CrazedDogs

Well, us Giants fans tend to be a little more in the know than most...

very, very underrated player.

I can live with that. These days, its too much to expect a shut down, smothering defense. I'm okay giving up the big play if they're also disrupting drives; giving up the quick score is better than giving up a score after a long drive, i.e., Perry Fewell's death by a thousand papercuts defense.

I was shocked to learn that he's 34.... he's only been a good player the last few seasons, before that he was having a journeyman's career. No clue where he gets off as a contract malcontent, he already had the best possible contract he could possibly get. Between age and attitude, that just seems like a bad fit for the Giants.

Kevin Gilbride says: 'what do you mean defenses figured out when the ball was going to be snapped? Thats nonsense!'

Is that based on actual research, or just the eye test? Because I would love to see some real research on that. That kind of makes sense, but its not unique to the Giants either.

I don't know if that's really true, fringe.... I think it always seems to the fan that their team loses a disproportionate number of players, but this is the first year over year, empirical analysis I've seen which shows the Giants at the bottom of the list. I've seen single season analysis before, some years were bad, some were pretty good. I don't know enough to conclude that this is an issue that goes back ten years, twenty years, or more. I don't really know, just saying that what is missingis many, many years analysis of games lost to injury. I don't know why more folks who are paid to analyze the game don't focus on that aspect of the game, because reversion to mean on the injury issue seems to be one of the biggest predictors of a team's future success.

lol, that makes far more sense.

Nonsense, one doesn't have to be a doctor or a professional athlete - let alone both! - to understand injuries. It may not be an accurate conclusion - Palmieri isn't the only factor here - but if we aren't looking at the guy in charge of conditioning, then who? Thats the next place I would look for a cause, right after the kind of drills, etc. being performed in practice. (How much full contact, etc.).

even with the injury?!?

It wasn't that long ago that centers used to go 250 lbs. Being quick off the snap is arguably the most important factor at Center.

I know what I saw.

Yeah, he's not likely to ever have an 8 game stretch like that again. Probably be another 20 years before anybody does that again.

Wish that were likely the case, but Coughlin has thrown away a couple seasons by going back to the projected starters when the backups proved to be superior players. For example, Sean O'Hara in 2010. They put him back in, and the line play instantly went straight to hell, cost the team a playoff berth.... probably would have made the dance instead of the eventual champion Packers if not for that ill-advised loyalty.

I wonder if he took a physical. He was a hell of a player for a few years, he's like the modern Tony Boselli.

yeah, I can't remember where I heard that; it was like a dude's mom taught at his elementary school or something, one of those kinds of stories.

LOL, can't argue with that. Run blocking last year was atrocious. Pretty sure we saw lots of 6 in the box last season too, and yeah.... 3 yards and a cloud of ineptitude.

good luck Kareem. I've heard through the grapevine he has some learning disabilities, it will be an uphill battle.

2 + 2 + 1 = 5.... unless the defense is playing with 12 guys, that leaves 6 in the box.

yeah, thats what brought us to this point. But around 2011, they never really got credit as a contender; the title run was a shock to almost everybody. But they got the rings.... and did it despite being far below league average in games lost to injury. The last two years (108% worse and 84% worse).... well, I don't know if any team could have weathered that storm, even if the drafts leading up to those seasons weren't extra crappy. It is a reason for optimism though...

Yeah, they must have a better, deeper roster than they typically get credit for, at least from 2009-2012.

although with the Bengals, you can never be certain....

Nas, in general I agree with your methodology - performance/(value of position(salary cap comp)) is a very logical way to look at roster building. But, by following that methodology to the point of dogma, the best value, by this formula, will be average players. And if you fill out a roster entirely with average players, you're going to have a team that isn't even average. This is the value (and sometimes the folly) of the meritocracy - as talent and performance increases, compensation does not increase linearly along with it.

goddamn it! Oh well, Beatty sucks in odd years anyway.

he was a hell of a player for a long time, terribly under-appreciated while in Cincinnati.