Money

Not entirely true. The Giants do have guys that can play DE in a 3-4: William Joseph and Fred Robbins. I think Strahan, even at his reduced size, could pull it off as well, although it would not come close to maximizing his skills. Kendrick Clancy played NT in Pittsburgh's 3-4, although he often seemed out of place and is not a true NT. Reggie Torbor and Carlos Emmons can each play SAM in a 3-4 (Emmons did this for the first 4 years of his career in Pitt). Pierce can play in any scheme, although I think he fits best as a 4-3 MIKE. You're right that they won't change any time soon, but they do have some guys who could make a potential conversion possible.

Dayne was chosen as a short-yardage back? I guess that explains why he had more carries than Tiki did during Dayne's rookie season (228 > 213) ... I suppose we had a lot of short-yardage situations, 228 to be exact...

Depends ... 3rd CBs are pretty much starters in the current game. But I think there should be much more time before we can decide if he was a worthwhile selection.

Yes ... I saw the Wrath of Khan...

Tony's got it. There is no superiority between the 4-3 and 3-4. Both schemes can be immensely successful with the right players and coaches. On a related note, the best coaches are the ones who can adjust schemes to maximize the strengths of their players ... the worst coaches are the ones who clean house and look exclusively at guys who fit their scheme. When Dom Capers become Jacksonville's DC in 1998, his 3-4 background conflicted with the Jags 4-3 personnel. But he stuck with the 4-3 and built his scheme around his assets, and they were one of the best defenses in 1998 and 1999. In our case, having Osi and Pierce alone as long-term fixtures makes the 4-3 the ideal long-term defense.

I'm Kirk. He's Khan. They became friends, right?

I did a ton of work for last year's mock (thank god for people like barens, Pizan, and Hank who helped me), so almost anything will be less work by comparison. Here is an explanation. Let's look at the people with the picks 1-16 ... prior to the time slot, all GMs must submit a big board that corresponds to their drafting position. In others words, the Texans GM can submit a 1-player big board, the Saints GM can submit a 2-player big board, the Titans GM can submit a 3-player big board, and so on. The Jets GM (picking 4th) only has to send me a list of 4 guys, because at least 1 of those guys will be available. Meanwhile, the guy picking 15th has to send me a list of at least 16 players, in case his 15 top choices are off the board. People have to let me know in advance if they will be there or not. For people who aren't there, they will automatically select the highest (available) ranked player on their big board. For people who will be there, they will have a set time on the clock after the person in front of them picks (say, 5 minutes). If someone's time expires without them submitting a selection, then they are assigned the highest player available on their big board. At most, the process takes 80 minutes (16 picks x 5 minutes) instead of an hour. Here's an example. Let's say I'm the Bills GM and I'm picking 8th overall. My big board may look something like this: 1. D'Brickashaw Ferguson 2. Haloti Ngata 3. Mario Williams 4. AJ Hawk 5. Michael Huff 6. Vernon Davis 7. Winston Justice 8. Tamba Hali Obviously I excluded guys like Bush, Leinart, and Young because I already have McGahee and Losman. Someone picking 14th, for example, may exclude those players because he knows they won't even be available. Now let's say I either inform the Commish that I will miss my time slot, or I space out altogether and my time on the clock expires, and the first 7 picks of the mock unfolds like this: 1. Reggie Bush 2. Matt Leinart 3. Vince Young 4. D'Brickashaw Ferguson 5. Mario Williams 6. AJ Hawk 7. Michael Huff Then, the Commish will select Haloti Ngata 8th overall on my behalf. This is very simple stuff.

No, it won't be the same as a fantasy draft. I think will do something like this (for example): Picks 1-16 will take place between 7:00-8:00 PM on April 1. Picks 17-32 will take place between 7:00-8:00 PM on April 2. ..and so on... There are two benefits to this structure. First, if someone has, say, the 14th pick, but will be unavailable during that time slot, they can send me a 16-player big board in advance and I will automatically select the highest rated player on their board. That is much easier than requiring people to submit a 96-player big board. Next, such a structure enables the draft to be run much more efficiently ... we can knock out a 3-round mock in 6 days, or 12 overall hours. Compare that to last year's format, where each team had upwards of 6 hours to make their selection ... the mock became a time-consuming, several-week process. I will do my best to find the most optimal time slots, but this strategy maximizes efficiency and minimizes controversy (if all GMs are responsible, then I won't have to make selections for them). Less overall work for the GMs and those involved in running the show.

Calmus is a good idea. Another guy is Rocky Boiman. Sign those two and draft Rocky McIntosh, and I think Sly Stallone might come to all of our home games... Another LB I like in addition to the Rocky's ... Ben Taylor of Cleveland. Very similar to Greisen (even has the whiteness thing going for him) in that he play any LB position in a 4-3. Cleveland reportedly will let him walk.

He's a good player with versatility and special teams skills. But I have to think Baltimore will make a strong effort to keep him.

Valuta Italiana = Currency = I don't know who he was on previous boards ... he's a bit of troll who likes to push buttons. If you don't take him seriously, he's pretty funny....

He works for DirecTV ... plus he livesin Utah, which is a hectic place..

A lot of good posters left giants.com and either resurfaced here or elsewhere. I still think deleting CE was the biggest mistake they could have made. They alienated some of their most loyal customers. The thing is, I actually stuck around after that and my account magically stopped working (every time I attempted to log-in, I got an "incorrect password" message). I believe I was unofficially banned. Nonetheless, we are trying to build an excellent Giants Forum at this site, and the getting knowledgable, dedicated fans like yourself is a good start.

I'd pass on Hope. Too expensive, and all Steelers fans recite the same mantra with him: "adequate but replaceable, doesn't make enough plays."

I don't know if I'd be comfortable entering a season with our starting RG serving as our primary back-up OC. Any OL situation where 1 injury means 2 positions changes is not promising. Cutting Whittle frees up $1.47 million in cap space, but a guy with his versatility is a useful commodity. Keep in mind that cutting him creates another need (back-up OC). And, if Luke, Diehl, O'Hara, Snee, McKenzie, Whitfield, Seubert, and Day 1 Rookie are all on the roster next year ... I don't think there is room for a late-round OC (Whittle's replacement). Carrying 9 OL instead of the standard 8 is truly a luxury, and I don't know if we have the roster flexibility to pull it off.

Phil Simms makes you sad? If anyone sees other posters (from Giants.com or other message boards) worth adding, feel free to list them here...

Revenue sharing has been a staple of the league for several years and is a primary reason why the NFL is the most prominent pro sport in America. Revenue sharing allows teams like the Lions and Cards, for example, to operate inefficiently yet still turn profits. It is one of the features of the NFL that effectively gives it monopoly power. If anything, revenue sharing has capitalistic effects on NFL franchises and potential competitors (AFL, USFL, XFL). Far from communistic.

At this point, we need anyone who will speak their mind. More posters, more posts, more discussion. Speaking of which, where have you been? I see you posting almost exclusively in the Politics forum.

It's a mystery ... along the lines of "who shot JFK" ... Maybe BlueSunday knows, but I have never received an explanation.

I see McCown as a long-term back-up. You and others are right that there may be a market for him as a starting QB. I don't know if any team can realistically rationalize that Josh McCown could be their solution at starting QB. ------------- Finally, someone questioned why I only went with a 4-round mock. There are a couple of reasons here: 1. It is much harder to project late round prospects. Specifically, it is difficult to differentiate between guys who will rise to Day One status, guys who will go 5-7, and guys who will go undrafted. 2. I don't think that I could create any more roster spots for rookies. Even the least valuable vets on our roster ... like Damane Duckett, Chase Blackburn, and Eric Moore, for example ... are better than the vast majority of rookies that will be available in the 5th-7th rounds. Obviously low-round and undrafted guys will sneak their way onto the roster come September, but at this point in time it is nearly impossible to project that type of stuff. 3. I had already profiled 25+ rookies, so I was getting kind of tired. ------------- Rocky McIntosh has the versatility to play WLB and MLB (he played both at Miami). If he puts on weight, he might even be able to play a little SAM. A wise football mind once told me to bring in 2 players when you need 1 ... bring in 3 players when you need 2 ... and so on. Notice how the two primary need areas I outlined (LB and CB) were supplemented by multiple vets and rookies. That is no coincidence. ------------- Unfortunately, bringing in a rookie OT takes away Whitfield's roster spot. So I feel the Giants have to decide between Whitfield or a rookie OT backing up both tackle position in 2006. My choice would be Whitfield. The only way to get 4 OTs on the roster is if the rookie OT can back-up any OG position (i.e. Daryn Colledge, who I think goes in the 1st round when all is said and done) AND if we have a guy who can back-up both OG and OC (i.e. Jason Whittle). That seems like a reasonable and realizable scenario, however, such a scenario takes away Rich Seubert's roster spot. Considering Seubert recently restructured his contract, I'm guessing he fits into future plans. In other words, drafting an OT ... even a versatile guy like Colledge ... means that either Seubert or Whitfield are goners.

That's a really good point. If we bring in a rookie OT, he'll likely have to back-up both tackle positions. That, or the Giants would have put Diehl at RT and Seibert at LG if Kareem were to get injured.

Haha ... that explain why his name was familiar...

I recenty perused Giants.com to look for some posters who may fit in here. Since I do not have a working username at their board, I encourage anyone who still visits that site to PM any of the following posters: Tucker65* mdc1 92_Strahan* Shockey+Manning=Shocking brad Kingpin3* davmac2BB* Don_Giant Tommy_Ribs* ParanoidAndroid* WellDressedAmani Boidsy Strider* Horseheads2000 usethe4sluke* Giantsrevival* Chopper 2Wills * Indicates posters who I interacted with freqeuntly on Giants.com (under the username NYGMoney21). If anyone decides to contact some of these guys, be sure to mention that Sportswrath.com is a refugee for people who used to post in the Current Events Forum and that we also have a growing Giants Forum that consists of a lot of knowledgable posters who left Giants.com. Feel free to drop my name if communicating with any of the people who I denoted with the '*' symbol.

I disagree that a first day rookie can do the same as Whitfield. Rookies are inherently unknown commodities, while Whitfield is a 14-year vet who did well in spot-duty last season. I see bringing in a rookie as a last-ditch alternative. We have the resources in place (Luke, Whitfield) to gave another year of solid LT play and focus energy on supplementing the defense with talent.

I don't want to enter season with the Giants being one back spasm away from having a rookie protecting Eli's blindside. Since we can bring back Whitfield, I would prefer to do that. As long as Whitfield can be an adequate back-up, I think we can postpone the search for another LT.