It's a fascinating topic to me as a fan in general.
During games I'm always rooting for the team to win, no matter the cost or benefit. Before and after the game, I'm more reasoned on what outcome is objectively best.
For instance, I 100% reject the hocus pocus notion that trying hard and winning meaningless games magically carries over to the next year. Or that treating meaningless games as exhibitions solicits a magical curse from the gods.
This year, I can't shake the idea that I would rather Daniel Jones unequivocally show he's not the answer, than tread water. I have no problem acknowledging I would rather the team go 3-14 than 7-10.
I'm perfectly comfortable with hoping players or coaches I don't think will ever be good, just prove it once and for all and move on.
Once the games start, I'll be rooting for Jones every second of every game. But between the games, I admit I have no confidence in him and hope he gets benched.
Anyone else feel that way?
I'm not ready to predict how week one will go, but if they do get smoked by Minnesota, I agree things will get really nasty.
Quote:
I still feel this discussion is completely moot though because I strongly believe Jones is going to flop based on losing his mobility, and the energy is going to get real toxic starting in week 1 when the Giants lose to the Vikings similar to the Broncos in 2021.
I'm not ready to predict how week one will go, but if they do get smoked by Minnesota, I agree things will get really nasty.
Yeah, I don't mean to derail a thoughtful discussion with predictions, but man, I've tried to talk myself into a Jones comeback season many times and I just don't see it at all, and I was someone who predicted that he would play well in 2022.
Quote:
I still feel this discussion is completely moot though because I strongly believe Jones is going to flop based on losing his mobility, and the energy is going to get real toxic starting in week 1 when the Giants lose to the Vikings similar to the Broncos in 2021.
I'm not ready to predict how week one will go, but if they do get smoked by Minnesota, I agree things will get really nasty.
You mean if they get smoked by McCarthy? Yeah that won't go well. But Minnesota is a pretty good team, anyway.
I think it will take some time for Jones to work himself into shape.
But with the additional pass catching talent, and if (big if) the pass protection stabilizes, I don't discount Jones can return to mediocrity.
I think a very plausible outcome is 7-8 wins and Jones returns in 2025. As I noted above, his price lowers for 2025, from 36M in new cash down to 30M.
Quote:
In comment 16520204 Lambuth_Special said:
Quote:
I still feel this discussion is completely moot though because I strongly believe Jones is going to flop based on losing his mobility, and the energy is going to get real toxic starting in week 1 when the Giants lose to the Vikings similar to the Broncos in 2021.
I'm not ready to predict how week one will go, but if they do get smoked by Minnesota, I agree things will get really nasty.
You mean if they get smoked by McCarthy? Yeah that won't go well. But Minnesota is a pretty good team, anyway.
Still hasn't stopped a lot Giants fans and pundits from marking the team as 1-0 after week 1 despite a lot of factors working against them (primarily Jones's historical struggles in early season home games).
You mean if they get smoked by McCarthy? Yeah that won't go well. But Minnesota is a pretty good team, anyway.
The two games I have circled are Minnesota and Pittsburgh. If the Giants get outclassed by a rookie a McCarthy and a rejuvenated Wilson, I believe things get ugly with the press and fans.
Quote:
I've tried to talk myself into a Jones comeback season many times and I just don't see it at all, and I was someone who predicted that he would play well in 2022.
I think it will take some time for Jones to work himself into shape.
But with the additional pass catching talent, and if (big if) the pass protection stabilizes, I don't discount Jones can return to mediocrity.
I think a very plausible outcome is 7-8 wins and Jones returns in 2025. As I noted above, his price lowers for 2025, from 36M in new cash down to 30M.
I'm realatively sanguine athat this outcome won't happen. Either the team struggles out the gate and Jones is quickly repleaced or he makes this mythical, long-anticipated sustained leap as a passer (we have to remember his major value in 2022 was running) and the team is competitive and we're generally more ok with the state of things.
I don't see the 7 win outcome as likely. Given the schedule, it's seems possible those wins would be backloaded and I doubt Jones would keep his job long enough in those circumstances.
Quote:
I'm not ready to predict how week one will go, but if they do get smoked by Minnesota, I agree things will get really nasty.
You mean if they get smoked by McCarthy? Yeah that won't go well. But Minnesota is a pretty good team, anyway.
The two games I have circled are Minnesota and Pittsburgh. If the Giants get outclassed by a rookie a McCarthy and a rejuvenated Wilson, I believe things get ugly with the press and fans.
You do realize that Wilson chose to go to the better team with the better chance at the playoffs, correct? Wilson had a choice to go where he wanted and went to the better team while he rebuilds his brand.
FWIW, I doubt McCarthy is the starter...
Quote:
In comment 16520235 section125 said:
Quote:
I'm not ready to predict how week one will go, but if they do get smoked by Minnesota, I agree things will get really nasty.
You mean if they get smoked by McCarthy? Yeah that won't go well. But Minnesota is a pretty good team, anyway.
The two games I have circled are Minnesota and Pittsburgh. If the Giants get outclassed by a rookie a McCarthy and a rejuvenated Wilson, I believe things get ugly with the press and fans.
You do realize that Wilson chose to go to the better team with the better chance at the playoffs, correct? Wilson had a choice to go where he wanted and went to the better team while he rebuilds his brand.
FWIW, I doubt McCarthy is the starter...
Getting smoked by Darnold will barely be any better (ie "we could've had him for NOTHING')
Getting smoked by Darnold will barely be any better (ie "we could've had him for NOTHING')
No getting "smoked" is bad. I doubt it can be done by Darnold...
Quote:
Getting smoked by Darnold will barely be any better (ie "we could've had him for NOTHING')
No getting "smoked" is bad. I doubt it can be done by Darnold...
I don't know, Darnold has been ok his last 7-8 NFL starts. I'm getting shades of Teddy Bridgewater smoking that 2021 team.
From 2018, we had zero chance because of Gettleman. Still in 2024 we have zero chance because of sweet Daniel. Whatever it takes to rid ourselves of this loser is good with me. I'd very much like to keep Daboll. He is a good coach. But we have no chance with Jones and a massive attachment to him from ownership. It's miserable.
All he has to do is play at a backup level and the job is his for life. So unfortunately we need some (more) bad things to happen for this team to have a chance to actually be good and actually compete in high stakes games against good teams. It's a terrible place to be as a fan, but here we are. Thanks, John.
You do realize that Wilson chose to go to the better team with the better chance at the playoffs, correct? Wilson had a choice to go where he wanted and went to the better team while he rebuilds his brand.
FWIW, I doubt McCarthy is the starter...
What I realize is Wilson visited the Giants and the report was he got no assurance he would start.
And whether he ultimately would or would not have chosen New York, the reporting and fan reaction won't be very nuanced if he kicks the Giants ass.
Quote:
The two games I have circled are Minnesota and Pittsburgh. If the Giants get outclassed by a rookie a McCarthy and a rejuvenated Wilson, I believe things get ugly with the press and fans.
You do realize that Wilson chose to go to the better team with the better chance at the playoffs, correct? Wilson had a choice to go where he wanted and went to the better team while he rebuilds his brand.
FWIW, I doubt McCarthy is the starter...
What I realize is Wilson visited the Giants and the report was he got no assurance he would start.
And whether he ultimately would or would not have chosen New York, the reporting and fan reaction won't be very nuanced if he kicks the Giants ass.
Nobody is guaranteed a starting job in an open competition, are they? Why would they guarantee him the starting job? Wilson played like absolute dogshit his previous two years. He played so poorly Sean Payton wanted him gone at any cost- now that is doing something.
Your posts seem to suggest that you want them to get embarrassed....
Whether you believe he should or shouldn't have been given a strong indication he could be the starter, if the Giants have a dog at QB and Wilson shines, this will be a hotly debated topic.
Well, maybe enjoyable isn't the right word. Fascinating...yeah, that's it, but it's a grotesque kind of fascination. It's like driving past a car accident. You just have to look.
Man, I love those two guys.
OP:
Quote:
This year, I can't shake the idea that I would rather Daniel Jones unequivocally show he's not the answer, than tread water. I have no problem acknowledging I would rather the team go 3-14 than 7-10.
And your reply was literally about Daniel Jones. Why is this a confounding outcome to you?
Your point appears to be winning more games is better, because if this is the right regime they will make the right decision regardless of circumstances. With the implication being they made the right decision last time (otherwise why bring up Smith and Mayfield?)
You just don't seem willing to acknowledge the material difference between guaranteeing twice as many years and twice as much money. The level of commitment they made to Jones was 100% greater than the two examples you continue to reference. You're right they're all well below elite quarterbacks, one of them just got twice as much money.
a) I entered a thread that asked the question about rooting for bad outcomes or not and answered that question.
b) My reply didnt include details about Jones' contract because i dont think they are particularly relevant to my point. you shifted the conversation that way and i've tried 3x now to explain why the specific guarantees they landed on dont impact the point im making. before agreeing to any details they first had to decide if they wanted to keep jones or not.
c) Re: the bold the implication was not that they made the right decision with Jones or that Mayfield/Smith were good decisions - but rather that bringing him back one way or the other was the same decision 99% would have made last year. Even the thread starter rooting against Daniel Jones would have at least tagged him, so their binary decision to bring him back or not bring him back wasn't some unconventional mistake. It was chalk. The contract they decided to give him is separate from that but wanting multiple years of a QB they liked is again justifiable even if it ends up not working out the same way the Russell Wilson trade was justifiable even if it spectacularly didn't work out. Or the Carr/Cousins deals in FA. Or the Jimmy G deal last year.
Denver's bigger mistake there was clearly getting the Hackett decision wrong - which is my point. As may be NO/ATL's mistakes with their decisions if Allen/Fontenot/Morris end up being the wrong choices.
Sean Payton may or may not have been the right choice at HC and the contract didn't stop him from making the decisions at QB he felt he had to make.
If you like Daboll root for him to win, if you don't root against. If you like Daboll but dislike Jones so much you want to root against him, then i guess you are in a sophies choice because they are probably linked for at least 1 more year.
Whether you believe he should or shouldn't have been given a strong indication he could be the starter, if the Giants have a dog at QB and Wilson shines, this will be a hotly debated topic.
Yes, he was so good, Payton benched him and got rid of him as fast as he could, eating a huge contract. That is a clear indication of what the Broncos thought of him. (to the Broncos credit and perhaps a lesson that Schoen should embrace)
If you were Wilson and the Giants and Pittsburgh offered the same assurances, where would you go? Pretty simple decision in my eyes. Clearly the Steelers are the far better team with a better chance at the playoffs(well maybe not in that division). In which way are the Giants remotely a better choice for Wilson?
B) Your first post on this thread brought up Jones's compensation, I didn't steer you in that direction.
Eric on Li : 5/19/2024 5:05 pm : link : reply
if it's the right regime they will get the jones decisions right and upgrade when they get the right chance. "but they overpaid him blah blah blah" - maybe but the decision to bring him back was pretty universal. instead of tag they rolled the dice to get extra years of control but that's pretty normal compared to what most other teams have done in their situation (seahawks, bucs, etc).
C) No matter how many times you say it, there's more to it than a binary choice. The details of the compensation and commitment were materially different. Making a 1/27M commitment to Geno Smith is a materially different action than making a 2/82M to Daniel Jones. And it speaks to the level of confidence and desire they had for the player.
You are what you spend your money on, no?
Whether you believe he should or shouldn't have been given a strong indication he could be the starter, if the Giants have a dog at QB and Wilson shines, this will be a hotly debated topic.
Yes, he was so good, Payton benched him and got rid of him as fast as he could, eating a huge contract. That is a clear indication of what the Broncos thought of him. (to the Broncos credit and perhaps a lesson that Schoen should embrace)
If you were Wilson and the Giants and Pittsburgh offered the same assurances, where would you go? Pretty simple decision in my eyes. Clearly the Steelers are the far better team with a better chance at the playoffs(well maybe not in that division). In which way are the Giants remotely a better choice for Wilson?
You're debating something I am not.
I am guessing what the fan and media reaction will be if a player the Giants met with outplays the incumbent. Not why and how Wilson became a Steeler.
for me it ties into the long term if it's the right regime they will get the jones decisions right and upgrade when they get the right chance. "but they overpaid him blah blah blah" - maybe but the decision to bring him back was pretty universal. instead of tag they rolled the dice to get extra years of control but that's pretty normal compared to what most other teams have done in their situation (seahawks, bucs, etc).
you are in a very combative mood on this topic, which is fine but it's also seemingly impairing you're literacy. you are using the faux quote "but they overpaid him blah blah blah" without taking into the account the words written immediately after it in bold - they literally say "maybe" they did overpay him while clearly spelling out the decision to bring him back separately as the thing im commenting on. so you are arguing a point i wasn't trying to make about his contract and even acknowledged in my very first post on the thread that maybe they did overpay him (I dont think the jury is entirely out on that yet since they are giving him a second year - if he repeats 2022 whether they keep him or not he will probably be a + value contract and tradeable).
C) No matter how many times you say it, there's more to it than a binary choice. The details of the compensation and commitment were materially different. Making a 1/27M commitment to Geno Smith is a materially different action than making a 2/82M to Daniel Jones. And it speaks to the level of confidence and desire they had for the player.
You are what you spend your money on, no?
as for this bolded quote thank you for helping me articulate my point. the YOU and YOUR in this sentence are my entire point ITT. the decision makers decide on the entire roster, and those people are way more important than any individual good or bad decision they make.
so yes 100%, schoen/dabs/fo are 100% what they spend their money on, which is why im rooting for wins. i still have some hope in them. rooting for anyone on their roster to fail, especially the qb, is rooting for them to fail. there is no way to divorce the 2, though you may try.
To be perfectly clear I'd rather they both go if 2022 is the high water mark ceiling for Daboll + Jones.
What will it take for the Giants to move off Jones? We know it's not a top 6 pick with two top twelve prospects available. It's not a torn ACL and the second neck injury. Will a 2025 at lower cash cost do it?
My guess is the only way he's not a Giant in 2025 is a disaster in 2024.
To be perfectly clear I'd rather they both go if 2022 is the high water mark ceiling for Daboll + Jones.
What will it take for the Giants to move off Jones? We know it's not a top 6 pick with two top twelve prospects available. It's not a torn ACL and the second neck injury. Will a 2025 at lower cash cost do it?
My guess is the only way he's not a Giant in 2025 is a disaster in 2024.
that isnt the germane question the thread asks - the question the thread asks is whether to root for bad outcomes or not.
if you want to root for needles to be threaded that's fine, but i think it's much simpler to root for daboll + schoen to succeed by winning as many games as possible to show progress, whatever the "costs". the 2nd best outcome to that is very very distant because it probably rightly brings about some amount of regime change.
as ive mentioned numerous times this offseason in all sorts of contexts - jimmy g winning didnt stop shanahan from trying with lance (and lance didnt stop them from ending up with purdy), alex smith winning didnt stop reid from trying with mahomes, goff didn't stop mcvay from trading for stafford, and now i guess we can add russell wilson didnt stop payton from moving and drafting bo nix and kirk cousins didnt stop atlanta from drafting penix. the coaches that made those decisions will have chapters of their careers defined by them. im rooting for a winning coach and i dont really care how they get there because that's the more important step 1 than any single decision (even QB). stefanski got to the playoffs last year with a 38 year old flacco outplaying his 1/4 bn$ man watson.
So now that we're debating under a common set of facts (the Giants vote of confidence in Jones was 2X your examples), my question: Given the degree of commitment, do the Giants need to lose so they finally move on from Jones?
And if the Giants lose to a degree they finally move on from Jones, is there a chance Daboll is still the coach?
I want the Giants to move on from Jones. I want them to keep Daboll, but if it requires losing both to achieve the former, I am OK with that.
Shanahan is an interesting example. Garoppolo was on year 4 with SF, and 3 years into his extension when they drafted Lance. But SF was 6-10 that year and Garoppolo was also coming off his 2 double digits games missed year in the last 3 seasons.
Does Daboll have the cache to lose double digit games, keep his job, and then move 3 first round picks to replace Jones. That would be awesome outcome.
To be perfectly clear I'd rather they both go if 2022 is the high water mark ceiling for Daboll + Jones.
What will it take for the Giants to move off Jones? We know it's not a top 6 pick with two top twelve prospects available. It's not a torn ACL and the second neck injury. Will a 2025 at lower cash cost do it?
My guess is the only way he's not a Giant in 2025 is a disaster in 2024.
The needle can be threaded if we start the year with Jones at QB, he struggles leading to his benching in favor of Lock or DeVito, and then Lock or DeVito look like legit NFL QB's leading offense to make a big turnaround
Quote:
The dog shit Wilson was 7-8 3070/26/8 last year and available for the veteran minimum.
Whether you believe he should or shouldn't have been given a strong indication he could be the starter, if the Giants have a dog at QB and Wilson shines, this will be a hotly debated topic.
Yes, he was so good, Payton benched him and got rid of him as fast as he could, eating a huge contract. That is a clear indication of what the Broncos thought of him. (to the Broncos credit and perhaps a lesson that Schoen should embrace)
If you were Wilson and the Giants and Pittsburgh offered the same assurances, where would you go? Pretty simple decision in my eyes. Clearly the Steelers are the far better team with a better chance at the playoffs(well maybe not in that division). In which way are the Giants remotely a better choice for Wilson?
You're debating something I am not.
I am guessing what the fan and media reaction will be if a player the Giants met with outplays the incumbent. Not why and how Wilson became a Steeler.
Except that why he signed with the Steelers is absolutely relevant.
Very few will bring up Wilson and it will irrelevant if they do. He was never a viable signing as he had a choice to go where he wanted to go.
People will likely whine about McCarthy, yes, because the Giants could have drafted him if they wanted him.
Except that why he signed with the Steelers is absolutely relevant.
Very few will bring up Wilson and it will irrelevant if they do. He was never a viable signing as he had a choice to go where he wanted to go.
People will likely whine about McCarthy, yes, because the Giants could have drafted him if they wanted him.
Thankfully for us, I have an obnoxiously good memory. I'll be happy to revisit this if a Wilson led Steelers team smokes the Giants.
Quote:
I am guessing what the fan and media reaction will be if a player the Giants met with outplays the incumbent. Not why and how Wilson became a Steeler.
Except that why he signed with the Steelers is absolutely relevant.
Very few will bring up Wilson and it will irrelevant if they do. He was never a viable signing as he had a choice to go where he wanted to go.
People will likely whine about McCarthy, yes, because the Giants could have drafted him if they wanted him.
Thankfully for us, I have an obnoxiously good memory. I'll be happy to revisit this if a Wilson led Steelers team smokes the Giants.
Well, we know there will be at least 5 or 6 from BBI!
Help me understand this let the season play out thing. Are you afraid I'm doing something that prevents the season from playing out? Like do you think I'm going to stadiums and intervening in the games? Or maybe you think I have super natural powers to interfere with my message board posts?
The season thing is you know when a team plays its 17-game season and hopefully maybe more and along the way they constantly re-evaluate where they're at and then at the end re-evaluate the whole shootin' match. Its not complicated.
I'm sorry Christian but saying "I have no problem acknowledging I would rather the team go 3-14 than 7-10" is just such a loser's mentality!
I understand folks here are frustrated; I mean its been what 18 games since the Giants last won a playoff game, but this is an improving football team that barring some unforeseen disaster isn't going 3-14. Heck, they had just about everything go wrong that could go wrong last year and still won 6 games and probably should have won 2-3 more.
Once the games start, I'll be rooting for Jones every second of every game. But between the games, I admit I have no confidence in him and hope he gets benched.
The season thing is you know when a team plays its 17-game season and hopefully maybe more and along the way they constantly re-evaluate where they're at and then at the end re-evaluate the whole shootin' match. Its not complicated.
But you get I what I feel has no bearing on that, right? Whether I "let it play out" or not doesn't change anything.
I think what you're really trying to say is you don't want to discuss this topic. Or maybe more weirdly you don't want me to discuss it?
So now that we're debating under a common set of facts (the Giants vote of confidence in Jones was 2X your examples), my question: Given the degree of commitment, do the Giants need to lose so they finally move on from Jones?
And if the Giants lose to a degree they finally move on from Jones, is there a chance Daboll is still the coach?
I want the Giants to move on from Jones. I want them to keep Daboll, but if it requires losing both to achieve the former, I am OK with that.
Shanahan is an interesting example. Garoppolo was on year 4 with SF, and 3 years into his extension when they drafted Lance. But SF was 6-10 that year and Garoppolo was also coming off his 2 double digits games missed year in the last 3 seasons.
Does Daboll have the cache to lose double digit games, keep his job, and then move 3 first round picks to replace Jones. That would be awesome outcome.
i didnt need to accept anything that wasnt in my original post - we were always under the same common facts, the ones you for some reason continue to harp on are irrelevant to my total disagreement with the bold.
if the giants have to move on from daboll and restart another new coaching staff with 2 more new systems that is the worst case outcome of this year. full stop. even if they end up hiring belichek or vrabel and those guys succeed it's still a waste of a year, and perhaps a waste of the #6 pick where they could have taken JJM or Penix or Nix that could have allowed them to succeed 1 year faster (or a lot more depending on however good the QB they'd move on to is).
for all of our sakes we better hope Daboll is the guy because irrelevant of whatever happens at QB if he isnt there is going to be a lot of breakage and another new regime is going back to start. shanahan was 29-20 in the 3 seasons prior to drafting lance, including 2 playoffs (and 1 SB appearance). even with the longer season the 14 wins necessary to get to 29 is obviously a stretch but i am rooting for daboll to get as close to that position as possible.
But you get I what I feel has no bearing on that, right? Whether I "let it play out" or not doesn't change anything.
I think what you're really trying to say is you don't want to discuss this topic. Or maybe more weirdly you don't want me to discuss it?
I was actually going to mention it myself that you guys do realize that whatever you root for has no bearing on the outcome of games or the season! I myself during the last season paced around for 3 hours every Sunday but losses didn't hurt as much because I could tell myself that we're closer to a high pick. And I am pretty sure if the Giants had been in position to draft a Caleb Williams during the last 2-3 weeks I probably would have been more than happy with losses.
All that said maybe I have become a little jaded with all the Daniel Jones talk. Personally I am tired of talking about Jones and want to talk about the Giants going forward instead. How are we going to win games this fall. There will be plenty of time to talk about what to do next when the season is over.
I like Daboll, but if his operating long term thesis is to build upon the current version of Daniel Jones, the sooner he's gone the quicker they can invest in a serious staff and quarterback. I don't care about waste looking backwards, only potential waste looking forwards.
Please refer to this handy visual on how to start new discussions you're interested in having.
Oh I give you my word, if when perusing threads and you were the creator, I'd happily skip.
Quote:
Help me understand this let the season play out thing.
The season thing is you know when a team plays its 17-game season and hopefully maybe more and along the way they constantly re-evaluate where they're at and then at the end re-evaluate the whole shootin' match. Its not complicated.
But you get I what I feel has no bearing on that, right? Whether I "let it play out" or not doesn't change anything.
I think what you're really trying to say is you don't want to discuss this topic. Or maybe more weirdly you don't want me to discuss it?
"Let it play out" has been used to try and stifle discussion since gettleman was hired.
Quote:
In comment 16520464 Snorkels said:
Quote:
Help me understand this let the season play out thing.
The season thing is you know when a team plays its 17-game season and hopefully maybe more and along the way they constantly re-evaluate where they're at and then at the end re-evaluate the whole shootin' match. Its not complicated.
But you get I what I feel has no bearing on that, right? Whether I "let it play out" or not doesn't change anything.
I think what you're really trying to say is you don't want to discuss this topic. Or maybe more weirdly you don't want me to discuss it?
"Let it play out" has been used to try and stifle discussion since gettleman was hired.
As someone who subscribes to the 'let it play out' philosophy, I think some of use it when we don't like the answers given on some topics. It really should not be used that way or as a way to try to shut down reasonable conversation. I do think it is good to apply it to those who's words indicate they know how the future will unfold.
Oh I think this particular instance of playing it out is of the shut it down variety. When a post is bookended by calling the thread nonsense and give it a rest, I'm pretty sure I get it.
I'm pretty careful to qualify my observations as guesses when they are, and facts when I believe them to be. I find the need to participate in discussions one doesn't want to participate in very strange.
Am I maybe the least pleasant poster to converse with on BBI? Probably. If when meeting one day in person Eric on Li kicks me directly in the shin before shaking my hand, I'll deserve it.
My general unlikable demeanor is even more a reason to pass by threads I start.
Quote:
As someone who subscribes to the 'let it play out' philosophy, I think some of use it when we don't like the answers given on some topics. It really should not be used that way or as a way to try to shut down reasonable conversation. I do think it is good to apply it to those who's words indicate they know how the future will unfold.
Oh I think this particular instance of playing it out is of the shut it down variety. When a post is bookended by calling the thread nonsense and give it a rest, I'm pretty sure I get it.
I'm pretty careful to qualify my observations as guesses when they are, and facts when I believe them to be. I find the need to participate in discussions one doesn't want to participate in very strange.
Am I maybe the least pleasant poster to converse with on BBI? Probably. If when meeting one day in person Eric on Li kicks me directly in the shin before shaking my hand, I'll deserve it.
My general unlikable demeanor is even more a reason to pass by threads I start.
Regarding the bolded text. I am guilty of this, but it is not because I don't want to discuss the topic, I actually do. I just don't want to see what others have to say sometimes, especially if it creates some doubt about my own opinions. I also sometimes participate in threads that I don't particularly care for because a part of me likes to fight with others and call them out (I am a hypocrite unfortunately).
I honestly am not sure if you are serious at all about you being one of the most unlikable posters to converse with. I certainly don't see it that way and I doubt most see it that way (including some of your rather bitter rivals).
I usually read most of what you and Eric have to say. I rarely have the urge to call either of you out because I think that typically you both put effort into your thoughts and opinions. Although, if you ever want to see if I am lurking, you can post about Eli being a phone and I am sure I'll be there quickly to present a snarky comment that I'll apologize for later. :)
Nobody is rooting for losses. They're rooting for the product of losses, whether it's organizational change, the perception of a higher draft pick as a sign of hope, or that the organization itself learns from mistakes.
The Giants were *arrogantly stubborn* for all four years of Dave Gettleman, you had mouthpieces for the franchise tongue-lashing the fans as know-nothings for years.
I think my view is a pretty common one, but maybe just not as directly put. I'm afraid more mediocrity from Jones results in another year of Jones. And I'd rather they move on, with no excuses to run him back again.
I think my view is a pretty common one, but maybe just not as directly put. I'm afraid more mediocrity from Jones results in another year of Jones. And I'd rather they move on, with no excuses to run him back again.
Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Here is my problem with your opinion. Its worthless! Of absolutely no discernible value. I guess because its sports which we all sort of played we think we know something about it but in reality we don't no diddly-squat. And people who have spent their whole lives in the business and whose jobs and careers are on the line with their decision have decided that for now Jones is their best option of several options none of which come with anything close to a guarantee. I just feel its the height of arrogance to spout off on a subject that one in truth knows almost nothing about and then get uppity when they get called out.