aGiantsfanstuckinpitt

02-24-2012, 05:12 PM

As he continues to get better & Jerry Reese continues his magic... He has 2 now & he has been in the league for 8 yrs, entering his prime?? I am thinking 1 or 2 more...

View Full Version : How many rings does Eli win?

aGiantsfanstuckinpitt

02-24-2012, 05:12 PM

As he continues to get better & Jerry Reese continues his magic... He has 2 now & he has been in the league for 8 yrs, entering his prime?? I am thinking 1 or 2 more...

PIERCEnumber58rules

02-24-2012, 05:17 PM

Yea, I agree. At least one, but probably two more. We got it good as GIANTS fans!

Down-lifer

02-24-2012, 05:24 PM

Eli will retire with 5 rings all with the Giants.

jhamburg

02-24-2012, 05:27 PM

As he continues to get better & Jerry Reese continues his magic... He has 2 now & he has been in the league for 8 yrs, entering his prime?? I am thinking 1 or 2 more...

I would put us up against any team out there, but still man it is hard to win super bowls in this league. I know we have made it look easy lately but even so, I'd be thrilled if we won another one in Eli's time.

I would put us up against any team out there, but still man it is hard to win super bowls in this league. I know we have made it look easy lately but even so, I'd be thrilled if we won another one in Eli's time.

ebick

02-24-2012, 05:27 PM

As he continues to get better & Jerry Reese continues his magic... He has 2 now & he has been in the league for 8 yrs, entering his prime?? I am thinking 1 or 2 more...</P>

I am in the "two more" camp. </P>

I am in the "two more" camp. </P>

SanDiablo

02-24-2012, 07:46 PM

I hope for two more. I think he and the Giants can do it. Elite Manning, in the annals with Bradshaw and Montana!

Voldamort

02-24-2012, 08:34 PM

Yea, I agree. At least one, but probably two more. We got it good as GIANTS fans! I say 3,ELI will have 5 total!

Jet-Blue

02-24-2012, 09:07 PM

I'll go for 2 more also, unless they get one next season then it will be 3 morel

SweetZombieJesus

02-25-2012, 09:35 AM

Eli will retire with 5 rings all with the Giants.

I think only Bart Starr has done that (in the NFL at least, not counting guys like Otto Graham who spanned two leagues).

I would be thrilled with one more. Hell I'm thrilled where we are now. The Giants have never had a QB win multiple championships.

For you guys predicting 3 more, come on, it's so hard to win a championship in today's NFL. And while Eli's been a rock, just look at his brother if you need to be reminded how quickly it can all unravel and your career is over.

I think only Bart Starr has done that (in the NFL at least, not counting guys like Otto Graham who spanned two leagues).

I would be thrilled with one more. Hell I'm thrilled where we are now. The Giants have never had a QB win multiple championships.

For you guys predicting 3 more, come on, it's so hard to win a championship in today's NFL. And while Eli's been a rock, just look at his brother if you need to be reminded how quickly it can all unravel and your career is over.

MikeIsaGiant

02-25-2012, 10:12 AM

Most 2 more, sorry guys. I hope he can get 3 more but I honestly believe he'll pan out to 2 more.

nhpgiantsfan

02-25-2012, 10:14 AM

Do you people realize how hard it is to win multiple rings? It's about the team not Eli. A lot of things have to go right. How are some people saying 5? I hope this is a joke.

You need a real good core and aside from Eli & the receivers we don't really have that.

Our O-line is in a transition phase. Kmac? Diehl? Beatty?

We don't have a dominant running back.

We dont know who our TE is gonna be next year.

Our Dline is strong, but what happens to Osi? Canty? Rocky?

Our LB group is average at best, and that might be generous.

Our DB's are pretty solid but. Ross? TT? Grant?

We need to figure out alot of pieces to the puzzle. And as recent history shows, the team that gets hot at the right time, wins the SB.

You need a real good core and aside from Eli & the receivers we don't really have that.

Our O-line is in a transition phase. Kmac? Diehl? Beatty?

We don't have a dominant running back.

We dont know who our TE is gonna be next year.

Our Dline is strong, but what happens to Osi? Canty? Rocky?

Our LB group is average at best, and that might be generous.

Our DB's are pretty solid but. Ross? TT? Grant?

We need to figure out alot of pieces to the puzzle. And as recent history shows, the team that gets hot at the right time, wins the SB.

nygfanmaybe

02-25-2012, 10:26 AM

I don't think Eli will win any more championships...by himself. The rings he has now are also owned by Tuck, Bradshaw, Jacobs, Osi, Tynes, and a few others.

Whether the Giants win any future rings with Eli at QB depends a lot on Reese. I think it is obvious that we have a guy who can move the ball with quality people around him.

I would like to see management concentrate on trying to build a dynasty type defense, add depth to the oline...and try to keep the people that Eli has been working with around for a while.

The problem is that Eli is helping these guys become all-pro and then they want more money...which is understandable.

Whether the Giants win any future rings with Eli at QB depends a lot on Reese. I think it is obvious that we have a guy who can move the ball with quality people around him.

I would like to see management concentrate on trying to build a dynasty type defense, add depth to the oline...and try to keep the people that Eli has been working with around for a while.

The problem is that Eli is helping these guys become all-pro and then they want more money...which is understandable.

bflo23

02-25-2012, 12:19 PM

The Giants future remains very bright with some young stars. It also helps that Reese knows how to build a great team and the giants have a great coach in Coughlin. I wouldn't be surprised if the Giants are better than in 2011.

I would think Eli sees 2 more championship rings in his future.

I would think Eli sees 2 more championship rings in his future.

NYtoSanDiego

02-25-2012, 12:35 PM

As he continues to get better & Jerry Reese continues his magic... He has 2 now & he has been in the league for 8 yrs, entering his prime?? I am thinking 1 or 2 more...

love it! "reese knows how to build a great team". all it took was another SB title.

i say he's got two more as well and there's a possibility he may get a 3rd one this year. i give them a good shot of repeating. our OC and DC are returning, the key players know the system, and as long as eli plays all 19 games they have good shot.

i say they win 13 games in 2012 and this will be the year coughlin and eli will have homefield and make it all the way without having to win road games to get in.

love it! "reese knows how to build a great team". all it took was another SB title.

i say he's got two more as well and there's a possibility he may get a 3rd one this year. i give them a good shot of repeating. our OC and DC are returning, the key players know the system, and as long as eli plays all 19 games they have good shot.

i say they win 13 games in 2012 and this will be the year coughlin and eli will have homefield and make it all the way without having to win road games to get in.

jakegibbs

02-25-2012, 12:45 PM

As he continues to get better & Jerry Reese continues his magic... He has 2 now & he has been in the league for 8 yrs, entering his prime?? I am thinking 1 or 2 more...

Let's see according to my algebraic calications below

The rational numbers, expressed as the quotient of two integers a and b, b not equal to zero, satisfy the above definition because x = a / b is the root of bx - a.[1]

The quadratic surds (irrational roots of a quadratic polynomial ax2 + bx + c with integer coefficients a, b, and c) are algebraic numbers. If the quadratic polynomial is monic (a = 1) then the roots are quadratic integers.

The constructible numbers (those that, starting with a unit length, can be constructed with straightedge and compass). These include all quadratic surds, all rational numbers, and all numbers that can be formed from these using the basic arithmetic operations and the extraction of square roots.

Any expression formed using any combination of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots gives an algebraic number.

Polynomial roots that cannot be expressed in terms of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots (such as the roots of x5 - x + 1). This happens with many, but not all, polynomials of degree 5 or higher.

Gaussian integers: those complex numbers a + bi where both a and b are integers are also quadratic integers.

Trigonometric functions of rational multiples of p (except when undefined). For example, each of cos(p / 7), cos(3p / 7), cos(5p / 7) satisfies 8x3 - 4x2 - 4x + 1 = 0. This polynomial is irreducible over the rationals, and so these three cosines are conjugate algebraic numbers. Likewise, tan(3p / 16), tan(7p / 16), tan(11p / 16), tan(15p / 16) all satisfy the irreducible polynomial x4 - 4x3 - 6x2 + 4x + 1, and so are conjugate algebraic integers.

Some irrational numbers are algebraic and some are not: The numbers and are algebraic since they are roots of polynomials x2 - 2 and 8x3 - 3, respectively.

The golden ratio ? is algebraic since it is a root of the polynomial x2 - x - 1.

The numbers p and e are not algebraic numbers (see the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem);[2] hence they are transcendental.

1 more has a 85% chance of being true. 2 more has a 49.9% chance of happining & 3 more has a 2.4% of probability & 4 well minute to almost impossible.

Next question please hmmmmmmm...........

Let's see according to my algebraic calications below

The rational numbers, expressed as the quotient of two integers a and b, b not equal to zero, satisfy the above definition because x = a / b is the root of bx - a.[1]

The quadratic surds (irrational roots of a quadratic polynomial ax2 + bx + c with integer coefficients a, b, and c) are algebraic numbers. If the quadratic polynomial is monic (a = 1) then the roots are quadratic integers.

The constructible numbers (those that, starting with a unit length, can be constructed with straightedge and compass). These include all quadratic surds, all rational numbers, and all numbers that can be formed from these using the basic arithmetic operations and the extraction of square roots.

Any expression formed using any combination of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots gives an algebraic number.

Polynomial roots that cannot be expressed in terms of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots (such as the roots of x5 - x + 1). This happens with many, but not all, polynomials of degree 5 or higher.

Gaussian integers: those complex numbers a + bi where both a and b are integers are also quadratic integers.

Trigonometric functions of rational multiples of p (except when undefined). For example, each of cos(p / 7), cos(3p / 7), cos(5p / 7) satisfies 8x3 - 4x2 - 4x + 1 = 0. This polynomial is irreducible over the rationals, and so these three cosines are conjugate algebraic numbers. Likewise, tan(3p / 16), tan(7p / 16), tan(11p / 16), tan(15p / 16) all satisfy the irreducible polynomial x4 - 4x3 - 6x2 + 4x + 1, and so are conjugate algebraic integers.

Some irrational numbers are algebraic and some are not: The numbers and are algebraic since they are roots of polynomials x2 - 2 and 8x3 - 3, respectively.

The golden ratio ? is algebraic since it is a root of the polynomial x2 - x - 1.

The numbers p and e are not algebraic numbers (see the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem);[2] hence they are transcendental.

1 more has a 85% chance of being true. 2 more has a 49.9% chance of happining & 3 more has a 2.4% of probability & 4 well minute to almost impossible.

Next question please hmmmmmmm...........

jakegibbs

02-25-2012, 12:50 PM

As he continues to get better & Jerry Reese continues his magic... He has 2 now & he has been in the league for 8 yrs, entering his prime?? I am thinking 1 or 2 more...

Let's see according to my algebraic calications below

The rational numbers, expressed as the quotient of two integers a and b, b not equal to zero, satisfy the above definition because x = a / b is the root of bx - a.[1]

The quadratic surds (irrational roots of a quadratic polynomial ax2 + bx + c with integer coefficients a, b, and c) are algebraic numbers. If the quadratic polynomial is monic (a = 1) then the roots are quadratic integers.

The constructible numbers (those that, starting with a unit length, can be constructed with straightedge and compass). These include all quadratic surds, all rational numbers, and all numbers that can be formed from these using the basic arithmetic operations and the extraction of square roots.

Any expression formed using any combination of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots gives an algebraic number.

Polynomial roots that cannot be expressed in terms of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots (such as the roots of x5 - x + 1). This happens with many, but not all, polynomials of degree 5 or higher.

Gaussian integers: those complex numbers a + bi where both a and b are integers are also quadratic integers.

Trigonometric functions of rational multiples of p (except when undefined). For example, each of cos(p / 7), cos(3p / 7), cos(5p / 7) satisfies 8x3 - 4x2 - 4x + 1 = 0. This polynomial is irreducible over the rationals, and so these three cosines are conjugate algebraic numbers. Likewise, tan(3p / 16), tan(7p / 16), tan(11p / 16), tan(15p / 16) all satisfy the irreducible polynomial x4 - 4x3 - 6x2 + 4x + 1, and so are conjugate algebraic integers.

Some irrational numbers are algebraic and some are not: The numbers and are algebraic since they are roots of polynomials x2 - 2 and 8x3 - 3, respectively.

The golden ratio ? is algebraic since it is a root of the polynomial x2 - x - 1.

The numbers p and e are not algebraic numbers (see the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem);[2] hence they are transcendental.

1 more has a 85% chance of being true. 2 more has a 49.9% chance of happining & 3 more has a 2.4% of probability & 4 well minute to almost impossible.

Next question please hmmmmmmm...........

Whoops made a critical mathematical equation error & stand corrected.

1 more ring 51.334% probability

2 more rings 2.435% probability

3 more rings well don't bet on it.

Let's see according to my algebraic calications below

The rational numbers, expressed as the quotient of two integers a and b, b not equal to zero, satisfy the above definition because x = a / b is the root of bx - a.[1]

The quadratic surds (irrational roots of a quadratic polynomial ax2 + bx + c with integer coefficients a, b, and c) are algebraic numbers. If the quadratic polynomial is monic (a = 1) then the roots are quadratic integers.

The constructible numbers (those that, starting with a unit length, can be constructed with straightedge and compass). These include all quadratic surds, all rational numbers, and all numbers that can be formed from these using the basic arithmetic operations and the extraction of square roots.

Any expression formed using any combination of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots gives an algebraic number.

Polynomial roots that cannot be expressed in terms of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots (such as the roots of x5 - x + 1). This happens with many, but not all, polynomials of degree 5 or higher.

Gaussian integers: those complex numbers a + bi where both a and b are integers are also quadratic integers.

Trigonometric functions of rational multiples of p (except when undefined). For example, each of cos(p / 7), cos(3p / 7), cos(5p / 7) satisfies 8x3 - 4x2 - 4x + 1 = 0. This polynomial is irreducible over the rationals, and so these three cosines are conjugate algebraic numbers. Likewise, tan(3p / 16), tan(7p / 16), tan(11p / 16), tan(15p / 16) all satisfy the irreducible polynomial x4 - 4x3 - 6x2 + 4x + 1, and so are conjugate algebraic integers.

Some irrational numbers are algebraic and some are not: The numbers and are algebraic since they are roots of polynomials x2 - 2 and 8x3 - 3, respectively.

The golden ratio ? is algebraic since it is a root of the polynomial x2 - x - 1.

The numbers p and e are not algebraic numbers (see the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem);[2] hence they are transcendental.

1 more has a 85% chance of being true. 2 more has a 49.9% chance of happining & 3 more has a 2.4% of probability & 4 well minute to almost impossible.

Next question please hmmmmmmm...........

Whoops made a critical mathematical equation error & stand corrected.

1 more ring 51.334% probability

2 more rings 2.435% probability

3 more rings well don't bet on it.

jakegibbs

02-25-2012, 12:50 PM

As he continues to get better & Jerry Reese continues his magic... He has 2 now & he has been in the league for 8 yrs, entering his prime?? I am thinking 1 or 2 more...

Let's see according to my algebraic calications below

The rational numbers, expressed as the quotient of two integers a and b, b not equal to zero, satisfy the above definition because x = a / b is the root of bx - a.[1]

The quadratic surds (irrational roots of a quadratic polynomial ax2 + bx + c with integer coefficients a, b, and c) are algebraic numbers. If the quadratic polynomial is monic (a = 1) then the roots are quadratic integers.

The constructible numbers (those that, starting with a unit length, can be constructed with straightedge and compass). These include all quadratic surds, all rational numbers, and all numbers that can be formed from these using the basic arithmetic operations and the extraction of square roots.

Any expression formed using any combination of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots gives an algebraic number.

Polynomial roots that cannot be expressed in terms of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots (such as the roots of x5 - x + 1). This happens with many, but not all, polynomials of degree 5 or higher.

Gaussian integers: those complex numbers a + bi where both a and b are integers are also quadratic integers.

Trigonometric functions of rational multiples of p (except when undefined). For example, each of cos(p / 7), cos(3p / 7), cos(5p / 7) satisfies 8x3 - 4x2 - 4x + 1 = 0. This polynomial is irreducible over the rationals, and so these three cosines are conjugate algebraic numbers. Likewise, tan(3p / 16), tan(7p / 16), tan(11p / 16), tan(15p / 16) all satisfy the irreducible polynomial x4 - 4x3 - 6x2 + 4x + 1, and so are conjugate algebraic integers.

Some irrational numbers are algebraic and some are not: The numbers and are algebraic since they are roots of polynomials x2 - 2 and 8x3 - 3, respectively.

The golden ratio ? is algebraic since it is a root of the polynomial x2 - x - 1.

The numbers p and e are not algebraic numbers (see the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem);[2] hence they are transcendental.

1 more has a 85% chance of being true. 2 more has a 49.9% chance of happining & 3 more has a 2.4% of probability & 4 well minute to almost impossible.

Next question please hmmmmmmm...........

Whoops made a critical mathematical equation error & stand corrected.

1 more ring 51.334% probability

2 more rings 2.435% probability

3 more rings well don't bet on it.

Let's see according to my algebraic calications below

The rational numbers, expressed as the quotient of two integers a and b, b not equal to zero, satisfy the above definition because x = a / b is the root of bx - a.[1]

The quadratic surds (irrational roots of a quadratic polynomial ax2 + bx + c with integer coefficients a, b, and c) are algebraic numbers. If the quadratic polynomial is monic (a = 1) then the roots are quadratic integers.

The constructible numbers (those that, starting with a unit length, can be constructed with straightedge and compass). These include all quadratic surds, all rational numbers, and all numbers that can be formed from these using the basic arithmetic operations and the extraction of square roots.

Any expression formed using any combination of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots gives an algebraic number.

Polynomial roots that cannot be expressed in terms of the basic arithmetic operations and extraction of nth roots (such as the roots of x5 - x + 1). This happens with many, but not all, polynomials of degree 5 or higher.

Gaussian integers: those complex numbers a + bi where both a and b are integers are also quadratic integers.

Trigonometric functions of rational multiples of p (except when undefined). For example, each of cos(p / 7), cos(3p / 7), cos(5p / 7) satisfies 8x3 - 4x2 - 4x + 1 = 0. This polynomial is irreducible over the rationals, and so these three cosines are conjugate algebraic numbers. Likewise, tan(3p / 16), tan(7p / 16), tan(11p / 16), tan(15p / 16) all satisfy the irreducible polynomial x4 - 4x3 - 6x2 + 4x + 1, and so are conjugate algebraic integers.

Some irrational numbers are algebraic and some are not: The numbers and are algebraic since they are roots of polynomials x2 - 2 and 8x3 - 3, respectively.

The golden ratio ? is algebraic since it is a root of the polynomial x2 - x - 1.

The numbers p and e are not algebraic numbers (see the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem);[2] hence they are transcendental.

1 more has a 85% chance of being true. 2 more has a 49.9% chance of happining & 3 more has a 2.4% of probability & 4 well minute to almost impossible.

Next question please hmmmmmmm...........

Whoops made a critical mathematical equation error & stand corrected.

1 more ring 51.334% probability

2 more rings 2.435% probability

3 more rings well don't bet on it.

coachjdc

02-25-2012, 01:15 PM

I have no idea what any of that means, Jake, but the end results sound about right. Would love to see the G-men win 2 or 3 more with Eli at the controls but 1 more at even odds and long odds beyond that is probably the reality.

Gmen32

02-25-2012, 01:16 PM

I was being conservative but way back when I said Eli will win 3 rings. The first one came quicker than I thought so...

I wouldn't be surprised if he retired a Giant with 4 rings.

I wouldn't be surprised if he retired a Giant with 4 rings.

MikeIsaGiant

02-25-2012, 01:23 PM

Jake, how long did that take you to figure out? Since the SB I bet?

Hehe

Hehe

jakegibbs

02-25-2012, 02:33 PM

Jake, how long did that take you to figure out? Since the SB I bet?

Hehe

37 mins 16 secs + 14 mins 11 secs for recalculation. Pc of Cake. The universe revolves around mathematical equations but everyone already knows that right?

Hehe

37 mins 16 secs + 14 mins 11 secs for recalculation. Pc of Cake. The universe revolves around mathematical equations but everyone already knows that right?

gmen46

02-25-2012, 03:37 PM

Eli will retire with 5 rings all with the Giants.

I think only Bart Starr has done that (in the NFL at least, not counting guys like Otto Graham who spanned two leagues).

I would be thrilled with one more.* Hell I'm thrilled where we are now.* The Giants have never had a QB win multiple championships.

For you guys predicting 3 more, come on, it's so hard to win a championship in today's NFL.* And while Eli's been a rock, just look at his brother if you need to be reminded how quickly it can all unravel and your career is over.

You hit the head right on the nail :)

There're very strong reasons why there are only 2 QBs in the last 46 years who have 4 SB rings, and they both occurred before the age of Free Agency.

And during the 19 (?) years of FA there have been only 2 QBs to win 3 rings--both of them earned them within a 4 year time frame, and Aikman won at least 1 of his before Free Agency came into play.

If there is One sport that is completely dependent upon just the right mixture of ALL the elements--owner(s), GM, Player Personnel, HC, coaching staff, each of 53 players on the roster, the QB and other key players, individual and overall attitude of players, quality of competition, and yes, a lucky bounce of the ball here and there--it is football.

It truly is a matter of alchemy.

We are indeed fortunate to have witnessed the 2 SB wins within the past 5 seasons, and owe a humungus debt of Fan Gratitude to Eli, Coughlin, Reese, Mara and Tisch, and of course to Accorsi for his overwhelming instinct that drove him to insist upon pursuing Eli in the 2004 draft.

All that said, I really do believe we have a CHANCE to win 1 more ring with Eli & Co.

That, in itself, would be an historic achievement, both for the franchise, and for the league.

Rock On

I think only Bart Starr has done that (in the NFL at least, not counting guys like Otto Graham who spanned two leagues).

I would be thrilled with one more.* Hell I'm thrilled where we are now.* The Giants have never had a QB win multiple championships.

For you guys predicting 3 more, come on, it's so hard to win a championship in today's NFL.* And while Eli's been a rock, just look at his brother if you need to be reminded how quickly it can all unravel and your career is over.

You hit the head right on the nail :)

There're very strong reasons why there are only 2 QBs in the last 46 years who have 4 SB rings, and they both occurred before the age of Free Agency.

And during the 19 (?) years of FA there have been only 2 QBs to win 3 rings--both of them earned them within a 4 year time frame, and Aikman won at least 1 of his before Free Agency came into play.

If there is One sport that is completely dependent upon just the right mixture of ALL the elements--owner(s), GM, Player Personnel, HC, coaching staff, each of 53 players on the roster, the QB and other key players, individual and overall attitude of players, quality of competition, and yes, a lucky bounce of the ball here and there--it is football.

It truly is a matter of alchemy.

We are indeed fortunate to have witnessed the 2 SB wins within the past 5 seasons, and owe a humungus debt of Fan Gratitude to Eli, Coughlin, Reese, Mara and Tisch, and of course to Accorsi for his overwhelming instinct that drove him to insist upon pursuing Eli in the 2004 draft.

All that said, I really do believe we have a CHANCE to win 1 more ring with Eli & Co.

That, in itself, would be an historic achievement, both for the franchise, and for the league.

Rock On

BornBrooklyn

02-25-2012, 03:39 PM

I bELIeve he'll get at least 2 more... Like Joe.

Toadofsteel

02-25-2012, 04:15 PM

Imagine if the giants get to go head to head against the pats... and win a third time! Massachusetts would have to call in the national guard at that point.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.