Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reese's Biggest Area of Concern His Biggest Weakness

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

  • Reese's Biggest Area of Concern His Biggest Weakness

    I can understand Reese making an attempt to sign fullbacks as anybody would most likely be a temp fill in for the injured Hynoski, but what is significant are attempts to sign linebackers, such as Bishop, when the money isn't there and where temps are not needed due to injuries.

    Reese's one weakness perhaps may be his inability to score linebackers in the draft. Granted other needs create positional draft choices as well, but this LB'r unit hasn't been top dog for a number of years. Or, a second weakness is hanging on to certain draft choices too long.

    When was the last time the Giants had a great line backing crop? There hasn't been any Taylor's, Huff's, Carson's, Armstead's etc.

  • #2
    What an original thread!

    Comment


    • #3
      If you throw enough poo at it, something will eventually stick.
      Do not feed the trolls.

      Comment


      • #4
        Maybe there reasons why he was unable to get good quality lbs.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Diamondring View Post
          Maybe there reasons why he was unable to get good quality lbs.
          I think he simply doesn't value them as highly in today's NFL where pass rushing DE's and DB's are more important. We are also a 4-3 team where tackes are made more by DL than LB.

          I think it is a planned decision even though I desagree with it. Still, to the OP point, we do in fact draft LB's and in the end they are all below average or worse. (example Sintim)
          No one remembers who came in second.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by jomo View Post
            I think he simply doesn't value them as highly in today's NFL where pass rushing DE's and DB's are more important. We are also a 4-3 team where tackes are made more by DL than LB.

            I think it is a planned decision even though I desagree with it. Still, to the OP point, we do in fact draft LB's and in the end they are all below average or worse. (example Sintim)
            Sintim was the highest drafted LB with Reese at the helm too, wasn't he?
            It's almost like Reese is snake-bit when it comes down to using a high pick on a LB now lol.
            my beer drinking team has a football problem

            Comment


            • #7
              Why do you assume the linebackers we have now are bad? Are there really free agents out there that are better than we have now?

              We've had a lot of turnover at LB this past year, while there are no obvious studs, we may be OK there.

              I'm more concerened about our corners.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Gimaniac View Post
                Why do you assume the linebackers we have now are bad? Are there really free agents out there that are better than we have now?

                We've had a lot of turnover at LB this past year, while there are no obvious studs, we may be OK there.

                I'm more concerened about our corners.
                I just hope that if Webster starts off badly again, he gets pulled from the CB2 spot for Ross. Ross wasn't that great by any means, but 2011 ross was better than 2012 webster.

                I'm Commander Shepard, and this is my favorite team in the NFL.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by jomo View Post
                  I think he simply doesn't value them as highly in today's NFL where pass rushing DE's and DB's are more important. We are also a 4-3 team where tackes are made more by DL than LB.

                  I think it is a planned decision even though I desagree with it. Still, to the OP point, we do in fact draft LB's and in the end they are all below average or worse. (example Sintim)
                  I think he does not value lbs not cause of the set the Giants uses but because the type of offenses the team faces. There are other reasons we don't look at as well.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jomo View Post
                    I think he simply doesn't value them as highly in today's NFL where pass rushing DE's and DB's are more important. We are also a 4-3 team where tackes are made more by DL than LB.

                    I think it is a planned decision even though I desagree with it. Still, to the OP point, we do in fact draft LB's and in the end they are all below average or worse. (example Sintim)
                    If it's an issue of how Reese values them, it's a mistake to think the position is less important than any other. It would be nice to have a guy who could shed blockers and still make the tackle or even the occasional sack. Trying to get pressure on the qb with just 4 dl guys all the time is going to fail far more than it's successful as was evident this past season. You aren't going to find guys that are both smart and physical in the bargain bin.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      :
                      Originally posted by jomo View Post
                      I think he simply doesn't value them as highly in today's NFL where pass rushing DE's and DB's are more important. We are also a 4-3 team where tackes are made more by DL than LB. I think it is a planned decision even though I desagree with it. Still, to the OP point, we do in fact draft LB's and in the end they are all below average or worse. (example Sintim)
                      +1
                      “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by FishinTheSalt View Post
                        If it's an issue of how Reese values them, it's a mistake to think the position is less important than any other. It would be nice to have a guy who could shed blockers and still make the tackle or even the occasional sack. Trying to get pressure on the qb with just 4 dl guys all the time is going to fail far more than it's successful as was evident this past season. You aren't going to find guys that are both smart and physical in the bargain bin.
                        The Giants won two Super Bowls with 2 crap LB corps. It's hilarious to think that all positions are created equal.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Sovereign View Post
                          The Giants won two Super Bowls with 2 crap LB corps. It's hilarious to think that all positions are created equal.
                          Not sayin the positions are equal. I get your point. Just saying it would be nice to have a real playmaker at the position for a change instead of average.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I'm thinking that in order for the team to satisfy the LBer cravings of us fans they will have to switch to a 3/4 defense

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by FishinTheSalt View Post
                              Not sayin the positions are equal. I get your point. Just saying it would be nice to have a real playmaker at the position for a change instead of average.
                              To fortify that postion you need to give up something somewhere else and probably from the defense since they have more of the cap space occupied right now. You want to give up a good player at CB or DL to bring in a good player at LB ? Given the resources available Reese has done well to find guys with potential upside and minimal risk.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X