to 1 and really have your pick.
You cant split the baby and try to hold onto assets and get the top QB.
If your going in, go all in.
I do too. I'm fine doing it when you're on the clock, but taking the leftovers rubs me the wrong way.
was stroud leftovers last year? by the time the draft rolls around it may be that bryce was a more consensus qb1 than caleb. as prospects id probably still take bryce over this years class but im a big bryce believer.
Quote:
trade up to 3 and take the guy available move. If your gonna move get to 1 and really have your pick.
You cant split the baby and try to hold onto assets and get the top QB.
If your going in, go all in.
was buffalo wrong to move up to pick #7 for qb3?
of course they will try to move up for whoever they like best but if chicago decides caleb is it there is no trade they will accept. same with washington and whoever they like best.
it's not impossible that more than 1 guy makes the grade or that different teams grade players differently. nobody will know until picks start getting made.
Buffalo didn't move to the top 3 to take Allen. They traded up for him after he dropped out of the top 6.
The move from that draft that would be parallel would be the Jets who moved to 3.
Quote:
what were the 5 pages of circular logic about in this case? disputing the maraphobes who have for months (including threads today) said the giants wouldnt entertain a qb in rd 1? guess you caught me red handed in my dj pom poms?
Oh, we're only talking about "in this case"?
That's convenient. And I'll save you the trouble - I already have the mute button extension. I just won't bother to use it until after I get to see all the RAS screengrabs.
so your comment was a side swipe not related the subject of this thread? isnt "this case" this thread, and a comment i made pertaining to the subject of this thread?
like i said you may as well stake your claim on your next handle, gatorade googs has a nice ring to it.
My next handle? So after 18 years with this one handle, I'm going to just switch it up?
You are an odd dude, especially when you get a little sand in your diaper.
Quote:
In comment 16409995 Ten Ton Hammer said:
Quote:
In comment 16409993 Rudy5757 said:
Quote:
And trade away a bunch of draft capital to get the 3rd best QB? I think the Bears are going QB, Washington is going QB, NE should go QB but may trade if the guy they want it gone.
Drafting a QB at 6 I can buy, but trading away draft capital and absorbing the DJ contract and expecting the team to all of the sudden have different results is crazy.
The contract is what it is. You can't pass up on a QB that you evaluate and think can be a solution because you gave out a mistake contract. That's how you make giving the bad contract *worse*, by allowing it to influence what you do going forward.
Eli's last 6-8 years were wasted because we had no talent around him. Was he a bad QB all of the sudden? His best year was 2011 and he had a great supporting cast. Over 500 more passing yards that year compared to any other year.
The supporting cast matters. We have no supporting cast, It is setting up a QB for failure. Look at just about every HOF QB and you can see a clear cast of players that helped them get to where they are. They are not dealing with the worst units. Mahomes has Kelce and a great OL, Burrow has great WRs, Montana had Rice, Brady and Gronk, Allen has Diggs. Very rare to see a QB successful without a complimentary piece or 2 or 3. We have no OL, No RB, No TE and No real threat at WR. Thats way too many holes for a QB to be successful and then trading away draft picks to get a QB. I dont see how it can be a successful in a trade up scenario.
These guys had Jones for over a year and gave him a big contract. They saw him day in and day out and said he's our guy.
My point is if a guy at QB falls to you at 6 by all means take the QB. Trading up to 1 is going to cost too much especially with the cap ramifications of having Jones contract. The rookie savings is lost.
When can we stop comparing Jones' situation to all-time greats? Two things can be true, the supporting cast can be subpar, and Jones can be (and is) a bad quarterback. And we are at the point where he is holding us back. Great QBs don't play as poorly as Jones played in 2023. They just don't. The same players you mention, were all able to produce when they lost great pieces, or had less than desirable circumstances. They've been mentioned before, I won't detail them here. But QB talent matters. More than context, which is also important.
To answer your questions. Yes, Eli had a precipitous drop in the latter half of his career. He wasn't the same player in 2018 that he was in 2011. He declined. It happens to most QBs.
And by the same logic you use when you say:
"These guys had Jones for over a year and gave him a big contract. They saw him day in and day out and said he's our guy."
Well if they now decide he is not the guy, shouldn't you listen? Were they right when they gave him the *limited commitment* contract? But then wrong to pivot away from him (if they do) after a disastrous performance by him? You can't have it both ways. Don't tell us they said he was the guy, so he's the guy, even if they have decided to move away. And for the record, I never thought Daniel Jones was a good QB, and felt the contract was a huge error, and moving away post haste is the correct move.
Go back and look at Eli's career. In 2012 when the team was clearly old and his weapons were not fully there Eli's passing yards dropped by 1000 yards, Eli was not in decline. The teams talent was. Magically in 2014 and 2015 when they got OBJ his numbers jumped back up significantly, then OBJ gets hurt and his numbers decline again significantly. It clearly had to do with the talent around him.
Id argue that if they can't evaluate a guy they worked with on a daily basis then they probably arent the best people to pick a new QB either. But the reality is if you can't upgrade the talent around the QB, any QB will fail. If we trade a haul of picks and dont have the cap money to really get weapons we are repeating the process of having a good enough QB in a bad situation. If we had a solid team on O it's a different story.
Do you really think that? I don't know Jon, I'm reading it the complete opposite to be honest.
Quote:
In comment 16410084 Dankbeerman said:
Quote:
trade up to 3 and take the guy available move. If your gonna move get to 1 and really have your pick.
You cant split the baby and try to hold onto assets and get the top QB.
If your going in, go all in.
was buffalo wrong to move up to pick #7 for qb3?
of course they will try to move up for whoever they like best but if chicago decides caleb is it there is no trade they will accept. same with washington and whoever they like best.
it's not impossible that more than 1 guy makes the grade or that different teams grade players differently. nobody will know until picks start getting made.
What your indicating is that you would rather take the 3rd QB with out knowing who it would be to save a few assets then to pay full price to know you get your guy.
Buffalo didn't move to the top 3 to take Allen. They traded up for him after he dropped out of the top 6.
The move from that draft that would be parallel would be the Jets who moved to 3.
no dan, i didnt not say take the 3rd qb without knowing to save assets. did you read the post you replied to? i specifically said they will try to move up as high as they can for whoever they like best, just as buf did. anyone would.
if chicago/washington want qbs then 3 is the highest anyone else is going to get. but even that doesnt mean other teams wont take different qbs than whoever the giants like just as cleveland took mayfield and jets took darnold ahead of allen.
Quote:
until a deal is announced. They're going to pick a WR or OT and ride with giving Daniel more help.
Do you really think that? I don't know Jon, I'm reading it the complete opposite to be honest.
if mike g feels confident enough to predict they are doing it then there's no way it's not plan A (not that plan A always happens).
this board has a lot of dog catching the car right now. some have chased for so long they should find any other non-jones qb while concocting all manner of reasons why they didnt but now that it's being credibly reported as possible (and makes obvious sense given the draft) they seemingly wont believe it until they see it.
its not an unfair approach because nothing is ever guaranteed in draft but clearly they are correctly very much in the qb market.
Quote:
until a deal is announced. They're going to pick a WR or OT and ride with giving Daniel more help.
Do you really think that? I don't know Jon, I'm reading it the complete opposite to be honest.
To this point, they've done little to deviate from past big decisions, and Jones is the biggest.
After $140M and six games, I don't see a pivot unless ownership is on board. I hope they can leverage the injuries to induce change, but until it's actually done ...
NYG typically lags behind in the big decision, forward vision category, and I'm still waiting to Schoen to demonstrate he's strong enough to break the cycle.
I believe the report they will investigate/attempt to move up, I just don’t see it happening with the QB needs of the teams above us.
NYG typically lags behind in the big decision, forward vision category, and I'm still waiting to Schoen to demonstrate he's strong enough to break the cycle.
he declined the 5yo, he stood firm in barkley negotiations, his first move was hiring his brian over the bc brian we knew mara wanted badly.
at what point do we stop grading him on an imaginary curve?
Barkley was tagged last year instead of traded, so I don't know that I share your view that he was tough on Barkley.
In a nutshell, he hasn't moved on from either player so I am not sure why he would get "credit" for doing tough things he immediately undid.
Barkley was tagged last year instead of traded, so I don't know that I share your view that he was tough on Barkley.
In a nutshell, he hasn't moved on from either player so I am not sure why he would get "credit" for doing tough things he immediately undid.
he hasnt moved on from either player because at those times he didnt have good alternatives and the 2 of them carried the offense to it's best year since obj. yes it was still middle of the pack but middle of the pack at best but thats better than back of the pack.
its a lot easier to blast players to siberia when you arent the one responsible for finding their replacements.
Quote:
absolutely the opposite is true in that regard.
NYG typically lags behind in the big decision, forward vision category, and I'm still waiting to Schoen to demonstrate he's strong enough to break the cycle.
he declined the 5yo, he stood firm in barkley negotiations, his first move was hiring his brian over the bc brian we knew mara wanted badly.
at what point do we stop grading him on an imaginary curve?
He blew the QB decision, there is no imagination over it.
Howabout drop the condescension, it's not like I'm uninformed.
Quote:
In comment 16410404 JonC said:
Quote:
absolutely the opposite is true in that regard.
NYG typically lags behind in the big decision, forward vision category, and I'm still waiting to Schoen to demonstrate he's strong enough to break the cycle.
he declined the 5yo, he stood firm in barkley negotiations, his first move was hiring his brian over the bc brian we knew mara wanted badly.
at what point do we stop grading him on an imaginary curve?
He blew the QB decision, there is no imagination over it.
Howabout drop the condescension, it's not like I'm uninformed.
honest question, starting with players from the day that schoen took over, who would gm jonc's starting qb be right now?
Quote:
He gets credit for decisions he didn't immediately walk back. Yes he declined the 5th year option on Jones. Then he signed him to a contract that paid him much more than the 5th year option was worth.
Barkley was tagged last year instead of traded, so I don't know that I share your view that he was tough on Barkley.
In a nutshell, he hasn't moved on from either player so I am not sure why he would get "credit" for doing tough things he immediately undid.
he hasnt moved on from either player because at those times he didnt have good alternatives and the 2 of them carried the offense to it's best year since obj. yes it was still middle of the pack but middle of the pack at best but thats better than back of the pack.
its a lot easier to blast players to siberia when you arent the one responsible for finding their replacements.
There were numerous good alternatives to paying Jones $82M in guaranteed money. They already had a plan in place with a better player in Tyrod Taylor as the bridge to the 2023 and 2024 drafts. And before you cite Taylor's health, I'll remind you Jones played 6 games in 2023.
Taylor/cheap vet FA or draft pick/DeVito - completely realistic QB room that would have been better than 2023, cheaper than 2023, and wouldn't have had negative impacts after 2023. The only catch is it would have been a tough sell for the mouth breathers.
He blew the QB decision, there is no imagination over it.
Howabout drop the condescension, it's not like I'm uninformed.
You need to look at this differently.
Yes, Schoen made a mistake. But it was the "right mistake" because he had no other options. If they could give out internal awards at 1925 GW, Schoen would get the "He Did the Best He Could Award"...