Contact Info
Administration
Coaching Staff
Coaching History
Annual Records
Hall Of Fame
Retired Jerseys
Ring Of Honor
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| The execs, whose backgrounds range from personnel evaluation to contracts/salary cap and analytics/strategy, ranked every team in each conference on condition of anonymity for competitive reasons. They also offered explanations, some of which are included below. Teams are ordered by the median of their rankings, with ties between teams broken by average vote. All five voters’ ballots, along with the median and average for each team, are in the table below. |
| Quote: |
| Votes: 16-11-14-15-16 | Avg.: 14.4 | Median: 15 Any path for the Giants to surprise probably includes a breakout season from rookie receiver Malik Nabers. “If Nabers or (Marvin) Harrison were Rookie of the Year, that means they had a bigger year than the quarterbacks — a historic year that would uplift their teams,” one exec said. The Giants appear optimistic, having unretired Hall of Famer Ray Flaherty’s No. 1 jersey so the rookie can wear that number. “Their best chance with Daniel Jones is to do what they did a couple years ago: Go heavy play-action, simple boots with simple reads, and scheme those guys to be open,” an exec who considers Jones to be a low Tier 3 quarterback said. “There is definitely a ceiling there. Unless they know something we all don’t, they are kind of existing.” |
Link - ( New Window )
Yeah, that's a great low-key insult
One big conspiracy
Traditionally the Giants have done well when there are no expectations.
In my opinion the key will be the OL. Lazy analysis thinks it's the turnstile that it was the last 2 years. It's not it's actually a professional O-line that can even survive an injury if necessary.
Quote:
Everyone hates the Giants.
One big conspiracy
Or is there some way they are bad enough to be #1 but Young is still viewed as the future franchise QB (outside of a Young injury).
It's a reasonable enough assessment. One certainty is the Giants do in fact know much much more than any of these guys (or us) know. Soon we see who's smarter.
That said, 11-15 sounds right to me.
Or is there some way they are bad enough to be #1 but Young is still viewed as the future franchise QB (outside of a Young injury).
An NFL QB really needs 6 seasons to get a full evaluation…. Sorry I had to do.
I think they would trade out with the Giants being a likely partner.
QB play is subpar, Nabers is really the only threat on offense. Huge question marks at TE, RT and OG. Average RB play.
On defense, the front 7 is great but if either Kayvon or Burns misses any time, that pass rush is going to be neutralized and the secondary will be exposed, big time. Huge question marks at safety and CB.
I think you'd need a lot of this young talent to really step forward for us to be any better than bottom 5.
What's clickbait about projecting a frequently crappy team in recent years to once again be a crappy team.
Calling things clickbait seems to just be the adult equivalent of putting our fingers in our ears. It doesn't actually mean anything most of the time, other than a declaration that we don't like what it says so we assume the source is just trying to be inflammatory for clicks.
We were 10x worse last year and still finished ahead of 5 other teams. I just don’t see us worse than last year unless injuries wreck us.
That’s 15th in the NFC though right? Not the league. So they probably see us winning 3-5 games.
Can anyone find a clickbait article saying the Giants are going to be a 11-13 win division winner and Super Bowl contender?
QB play is subpar, Nabers is really the only threat on offense. Huge question marks at TE, RT and OG. Average RB play.
On defense, the front 7 is great but if either Kayvon or Burns misses any time, that pass rush is going to be neutralized and the secondary will be exposed, big time. Huge question marks at safety and CB.
I think you'd need a lot of this young talent to really step forward for us to be any better than bottom 5.
Agreed, lots of changes at RB and the offensive line. Those changes will hopefully be good, but we have seen what happens many times in the past when you make a ton of changes. It takes time for the team to gel, and find an identity on offense. The last few years everything more or less ran through Barkley.
QB play is subpar, Nabers is really the only threat on offense. Huge question marks at TE, RT and OG. Average RB play.
On defense, the front 7 is great but if either Kayvon or Burns misses any time, that pass rush is going to be neutralized and the secondary will be exposed, big time. Huge question marks at safety and CB.
I think you'd need a lot of this young talent to really step forward for us to be any better than bottom 5.
Lets be honest, every position group on offense is a question mark. Maybe they all take a jump and surprise the league, but this offense has the potential to be very bad.
We have a bottom 5 QB and 1 legit playmaker. Unfortunately, it is what it is.
Can anyone find a clickbait article saying the Giants are going to be a 11-13 win division winner and Super Bowl contender?
Spot on. A simple view of the roster tells the whole story. Tons of youth, new faces, poor QB group. It’s quite possible the team could play .500 ball this year, but it’s probably more likely we are looking at a 3-7 win season. While I hate to see the Giants lose, there’s a difference between a young team that is developing and that needs a QB winning a handful of games, vs. an established team with a solid QB that only wins 5 games. I think we have to keep that in mind as the season unfolds.
Votes: 9-11-8-7-5-6 | Avg: 7.67 | Median: 7.5
The Giants are rising, although no one pushed them into the top quartile of the conference.
“I’m high on them,” the exec who voted the Giants sixth said. “(Brian) Daboll got them to believe last year. They add (Darren) Waller and some other good pieces without breaking the bank, and now they have speed outside. I think they are really going to open it up this year, and I expect them to ascend almost like the Jacksonville of the NFC: well-coached, with a quarterback they like. They really seem to have turned the corner.”
Voters stacked the Giants and Vikings together in the middle of the conference, which might be fitting. Both teams outperformed expectations last season. Only Minnesota finished 2022 with more victories (11) than the Giants had (eight) in one-score games.
“The Giants are just like the Vikings in that both had incredible luck last year, except the Vikings were willing to tear it down,” one exec said of the teams’ disparate approaches to the offseason. “It will be super interesting to track those two programs and see what their trajectories are like.”
Past the top 4 (that everyone everywhere was picking as the top 4) they didn't do all that great with their rankings. One of them even picked the Panthers at 4. Maybe that was the exec they dropped to go from 6 execs last year to 5 this year lol.
There are going to be growing pains and flashes witht his team and hopefully by the end of the year we can say ok there is talent
2023 NFL execs rank NFC teams - ( New Window )
Quote:
7. New York Giants
Votes: 9-11-8-7-5-6 | Avg: 7.67 | Median: 7.5
The Giants are rising, although no one pushed them into the top quartile of the conference.
“I’m high on them,” the exec who voted the Giants sixth said. “(Brian) Daboll got them to believe last year. They add (Darren) Waller and some other good pieces without breaking the bank, and now they have speed outside. I think they are really going to open it up this year, and I expect them to ascend almost like the Jacksonville of the NFC: well-coached, with a quarterback they like. They really seem to have turned the corner.”
Voters stacked the Giants and Vikings together in the middle of the conference, which might be fitting. Both teams outperformed expectations last season. Only Minnesota finished 2022 with more victories (11) than the Giants had (eight) in one-score games.
“The Giants are just like the Vikings in that both had incredible luck last year, except the Vikings were willing to tear it down,” one exec said of the teams’ disparate approaches to the offseason. “It will be super interesting to track those two programs and see what their trajectories are like.”
Past the top 4 (that everyone everywhere was picking as the top 4) they didn't do all that great with their rankings. One of them even picked the Panthers at 4. Maybe that was the exec they dropped to go from 6 execs last year to 5 this year lol.
So we go from middle of the pack in the conference to next to last. Awesome
The only teams in that list I feel we could be better than this year would be the Pats, Vikings, and maybe the Panthers depending on how much Young improves in year 2.
They have the Giants as being 15th in a 16 team conference, not the 32 team league. Your .500 take is way more optimistic than this survey.
If you posted that this article was clickbait, it just highlights that you refuse to consider any informed opinions that vary from your own.
I'm just glad the games start soon, so we can move on from some of the clickbait listicle offseason nonsense.
If you posted that this article was clickbait, it just highlights that you refuse to consider any informed opinions that vary from your own.
Mike, it's clickbait because rankings are meaningless no matter whose opinions they reflect. Somewhere around 14 or 15 is probably right based on what we know entering the season, but so what? If the Giants beat Minnesota with a last-second 55-yard field goal after a fluke turnover, will that show they should have been 13 instead of 15?
The Giants are not, on paper, a good team. Anyone can see that, from John Lynch to the dumbest Youtuber. Where they rank in the bottom quartile of the NFC is meaningless, no matter who does the ranking.
Well since it is a pre-season poll, probably not since the Giants won't play a regular season game in the pre-season.
If it is a power ranking, those are done every week so yes, you would assume they probably move up if they beat the vikings. But that wasn't what this article was.
Quote:
should be projected to be the 15th team in a 16 team conference, but The Athletic is not clickbait. It is a legit publication doing a survey of insiders who work in this industry and know something about it.
If you posted that this article was clickbait, it just highlights that you refuse to consider any informed opinions that vary from your own.
Mike, it's clickbait because rankings are meaningless no matter whose opinions they reflect. Somewhere around 14 or 15 is probably right based on what we know entering the season, but so what? If the Giants beat Minnesota with a last-second 55-yard field goal after a fluke turnover, will that show they should have been 13 instead of 15?
The Giants are not, on paper, a good team. Anyone can see that, from John Lynch to the dumbest Youtuber. Where they rank in the bottom quartile of the NFC is meaningless, no matter who does the ranking.
No, that doesn't make it clickbait at all. It makes it an article that you personally don't find informative. Asking experts their expectations about upcoming events is the opposite of clickbait.
Would you call an article in the WSJ asking economists about what they expect the Fed to do related to interest rates in their next meeting to be clickbait because their opinions don't influence the Fed? If your answer is yes, then it sounds like you use the terms "opinion" and "clickbait" interchangeably.
You don't like hearing assumptions on a fan opinion forum? Did you log in today expecting only to see game recaps and statistics?
You provided an opinion in a public forum. Maybe you should have followed it with something like "please do not challenge my opinion everyone?"
Having said that, I will avoid interacting with you in the future since you don't like hearing contrary points of view.