Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What are you hearing, YA?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I am not enthused with any of them for various reasons. Everything from some of them having bad records in their prior stint to just no experience. Normally the experience thing wouldn't bother me so bad if we just didn't go through with what we did. It would be insane to repeat that so soon. I guess the first rounds of interviews are complete so there probably are not going to be any surprise candidates.

    Whoever it is has to get in here and hit the ground running by putting together a draft strategy with the new GM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Morehead State View Post

      That whole "value" thing is fine but the QB position is SO impactful. I say if they think he will be a good pro, take him at 2. If they have serious doubts, then they should pass.
      But the whole notion that they "should" be able to get him if they trade down would be misguided. That is as I said, if they think he will be a good pro.
      I agree with this thought process 100%. I've always said if the player is going to be a good player then draft him. This nonsense about getting the value at a certain pick drives me crazy and has for years. This all started with the Mel Kiper types and their particular views of certain players. In the 4-5 years of his rookie contract when the guy you drafted is making plays for your team nobody cares where you drafted him.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Morehead State View Post

        That whole "value" thing is fine but the QB position is SO impactful. I say if they think he will be a good pro, take him at 2. If they have serious doubts, then they should pass.
        But the whole notion that they "should" be able to get him if they trade down would be misguided. That is as I said, if they think he will be a good pro.
        THats exactly how they should approach it. If they like one or more of those kids, then they should do what they need to do to get him. If not, move along and take the BPA or if youíre cocky and like lots of other players in he draft trade down.

        Comment


        • #19
          Well, my first choice was Pat Shurmur based on past performance but then I hear no one was impressed with his leadership skills. I kind of didn't want Patricia b/c he's got zero experience but then today I saw this and it scared the ghost out of me. https://www.profootballrumors.com/20...-colts-raiders Why would he be getting a second interview? And why was he the only guy who interviewed with Tisch right off the bat? If it's solely for the Gettleman connection, I'd be pissed.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Gints4Free View Post
            Well, my first choice was Pat Shurmur based on past performance but then I hear no one was impressed with his leadership skills. I kind of didn't want Patricia b/c he's got zero experience but then today I saw this and it scared the ghost out of me. https://www.profootballrumors.com/20...-colts-raiders Why would he be getting a second interview? And why was he the only guy who interviewed with Tisch right off the bat? If it's solely for the Gettleman connection, I'd be pissed.
            Let's hope the Giants don't do what they did last time and pull the trigger on the hire just because other teams show interest. They did that with McAdoo when the Eagles were looking at him.

            Comment


            • #21
              had not seen this thread until now

              I'm not hearing anything ... all I have to go on is what I was told before the interviews took place ... and that is that the first man on their list was Matt Patricia

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by YATittle1962 View Post
                had not seen this thread until now

                I'm not hearing anything ... all I have to go on is what I was told before the interviews took place ... and that is that the first man on their list was Matt Patricia
                Do your source told you why they are so enamored by him? I just don't see why everybody like him, I particularly don't give a crap that he is a "rocket scientist".

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Fvital92 View Post

                  Do your source told you why they are so enamored by him? I just don't see why everybody like him, I particularly don't give a crap that he is a "rocket scientist".
                  He's an aeronautical engineer so he should be able to explain to Eli the importance of a tight spiral and proper trajectory.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Fvital92 View Post

                    Do your source told you why they are so enamored by him? I just don't see why everybody like him, I particularly don't give a crap that he is a "rocket scientist".
                    they think he is a good coach

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by That Guy Rich View Post

                      I agree with this thought process 100%. I've always said if the player is going to be a good player then draft him. This nonsense about getting the value at a certain pick drives me crazy and has for years. This all started with the Mel Kiper types and their particular views of certain players. In the 4-5 years of his rookie contract when the guy you drafted is making plays for your team nobody cares where you drafted him.
                      you get 7 picks per draft to get 53 starters. If you hit on every single draft pick, you would need to 7.5 years of drafts to remain on your team. In other words every one of them must stay more than 7.5 years after all of your picks were perfect and became starters. That is the perfect scenario. all injuries don't matter because you are so perfect that all 53 players are starters.

                      Minimum you need 22 starters, not including special teams. Even if you draft perfectly it takes 3.5 years if you hit on all 7 picks as starters every single year.
                      Now we look at the salary cap and you see that you lose at least 1 or 2 or so good players every year, on average, because you can't afford to keep them all.

                      Realistically you are going to actually get about 2-3 starters per draft on average. that means you need those guy under contract for 7.3 - 11.0 years on average.

                      If those are the numbers. You can't beat them. You have to deal with them. The only way to combat those numbers is to find value. Either in the draft or in free agency or both. The salary cap makes "value" the only formula for success as a team. The patriots succeeded in the NFL because they consistently find value. Even Tom Brady takes less money than he deserves in order for their team to be able to afford better players at other positions.

                      My numbers aren't exact, but just attempting to illustrate how important "value" is to the success of a franchise. If you overpay or overdraft players, your team is going to suck. That is the reality of it.


                      2 cents


                      2 cents

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Gints4Free View Post
                        Well, my first choice was Pat Shurmur based on past performance but then I hear no one was impressed with his leadership skills. I kind of didn't want Patricia b/c he's got zero experience but then today I saw this and it scared the ghost out of me. https://www.profootballrumors.com/20...-colts-raiders Why would he be getting a second interview? And why was he the only guy who interviewed with Tisch right off the bat? If it's solely for the Gettleman connection, I'd be pissed.
                        lol...most of this crap is made up. Wilks didnít even get one interview with the Colts

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I'm surprised that they didn't consider Matt Rhule. He has giants ties and did really well at Temple. I give him a pass for Baylor because he jumped into a **** storm there. Anyways, I don't trust the owners and feel that they will find a way to **** this up. I hope that I am wrong.
                          If you respect others, they will respect you.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by bigpoppy View Post

                            you get 7 picks per draft to get 53 starters. If you hit on every single draft pick, you would need to 7.5 years of drafts to remain on your team. In other words every one of them must stay more than 7.5 years after all of your picks were perfect and became starters. That is the perfect scenario. all injuries don't matter because you are so perfect that all 53 players are starters.

                            Minimum you need 22 starters, not including special teams. Even if you draft perfectly it takes 3.5 years if you hit on all 7 picks as starters every single year.
                            Now we look at the salary cap and you see that you lose at least 1 or 2 or so good players every year, on average, because you can't afford to keep them all.

                            Realistically you are going to actually get about 2-3 starters per draft on average. that means you need those guy under contract for 7.3 - 11.0 years on average.

                            If those are the numbers. You can't beat them. You have to deal with them. The only way to combat those numbers is to find value. Either in the draft or in free agency or both. The salary cap makes "value" the only formula for success as a team. The patriots succeeded in the NFL because they consistently find value. Even Tom Brady takes less money than he deserves in order for their team to be able to afford better players at other positions.

                            My numbers aren't exact, but just attempting to illustrate how important "value" is to the success of a franchise. If you overpay or overdraft players, your team is going to suck. That is the reality of it.


                            2 cents


                            2 cents
                            I understand poppy and you expressed yourself really well. I don't disagree in general but as you say it seems the team can only count on the first 2 picks every year actually contributing. The other draft choices stay on the team to fill out roster and stay under the cap. Very seldom do these players stay past their rookie contracts.

                            But I do agree when you overpay you don't have money to sign another good player, but that has to do more with FA not the draft. The difference in the draft financially is minimal. All I'm saying is if we like a player at #10 and the powers that be say that's too high for him he shouldn't go before #16 who cares if that player will help us. Don't consider that overpaying, I just feel if there is a player projected to be good and he will help us go for it.

                            I probably didn't express myself as eloquent as you did. I have no confidence in any player drafted from the 3rd rd down. Maybe 1 player per draft actually turns out good from 3rd to 7th.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by That Guy Rich View Post

                              I understand poppy and you expressed yourself really well. I don't disagree in general but as you say it seems the team can only count on the first 2 picks every year actually contributing. The other draft choices stay on the team to fill out roster and stay under the cap. Very seldom do these players stay past their rookie contracts.

                              But I do agree when you overpay you don't have money to sign another good player, but that has to do more with FA not the draft. The difference in the draft financially is minimal. All I'm saying is if we like a player at #10 and the powers that be say that's too high for him he shouldn't go before #16 who cares if that player will help us. Don't consider that overpaying, I just feel if there is a player projected to be good and he will help us go for it.

                              I probably didn't express myself as eloquent as you did. I have no confidence in any player drafted from the 3rd rd down. Maybe 1 player per draft actually turns out good from 3rd to 7th.
                              Of course you are right also. You make a valid point my friend. It's just a pet peeve of mine that so many times we undervalue how important the late round draft picks really are as well as how important it is Not to overpay free agents, and to find undervalued free agents. I like that Gettleman acknowledged finding value in the draft as being important to him, so I'm more hopeful that i've been in a very long time.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by YATittle1962 View Post

                                they think he is a good coach
                                Now Iím really interested on anything you may hear. If Patricia turns down the Giants as expected I wonder what kind of conversations that will stir up in Giants land

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X