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.
Big thing will be the progress of the OL/front 7 imv. If those two things are good then they will be in most games. Then it comes down to the 4th QTR execution all around.
I think BD is under a more pressure than JS. NYG have been wrongly soft on GM's in the past but if the OL is terrible again then he may go as well. Mara made some very strong comments being tired of the OL issues. Also mentioned that "we" won a lot of games around here when we had a good one.
Quote:
In comment 16516791 aimrocky said:
Quote:
and it aligns with much of what GoTerps had been saying. This regime passed on taking a QB in a QB rich draft. Facts are that all of the moves to this point were geared towards win now, so we should expect a winning team.
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.
But if the Giants had drafted McCarthy, you could argue that their outlook for 2024 would even be worse right now.
I'd argue it'd be a similar outlook, with 2025 and beyond holding more hope than it currently does. McCarthy wouldn't have to be very good to match Jones. Actually if his rookie year were similar to Jones I'd be worried we missed on the pick.
But the way it is now is misaligned, and it's likely that in a few months everyone is going to be pushing to do what they were saying before you couldn't: force the QB.
And is forcing a QB the right move for 2 or 3 more wins vs getting one that can actually win?
Does winning 8 or 9 games the next 4 years make them more in contention than 6 or 7 with this draft? 9 wins may make the playoffs, yes. But that is all it is. It is not true contention.
I don't disagree that Jones is not the answer. But just getting a guy slightly better is not getting the team to be a real contender, is it.
I certainly don't have an answer. But getting better players when you can is most important.
the OP posits the Giants are improved. Perhaps - time will tell. But until then they prove it on the field, they are a 6 win team with a major question at QB.
That's why the pundits are down on the Giants
- One will be towards the bottom end of the "good QB" stack, like 6-10 range - Stafford, Ryan, Eli, Romo types
- One will be in the middle ground of QBs - good but maybe not good enough- Cousins, Tannehill, Tua types
- One will be a backup/journeyman - Trubisky, Jones, Darnold, Brissett, etc
Which one will be which? Really it's just a guess. And eventually you have to be willing to make that guess.
I don't disagree that Jones is not the answer. But just getting a guy slightly better is not getting the team to be a real contender, is it.
I certainly don't have an answer. But getting better players when you can is most important.
Slightly better at a fraction of the cost is not an insignificant difference.
And again, what's the plan for acquiring a QB who would be much better than Jones, other than losing 13+ games?
Quote:
In comment 16516797 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
In comment 16516791 aimrocky said:
Quote:
and it aligns with much of what GoTerps had been saying. This regime passed on taking a QB in a QB rich draft. Facts are that all of the moves to this point were geared towards win now, so we should expect a winning team.
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.
But if the Giants had drafted McCarthy, you could argue that their outlook for 2024 would even be worse right now.
I'd argue it'd be a similar outlook, with 2025 and beyond holding more hope than it currently does. McCarthy wouldn't have to be very good to match Jones. Actually if his rookie year were similar to Jones I'd be worried we missed on the pick.
But the way it is now is misaligned, and it's likely that in a few months everyone is going to be pushing to do what they were saying before you couldn't: force the QB.
And is forcing a QB the right move for 2 or 3 more wins vs getting one that can actually win?
Does winning 8 or 9 games the next 4 years make them more in contention than 6 or 7 with this draft? 9 wins may make the playoffs, yes. But that is all it is. It is not true contention.
I don't disagree that Jones is not the answer. But just getting a guy slightly better is not getting the team to be a real contender, is it.
I certainly don't have an answer. But getting better players when you can is most important.
Why is it forcing when it's a prospect with an unknown ceiling but it's not forcing when it's another year of a known low ceiling in Janiel Dones? It's ok to settle for 5 to 8 wins with JD, but it's not ok to do that with a rookie, who also has the upside to become a champion?
The *don't force the pick* adherents don't have a case. They're just wrong from a game theory perspective. They have no plan to try and win THIS SEASON. They're content to squander this season, and not make any progress at QB that may pay off next season.
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.
I think the floor needs to be around .500.
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.
Yup. The excuses not to draft a QB this year ("Nabers is a 90, McCarthy is an 83") are almost certainly going to exist again next year. So under what conditions will the Giants actually draft a first round quarterback? They've only drafted 2 in 20 years.
I think the floor needs to be around .500.
Does it really matter though? The record? Let's say we get smoked by most of the good teams we play. And we win 2 easy games against bad/injured teams.
Then we play 9 games against mediocre teams where the score is like 20-17 or 17-16. Does it really matter if we go 6-3 or 3-6 in those games?
The *don't force the pick* adherents don't have a case. They're just wrong from a game theory perspective. They have no plan to try and win THIS SEASON. They're content to squander this season, and not make any progress at QB that may pay off next season.
It's an exercise in kicking the can down the road. Sure, they'll say they want to replace the current QB, but then add a boatload of caveats and criteria for actually doing it that make actually doing it extremely difficult.
I'll guarantee you that if we're sitting here next April with the 9th pick in the draft, the same people will be making a case to draft a tackle.
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.
I'm a competence guy vs a continuity guy. I believe you can use logic rather than be so rgid.
If they passed on the quality QB - in which this was a rich QB Draft- and it loooks like the Giants are nothing more than a mediocre team at best going forward--
why are you accepting mediocrity? Conitnuity should't trump mediocrity.
Why is it forcing when it's a prospect with an unknown ceiling but it's not forcing when it's another year of a known low ceiling in Janiel Dones? It's ok to settle for 5 to 8 wins with JD, but it's not ok to do that with a rookie, who also has the upside to become a champion?
The *don't force the pick* adherents don't have a case. They're just wrong from a game theory perspective. They have no plan to try and win THIS SEASON. They're content to squander this season, and not make any progress at QB that may pay off next season.
It is very easy for you or anyone to sit there on your couch and make up points that are not factually correct(nor incorrect) and cast them as support for your position.
Both methods have very good reasoning. Both are not incorrect.
I could have gone either way with that pick and I would have preferred McCarthy to be honest(actually trade back for more picks with McCarthy).
But to espouse that one method to improve the team is superior to the other is a matter of opinion. Those that wanted a QB think their POV is best. Those that did not think JJM was a viable QB feel Nabers was the correct path.
Even experts will argue over QB first or team first and which is better. I think it is 50/50.
We are an improved team. Drafting Nabers dramatically improves the WR talent. In fact, it is something to be giddy about! The FA acquisition of Burns dramatically adds to our pass rush, but that came at a hefty cost, but probably well worth it.
But of course, that is dependent upon the QB play. Can DJ overcome his shell shock and his injuries? Can he return to his 2022 form or even his rookie season where he was actually good at the deep pass? Those are big maybes, but not an impossibility. If not, that nullifies the Wr improvement for this year, but not the next. We've seen Jones surprise before, so it can be hope for, if not expected.
But of course, DJ is not likely to get over his shell shock season of 2023 if the OL is not vastly improved over last year. This was not addressed during the draft, so one can only hope the change in coaching and the addition of FA vets solidifies this mess of a line. One might also hold out hope beyond hope that Evan Neal is not the bust he appears to be.
And this leads us to the loss of Barkley, who has been replaced by Singletary, who is no Barkley. He's not the RB defenses fear. But, if the OL turns out to be adequate, then the loss of Barkley will sting far less than expected. Maybe Gray, Tracy, Miller, or Corbin surprise us. Once again, though, the running game will be dependent upon how improved the OL turns out to be.
We had a big loss at safety in McKinney, who we couldn't afford to keep, but we did pick up the best safety in the draft in Tyler Nubin. There is some hope that he turns out to be even better than McKinney, but of course, that is not expected.
In summary, it would seem to be a 5 win season coming up, unless the OL gels, and then that makes the QBs and RBs better. With an improved pass rush, and a solid season from Nubin, then this is a team capable of a 10 win season.
Quote:
In comment 16516822 Go Terps said:
Quote:
In comment 16516797 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
In comment 16516791 aimrocky said:
Quote:
and it aligns with much of what GoTerps had been saying. This regime passed on taking a QB in a QB rich draft. Facts are that all of the moves to this point were geared towards win now, so we should expect a winning team.
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.
But if the Giants had drafted McCarthy, you could argue that their outlook for 2024 would even be worse right now.
I'd argue it'd be a similar outlook, with 2025 and beyond holding more hope than it currently does. McCarthy wouldn't have to be very good to match Jones. Actually if his rookie year were similar to Jones I'd be worried we missed on the pick.
But the way it is now is misaligned, and it's likely that in a few months everyone is going to be pushing to do what they were saying before you couldn't: force the QB.
And is forcing a QB the right move for 2 or 3 more wins vs getting one that can actually win?
Does winning 8 or 9 games the next 4 years make them more in contention than 6 or 7 with this draft? 9 wins may make the playoffs, yes. But that is all it is. It is not true contention.
I don't disagree that Jones is not the answer. But just getting a guy slightly better is not getting the team to be a real contender, is it.
I certainly don't have an answer. But getting better players when you can is most important.
Why is it forcing when it's a prospect with an unknown ceiling but it's not forcing when it's another year of a known low ceiling in Janiel Dones? It's ok to settle for 5 to 8 wins with JD, but it's not ok to do that with a rookie, who also has the upside to become a champion?
The *don't force the pick* adherents don't have a case. They're just wrong from a game theory perspective. They have no plan to try and win THIS SEASON. They're content to squander this season, and not make any progress at QB that may pay off next season.
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.
And it’s not like they signed an all pro lineman and drafted a top 10 one ( or drafted any OLine at all).
But most importantly it’s the QB. He hasn’t proven he can produce multiple touchdowns a game. Add in the loss of Barkley. Where are they getting their points from?
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.