The national media is lumping NYG in with the Panthers as the bottom feeders of the league. As I've said, Schoen's actions do not line up with a franchise which is going to be a bottom feeder.
--We can all debate the Jones contract. At most, Schoen thinks he's a franchise QB. At the least, he thinks he's a bridge QB until the right QB comes along. Either way, Schoen is opting for the roster build strategy until the next QB is here.
--Schoen traded a top 40 pick for Brian Burns and immediately gave him a top tier level contract in his position group.
--Schoen invested heavily in the OL through FA.
--NYG spent a total of $221.8M in free agency (ranked 4th among all NFL teams).
--The Giants drafted Malik Nabers who should be a WR1 and was considered the best non QB in the draft by some.
--This regime has now had 3 drafts which should be the foundation of the roster outside of QB.
I cannot believe how many fans here are just casually predicting a 4 win season with a poor roster being the reasoning. That feels like a total cop out. A few weeks ago I made a thread stating I didn't believe Schoen was on the hot seat, but I had the assumption NYG would be competitive, let's say hovering around .500 and "in the hunt" in December.
However, if the Giants are as bad as people think despite the actions Schoen has taken this offseason, I'd be all for another total housecleaning. When Schoen says they are a few players away, that doesn't mean 4-13. That should mean a few players from competing for a NFC title. Not a few players from going .500.
The Giants brand has never been worse imo. They can only get out of it by winning consistently, but another season over by October and this franchise would be in desperate need for any kind of credibility.
TLDR: Schoen's actions in free agency, the draft and trading for Burns do not align with a team that is going to be as bad as many think. The Giants need to be at minimum, competitive and around .500.
Schoen is casting his lot with Jones and Lock.
Let's hope for our sakes and his that it works out.
I personally believe that the Giants are much better off this season having drafted Nabers instead of a QB. The facts are that the Giants only felt good about 2-3 QBs in the draft. We defilitely know that they felt like nabers was a better option than the other QBs. I think the combination of Jones/Nabers or Lock/Nabers was a better option than any QB in this draft.
Look at our current cap situation, we would be in worse shape if we drafted a QB because we probably would have had to cut Jones and replace him with someone else. Raising the cap dedicated to QB. We already have to restructure some contracts just to operate this season.
I am predicting an 8-10 win season. I think we will go 3-3 in the division and the rest of the schedule isnt as bad as last year. I actually think that we have a good shot to go 2-0 to start the season and possibly 3-0 as Im not sold on the Browns. Then we probably lose against the cowboys and the Seattle game is interesting. Are they the Carroll Seahawks or is the new coach going to fail. I think thats a winable game. The bangals is probably a loss. I think the Eagles game could go either way. If the Eagles get off to a bad start again the pressure could blow that team up without their leaders. The Steelers are always tough but thats a winable game. Washington will be going through growing pains. We should also beat the Panthers. Then the last 5-6 games are the toughest. depending on how the beginning of the season goes we could be sitting very well in the playoff hunt. Maybe the Eagles game at the end is the decider.
To me this team will go where the OL will take us. I think Daboll/Kafka can get us some points if the OL can hold up no matter who is QB. I believe it will be Jones and he will play well with a good OL. Every QB folds under pressure, then constant pressure you lose your confidence. Hopefully Jones can get it back.
That being said, I'm a continuity guy and doin't think the answer is firing the group at seasons end, barring a complete collapse/embarrassment. If we're hovering around .500 and metrics are showing progress, I wouldn't clean house. By this rationale, Schoen and Daboll likely missed their opportunity to draft a high end QB, though.
Win now... lol. Well, fucking DUH. What team doesn't want to win now? What the fuck does that even mean? If they don't want to win now I don't want them running the fucking team.
This is the thing that drives me nuts. The overall roster - THE OVERALL ROSTER - has been subpar for 11 of the last 12 years. We have SUCKED at scouting, building depth, building an overall solid team through the draft. This is why we suck. NOT BECAUSE OF ONE POSITION ON THE TEAM.
This team could have well built off of 2022, but we came into the season under-prepared, the defense absolutely SUCKED until about halfway through the season (not sure why barely anyone ever discusses this fact) we made bad roster decisions especially on the OL, and we lost our most important offensive player in the 1st series of the 1st game, which 100% caused the wheels to come off until we stabilized (SOMEWHAT) AFTER week 9 when he came back into the lineup and we added a guard to the OL that was sitting on his couch for a year.
QB is one position and is timing and luck. Scout better, draft better, Build and coach the fucking team. Do that and we'll be a winning team.
No, but when people ask why the Giants are viewed negatively? You read the posts. I am a lot older than you and as a fan since 1956 I do not understand the daily whining that people spew. Is this a generational thing?
The upside to become a champion?!? Look, I want Daniel Jones gone, but you are not helping yourself by overselling guys like McCarthy, Nix, and Penix. Of those 3, I thought that McCarthy was in a separate tier higher than Nix and Penix (I thought that there were only 4 QB's worth a 1st Round pick in this draft). That being said, McCarthy is not without his limitations. He played in an offense in college where the running game opened up a lot. If he gets in a 52-49 type game like we had against the Saints when Eli was here how will he perform? When Trey Lance was coming out the lack of reps was a concern and that he never played from behind where a team was depending on him to open things up in order to win. Look how that translated to the NFL. There are peripherals that indicates McCarthy has a greater chance for success than Lance, but to say he is a surefire champion upside is improper.
I don't think you are reading my posts properly. And maybe I have been unclear. I'm not saying they are championship QBs. I am saying they are probability vectors with championship upside. It could be a 5% chance of being a championship QB. It could be a 40% chance to become a championship QB. We don't know what they will become because there are so many unknowns jumping from college to the NFL. And lesser prospects beat their expectations all the time: Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott, Brock Purdy, CJ Stroud are all QBs who outperformed expectations. A year from now we might be saying, "Why did we think Bo Nix wasn't good?" Or not. The point is we don't know yet. But we have a hardened idea of what Daniel Jones is, and he has a known low ceiling. Whereas Bo Nix can still turn into Drew Brees. Unlikely? Sure. But if he does, Denver joins the club of teams that are perennial playoff contenders. And we'll still have Janiel Dones.
I believe, it is better to cycle through unknown QBs in the hopes of landing a QB who exceeds expectations. than sticking with a known quantity with a shitty ceiling. If you don't take these chances, as the 49ers did, as KC did, you are likely missing opportunities at a dramatic upgrade to the position.
Last year was about as ridiculous a disaster out of the gate as you could imagine. Lose all the players you can't afford to lose immediately. That is bad luck, there is no way around it.
It doesn't matter what any of us "think" is going to happen. This should be a solid team given the resource outlay.
Quote:
What do you want? This guy?
No, but when people ask why the Giants are viewed negatively? You read the posts. I am a lot older than you and as a fan since 1956 I do not understand the daily whining that people spew. Is this a generational thing?
Saying the team is poorly run and has stunk for years is an observation of fact, not whining.
This implies that you want me to purge people with the "wrong" tone.
I don't understand the desire to pretend that the piss landing on our heads is actually rain.
I don't understand the desire to pretend that the piss landing on our heads is actually rain.
That's what real fans do Terps, and remember to say thank you.
And this went on year after year for 17 years. You learn to try and be objective.
So, at least trying to be objective, I see a team that had trouble stopping the run last season adding a guy who doesn't play the run well, pinning hopes at tackle on a former high draft pick that has not progressed, hiring a couple of cheap free agent guards, a defense that is depending on several rookies in the secondary, a qb room where the starter is the least talented passer and a running back corp that has a journeyman starter that no DC cares about and unproven players as backups. We have no TE. (the kid might turn out good, but te is a difficult position and it is littered with great athletes who failed).
Maybe if all the stars align, everyone stays healthy, all of our good players maintain what they did last year, the rookies all turn out to be good players, we find a qb among the qb room, discover a running game among the flotsam on the roster and our opponents shit the bed, we could sneak into the playoffs. The probabilities are that the stars will not align and we will be in the bottom third of the league.
Quote:
What do you want? This guy?
No, but when people ask why the Giants are viewed negatively? You read the posts. I am a lot older than you and as a fan since 1956 I do not understand the daily whining that people spew. Is this a generational thing?
If you've been a fan since 1956, surely you can't be unfamiliar with a generation that whines about everything.
I believe, it is better to cycle through unknown QBs in the hopes of landing a QB who exceeds expectations. than sticking with a known quantity with a shitty ceiling. If you don't take these chances, as the 49ers did, as KC did, you are likely missing opportunities at a dramatic upgrade to the position.
I agree that we have seen enough from Jones to know that he is not the QB that will bring you a Super Bowl championship. My disagreement largely centers on what it means to "cycle through unknown QBs." You will not get an objection from me of following the Ron Wolf strategy of using a pick from Round 5 on each year on a QB. On the other hand, if you are taking one in the first round pick you need to do it on a QB that your scouting staff has graded as a first round caliber and you believe their REALISTIC POTENTIAL can be the type of QB you can win with. I am not talking about their best case upside, but what you believe they can do in your system with your coaching staff. The opportunity cost of losing an elite talent at another position for the sake of overdrafting a QB is more pronounced in Round 1. Imagine if we had the other Josh Allen as part of our pass rush rather than having Daniel Jones at QB.
Quote:
to add onto my last response.
I believe, it is better to cycle through unknown QBs in the hopes of landing a QB who exceeds expectations. than sticking with a known quantity with a shitty ceiling. If you don't take these chances, as the 49ers did, as KC did, you are likely missing opportunities at a dramatic upgrade to the position.
I agree that we have seen enough from Jones to know that he is not the QB that will bring you a Super Bowl championship. My disagreement largely centers on what it means to "cycle through unknown QBs." You will not get an objection from me of following the Ron Wolf strategy of using a pick from Round 5 on each year on a QB. On the other hand, if you are taking one in the first round pick you need to do it on a QB that your scouting staff has graded as a first round caliber and you believe their REALISTIC POTENTIAL can be the type of QB you can win with. I am not talking about their best case upside, but what you believe they can do in your system with your coaching staff. The opportunity cost of losing an elite talent at another position for the sake of overdrafting a QB is more pronounced in Round 1. Imagine if we had the other Josh Allen as part of our pass rush rather than having Daniel Jones at QB.
First of all, if you are going to do a proper analysis of what it means to pass on a 1st round "elite talent" you have to be honest. Many of them don't work out so well - like Evan Neal and Kayvon. What pct of even top-10 picks turn out to be uninspiring? That's part of the calculation. And then if they do hit, they are still far less valuable than a QB upgrade from bad to (just) good.
Quote:
In comment 16517053 Darwinian said:
Quote:
to add onto my last response.
I believe, it is better to cycle through unknown QBs in the hopes of landing a QB who exceeds expectations. than sticking with a known quantity with a shitty ceiling. If you don't take these chances, as the 49ers did, as KC did, you are likely missing opportunities at a dramatic upgrade to the position.
I agree that we have seen enough from Jones to know that he is not the QB that will bring you a Super Bowl championship. My disagreement largely centers on what it means to "cycle through unknown QBs." You will not get an objection from me of following the Ron Wolf strategy of using a pick from Round 5 on each year on a QB. On the other hand, if you are taking one in the first round pick you need to do it on a QB that your scouting staff has graded as a first round caliber and you believe their REALISTIC POTENTIAL can be the type of QB you can win with. I am not talking about their best case upside, but what you believe they can do in your system with your coaching staff. The opportunity cost of losing an elite talent at another position for the sake of overdrafting a QB is more pronounced in Round 1. Imagine if we had the other Josh Allen as part of our pass rush rather than having Daniel Jones at QB.
First of all, if you are going to do a proper analysis of what it means to pass on a 1st round "elite talent" you have to be honest. Many of them don't work out so well - like Evan Neal and Kayvon. What pct of even top-10 picks turn out to be uninspiring? That's part of the calculation. And then if they do hit, they are still far less valuable than a QB upgrade from bad to (just) good.
Kayvon hasn’t worked out so far?
Manhattan analysis
The landscape of the NFL has changed. It is changing. And teams who get the message early. like the Falcons, the 49ers, the Chiefs, the Broncos, the Vikings, will be rewarded. Teams that are slow to adapt, will lose a generation.
And this went on year after year for 17 years. You learn to try and be objective.
So, at least trying to be objective, I see a team that had trouble stopping the run last season adding a guy who doesn't play the run well, pinning hopes at tackle on a former high draft pick that has not progressed, hiring a couple of cheap free agent guards, a defense that is depending on several rookies in the secondary, a qb room where the starter is the least talented passer and a running back corp that has a journeyman starter that no DC cares about and unproven players as backups. We have no TE. (the kid might turn out good, but te is a difficult position and it is littered with great athletes who failed).
Maybe if all the stars align, everyone stays healthy, all of our good players maintain what they did last year, the rookies all turn out to be good players, we find a qb among the qb room, discover a running game among the flotsam on the roster and our opponents shit the bed, we could sneak into the playoffs. The probabilities are that the stars will not align and we will be in the bottom third of the league.
I don't go back quite that far (wasn't born yet in '56), but I've been a fan since the 70s so I have also seen the glory years and the wilderness years. The last 12 years haven't been total wilderness, but closer to that than glory years.
Hoping JS is the one to lead us back into contention, still a lot more upgrades to be made.
Las Vegas says the over and under for 2024 is 6.5 games.
You may not agree with Vegas, but a lot of folks rely on Vegas' opinion.
Based on the schedule, I am seeing a ceiling of 4-6 wins. The floor could easily be this team's worst record in the Super Bowl Era. At this point, I could easily see the team who loses the Munich Bowl getting the first selection in the 2025 draft.
Quote:
In comment 16517053 Darwinian said:
Quote:
to add onto my last response.
I believe, it is better to cycle through unknown QBs in the hopes of landing a QB who exceeds expectations. than sticking with a known quantity with a shitty ceiling. If you don't take these chances, as the 49ers did, as KC did, you are likely missing opportunities at a dramatic upgrade to the position.
I agree that we have seen enough from Jones to know that he is not the QB that will bring you a Super Bowl championship. My disagreement largely centers on what it means to "cycle through unknown QBs." You will not get an objection from me of following the Ron Wolf strategy of using a pick from Round 5 on each year on a QB. On the other hand, if you are taking one in the first round pick you need to do it on a QB that your scouting staff has graded as a first round caliber and you believe their REALISTIC POTENTIAL can be the type of QB you can win with. I am not talking about their best case upside, but what you believe they can do in your system with your coaching staff. The opportunity cost of losing an elite talent at another position for the sake of overdrafting a QB is more pronounced in Round 1. Imagine if we had the other Josh Allen as part of our pass rush rather than having Daniel Jones at QB.
First of all, if you are going to do a proper analysis of what it means to pass on a 1st round "elite talent" you have to be honest. Many of them don't work out so well - like Evan Neal and Kayvon. What pct of even top-10 picks turn out to be uninspiring? That's part of the calculation. And then if they do hit, they are still far less valuable than a QB upgrade from bad to (just) good.
Busts happen and so do players who overperform expectations, but if I am comparing two players and one has a second round grade and the other has a first round grade I am taking the latter every time at 6 even if the former happens to be a QB. That is why I would never select Nix or Penix over Nabers. McCarthy was the only one of the three that would have merited consideration based solely on my view. I am not privy to any of the medicals nor do I see other evaluations nor have I interviewed any of the players. Bob McGinn, for example, had scouts who questioned issues of McCarthy's mental toughness. That is something that could only be assessed in interviews and discussions with people at Michigan. I was not a part of that and if there were red flags I can totally see not grading him as a first round player.
I apologize if I am not explaining myself clearly, but my concern is wasting high picks by asking the wrong question of "what does it mean for my team if Player X reaches his best case scenario?" Almost nobody reaches their "best case scenario." This is why you evaluate what a player's realistic upside is. If you are telling me that that is not something you would even want to offer a fifth year option to (which merely being slightly better than Daniel Jones would be) then I do not want that player in Round 1 at all.
Quote:
In comment 16517125 Mike in NY said:
Quote:
In comment 16517053 Darwinian said:
Quote:
to add onto my last response.
I believe, it is better to cycle through unknown QBs in the hopes of landing a QB who exceeds expectations. than sticking with a known quantity with a shitty ceiling. If you don't take these chances, as the 49ers did, as KC did, you are likely missing opportunities at a dramatic upgrade to the position.
I agree that we have seen enough from Jones to know that he is not the QB that will bring you a Super Bowl championship. My disagreement largely centers on what it means to "cycle through unknown QBs." You will not get an objection from me of following the Ron Wolf strategy of using a pick from Round 5 on each year on a QB. On the other hand, if you are taking one in the first round pick you need to do it on a QB that your scouting staff has graded as a first round caliber and you believe their REALISTIC POTENTIAL can be the type of QB you can win with. I am not talking about their best case upside, but what you believe they can do in your system with your coaching staff. The opportunity cost of losing an elite talent at another position for the sake of overdrafting a QB is more pronounced in Round 1. Imagine if we had the other Josh Allen as part of our pass rush rather than having Daniel Jones at QB.
First of all, if you are going to do a proper analysis of what it means to pass on a 1st round "elite talent" you have to be honest. Many of them don't work out so well - like Evan Neal and Kayvon. What pct of even top-10 picks turn out to be uninspiring? That's part of the calculation. And then if they do hit, they are still far less valuable than a QB upgrade from bad to (just) good.
Busts happen and so do players who overperform expectations, but if I am comparing two players and one has a second round grade and the other has a first round grade I am taking the latter every time at 6 even if the former happens to be a QB. That is why I would never select Nix or Penix over Nabers. McCarthy was the only one of the three that would have merited consideration based solely on my view. I am not privy to any of the medicals nor do I see other evaluations nor have I interviewed any of the players. Bob McGinn, for example, had scouts who questioned issues of McCarthy's mental toughness. That is something that could only be assessed in interviews and discussions with people at Michigan. I was not a part of that and if there were red flags I can totally see not grading him as a first round player.
I apologize if I am not explaining myself clearly, but my concern is wasting high picks by asking the wrong question of "what does it mean for my team if Player X reaches his best case scenario?" Almost nobody reaches their "best case scenario." This is why you evaluate what a player's realistic upside is. If you are telling me that that is not something you would even want to offer a fifth year option to (which merely being slightly better than Daniel Jones would be) then I do not want that player in Round 1 at all.
I appreciate your point of view but draft grades are just opinions. They are speculations and representations of what an individual thinks will happen. And when the playing starts the grades are meaningless. In 2022 KT went 5th, Neal went 7th and Brock Purdy went 262nd. Today, if you went to the 49ers and tried to trade those two for Purdy, they likely wouldn't do it. These high draft picks aren't really elite talents until they do it in the NFL. It's just potential.
So we really don't know how good or bad any of these QBs will be. But they're in the conversation. KOC and Payton thought JJM and Nix were first round quality. And I agree that Malik Nabers is likelier to hit than QBs 3 through 6. But Nabers cannot transform a bad team into a good team. Wide receivers don't move the needle enough. All the QBs have a higher chance to transform the New York Giants if they do hit. And from where the Giants presently sit, they are better off taking a player with a higher chance to transform the team, than taking the player with the better chance to hit, in my opinion.
But, I will say, if they had taken a developmental QB after the Nabers selection, at least, I'd be happier.
I think they're good enough between 7-10 to 9-8 to be honest. Assuming the key guys remain relatively healthy.
Quote:
In comment 16517160 Darwinian said:
Quote:
In comment 16517125 Mike in NY said:
Quote:
In comment 16517053 Darwinian said:
Quote:
to add onto my last response.
I believe, it is better to cycle through unknown QBs in the hopes of landing a QB who exceeds expectations. than sticking with a known quantity with a shitty ceiling. If you don't take these chances, as the 49ers did, as KC did, you are likely missing opportunities at a dramatic upgrade to the position.
I agree that we have seen enough from Jones to know that he is not the QB that will bring you a Super Bowl championship. My disagreement largely centers on what it means to "cycle through unknown QBs." You will not get an objection from me of following the Ron Wolf strategy of using a pick from Round 5 on each year on a QB. On the other hand, if you are taking one in the first round pick you need to do it on a QB that your scouting staff has graded as a first round caliber and you believe their REALISTIC POTENTIAL can be the type of QB you can win with. I am not talking about their best case upside, but what you believe they can do in your system with your coaching staff. The opportunity cost of losing an elite talent at another position for the sake of overdrafting a QB is more pronounced in Round 1. Imagine if we had the other Josh Allen as part of our pass rush rather than having Daniel Jones at QB.
First of all, if you are going to do a proper analysis of what it means to pass on a 1st round "elite talent" you have to be honest. Many of them don't work out so well - like Evan Neal and Kayvon. What pct of even top-10 picks turn out to be uninspiring? That's part of the calculation. And then if they do hit, they are still far less valuable than a QB upgrade from bad to (just) good.
Busts happen and so do players who overperform expectations, but if I am comparing two players and one has a second round grade and the other has a first round grade I am taking the latter every time at 6 even if the former happens to be a QB. That is why I would never select Nix or Penix over Nabers. McCarthy was the only one of the three that would have merited consideration based solely on my view. I am not privy to any of the medicals nor do I see other evaluations nor have I interviewed any of the players. Bob McGinn, for example, had scouts who questioned issues of McCarthy's mental toughness. That is something that could only be assessed in interviews and discussions with people at Michigan. I was not a part of that and if there were red flags I can totally see not grading him as a first round player.
I apologize if I am not explaining myself clearly, but my concern is wasting high picks by asking the wrong question of "what does it mean for my team if Player X reaches his best case scenario?" Almost nobody reaches their "best case scenario." This is why you evaluate what a player's realistic upside is. If you are telling me that that is not something you would even want to offer a fifth year option to (which merely being slightly better than Daniel Jones would be) then I do not want that player in Round 1 at all.
I appreciate your point of view but draft grades are just opinions. They are speculations and representations of what an individual thinks will happen. And when the playing starts the grades are meaningless. In 2022 KT went 5th, Neal went 7th and Brock Purdy went 262nd. Today, if you went to the 49ers and tried to trade those two for Purdy, they likely wouldn't do it. These high draft picks aren't really elite talents until they do it in the NFL. It's just potential.
So we really don't know how good or bad any of these QBs will be. But they're in the conversation. KOC and Payton thought JJM and Nix were first round quality. And I agree that Malik Nabers is likelier to hit than QBs 3 through 6. But Nabers cannot transform a bad team into a good team. Wide receivers don't move the needle enough. All the QBs have a higher chance to transform the New York Giants if they do hit. And from where the Giants presently sit, they are better off taking a player with a higher chance to transform the team, than taking the player with the better chance to hit, in my opinion.
But, I will say, if they had taken a developmental QB after the Nabers selection, at least, I'd be happier.
I will agree on the last point. I would have taken Pratt instead of the LB in Round 6. Hope I am proven wrong, but I think special teams players you could find as UDFA. I personally was not fond of Milton because if the light has not gone on yet with all of the chances he had at major programs why would it suddenly change in the NFL? I thought Pratt's realistic upside was higher.
Based on the schedule, I am seeing a ceiling of 4-6 wins. The floor could easily be this team's worst record in the Super Bowl Era. At this point, I could easily see the team who loses the Munich Bowl getting the first selection in the 2025 draft.
If the Giants are picking first, Schoen has to go imo.
Evan Neal, Wan'Dale Robinson, Cordele Flott, Daniel Bellinger. All key pieces this season and if they can be productive, I feel it hugely benefits Schoen going further. This is his team 100% now.
I will agree on the last point. I would have taken Pratt instead of the LB in Round 6. Hope I am proven wrong, but I think special teams players you could find as UDFA. I personally was not fond of Milton because if the light has not gone on yet with all of the chances he had at major programs why would it suddenly change in the NFL? I thought Pratt's realistic upside was higher.
Glad we could agree on one point, at least. It would have been nice to get one of the later round guys. I don't really care which, I think they are all similar probability plays. Rattler, Pratt, Travis, Milton.
Nabers (or whatever non-QB) has a better likelihood of being a good player than JJM (or whatever QB). That is true. Nabers has a better chance of being great, good, useful...every level.
So for the pick itself, it makes some sense. From the broader team building perspective though, you are going to have to pick the QB at some point. You need to have a good QB. And unless you're picking #1 in the right draft, the position player is always going to have a higher likelihood of being good.
+1.
There's a reason why Goff and Cousins get more money than Amon-Ra even though Brown is "better."
I think the qb will hold his own if the team functions at a reasonable well level. Call me crazy.
And that’s the good part of the team. The offense is even more questionable but that’s why they play the games. We’ll see in a few months.
The Giants might be mediocre or middle of the road this year. But barring another slew of injuries, there is no reason to expect they will be at the bottom of the league. There is reason to hope that with a strong effort, they could have a winning season.
There are some good players on this team.
The cornerstones of the 2022 and 2023 teams were Gettleman acquisitions. Thibs, JMS, Neal, Robinson, Hyatt, Banks, Flott, Ezeudu, Nabers, Nubin, and Phillips were all top 100 picks. Several of those guys need to be above average or better starters to put together a sustained run of winning years.
The Giants might be mediocre or middle of the road this year. But barring another slew of injuries, there is no reason to expect they will be at the bottom of the league. There is reason to hope that with a strong effort, they could have a winning season.
There are some good players on this team.
I think so too. If JSS and banks progress from rookie year and Nabers is a true number 1…. They’re going to win some games.
No. On Offense.
The problems were the OL.
The WR crew.
The TE
The QB.
To only single out the OL is just wrong.
Sad thing is I’m not that optimistic. Even my best case scenario is nothing special. I guess I’m just looking for a shred of something hopeful … I’m not exactly booming with confidence, won’t lie.
All I really want is a quality NYG defense. Just give us that this season. One with staying power.
The next question is: why would someone give up a 1st or 2nd round pick for a guy who has yet to take an NFL snap when they weren't willing to give up a 1st or 2nd round pick for him in the 2023 draft? Not impossible, but not bloody likely.
However, this team got a lot better. The foundation is laid now to where if you can acquire that difference maker at the QB position, they can win quickly.
So much still relies on health, though, and the Giants really had a bad 2023 on that front. Given the injuries to really key players last year, I maintain that Daboll really overachieved with what he had week to week. You just don't see UDFA rookies at QB win hardly at all at the NFL level. This gives me a good vibe that if Schoen can acquire a real talent at QB going into 2025, they can become contenders quickly.
It does feel like the people in charge have real competency.
That said, I thought they should've drafted McCarthy, and if he becomes a franchise QB, failing drafting an equal or better talent in 2025, not taking him will be viewed as a major missed opportunity.
And I absolutely love Nabers, I believe he will be a superlative #1 receiver. Cee Dee Lamb level at least.