fishgutmartyr

That pick pleased me--Even if Walton wins the competition, he's not a long-term solution. And there's no real backup. Boothe was a great, hard worker for years. The thing is, he's in his 30's now, and his abilities don't allow him to compensate for the inevitable drop off in physical ability.

This kind of disappointed me. I was hoping he had hooks.

Shame he's on the small side. From what I saw of his highlights, he's got linebacker's instincts on playing the run. Might be an excellent gunner, though. We haven't really had a real good one since Tyree.

Jacquian Williams, Andre Brown (and we would have gotten a lot more if he didn't tear his achilles), a few years of Tyler Sash... Then we have the guys that were just starting to bloom when they had injuries: Goff, Koets. Especially Koets--his knee set us back years at center. Cruz, Blackburn as UDFAs. I'd look up more, but I can't be bothered. Suggest you look at some of the drafts under Accorsi, and some of those later round picks. Maybe check out some of the eggs George Young laid in the 80's in the first round. Then trot over and see what Ozzie Newsome is doing.

The funny part is that there's another article on the same site that gives us an "A." They can't be wrong.

On the other hand, Reese does has an excellent record with DTs, outside of Austin. (And I wonder how he would have done if he didn't tear his muscle and miss his rookie year. Oh well.) We're just going to have to wait and see which tendency wins out. Probably saw the same vids you did--Clemson, NC State, and Minnesota, right? On the one hand, it looks like he gets lost in a crowd: on the other, it looks like he causes the crowd. And a couple of big-time TFLs on the goal line. And sacks. If he beats out Kuhn, it's an upgrade in the rotation. This isn't directed at you, Jim, but I'm on a roll: I'm not a big "value" guy anyway. Who's value, and by what measure? If you go by the "value boards" from Feb, the team drafting Yankey will be getting the steal of the draft. It just seems to me that mock drafts, which were originally fans trying to guess what GMs might do, have somehow morphed into something that fans believe GMs should do. I bet you can go on every forum for every team and see fans flipping because of their team's picks so far--and it's been amplified because there's been so much extra time before the draft. Not because they necessarily know the player, but because they have read so many mocks with just a small amount of players in a range that it's a shock to get a player outside of that list. I know I'm not immune to it, but I try to shake it off after the first round. You have to wonder: how does that improve the experience of fans if it's taken so seriously? As an example, we needed a center. We passed on the big FA centers, and drafted arguably the best center in the draft. In the context of the draft, there might have been better "value" picks in that round; but the long term value is a center that will work together with Manning for the balance of his career and aid his successor, assuming he pans out and stays healthy. (A big if, naturally. We lost Chad Jones before he even entered the weight room.) Of course, I also think center is a very underrated position. In that context, I'm ok with taking the best available center in what is supposedly a weak draft for centers when we did, rather than trading down or grabbing the next best tackle, or even tight end. Phew. Feel better now. Sorry for the rant.

He's definitely in a good place to do it. With Walton being out last season and a new FA, AND the new offense just being unveiled a few weeks ago; being the veteran doesn't really provide that much of an advantage. Let's just hope that the best man wins, rather than the lesser of two evils. Sorry for the cliches.

Can't argue. These guys aren't just competing with each other: they're competing with all the players that are on the team already, the ones drafted after them, and are trying to stay healthy in the meantime. That's a lot of factors working against a typical player. They're also drafted at a very high rate in the first round.

I read somewhere that Beckham compared to Boldin. If that turns out to to be the case, I'm not going to complain. You know, without the whole knee thing early in the career.

I'm not going to lie--I was disappointed. But it looks like there are plenty of linemen in the second, so I'm not freaking out yet, and I don't follow college ball enough to really have an opinion on single players. For all I know, Beckham might be the best WR this year. And let's face it--there's no real guarantee that a first round lineman would be any better than the FAs we have signed--just hope. Besides, we historically do better in the second round than the first. I'm going to wait and see.

Can you imagine the shit-storm on this site if THAT happens? I think this is designed so Jerrah loosens up with the picks...

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/giants/peyton-eli-manning-started-throwing-football-blog-entry-1.1779162 Eli running? It would be the first time in 10 years...

Reese's press conference: He said the same thing about Osi a few years ago; then gave him an updated contract. It's GM-speak, that Raanan ran with. It looks like reporters from other teams are running with it, with nothing else but speculation. It's pretty funny to watch. Naturally, if he got offers at his price, he'd go for it--it was kind of the point of drafting him where we did. But bringing in other QBs has more to do with only 1 available for spring practices than any reflection on Nassib; and come training camp, do you really want Nassib, a partially healed Manning, and no one else doing all of the work? I doubt Painter is coming back any time soon with getting his knee scoped, and even if he is, he's not worth keeping around damaged. If they do trade Nassib, you can be sure that depending on Eli's health, we'll be getting another QB. No matter what, even if Nassib turns out to be bad (I never ruled this out, just said we don't know yet), we'll have an actual backup quality QB with Freeman.

Let me be clear before I make this argument: I'm not comparing the two talent-wise. That would be insane--an established, elite QB vs. a rookie with almost no playing time. But how much playing time did Aaron Rodgers get playing behind Favre? And Rodgers was drafted in the first round, to be the heir-apparent; not as a backup or at most, tradebait. Nassib was drafted 4th round, with none of those ambitions. Some thought he would go first, but he didn't. It shouldn't come as a shock to anyone that he didn't play last year, or that he didn't beat out Painter--shitty as he is, Painter does have game-time experience. It would have been idiotic to put a rookie in as a sole backup last year, in case something catastrophic happened to Manning. True, we went through 2004 with just Warner and Manning--but Manning was starting 2005 regardless, so it's not the same situation. Manning had a ton of reps in camp his rookie season; Nassib didn't. I don't know it this was a good/bad pick--we haven't seen anything. The theory's good--and it's not like our 4th round history this century is world-beating; with decent starters limited to Andre Brown, Brandon Jacobs, and maybe Brandon Short. It's a matter of execution now. I think we'll get a better idea this preseason. The anger about this kid are all based on things out of his control--and are completely out of proportion considering that the same level wasn't reached on duds like Kehl or Brewer who didn't receive this much grief until they proved they weren't starter material. Maybe Phillip Dilliard.

I doubt actual rankings by GMs are rising and falling like that. Maybe at the lower levels, where there are less pieces of game tape, or against lesser competition, but upper echelon guys dropping due to a bad practice after multiple years of good football? Dropping a spot or two, sure. But I'd bet the first couple rounds aren't going to change much overall; and a lot of this is due to really bored people over-analysing things with the extra time. But I'd love Yankey being there for us in the second round.

Have at it.

That's a really good point--what side do you play him? Do you change the defense, where you weaken Taylor's impact? 1986 was Taylor's MVP year... Also, down the road, do the Giants draft Strahan if they have White?

Jeez, lighten up guys. Greg Jones= 2 monosyllabic names. The post wasn't exactly meant to be taken seriously. I would have hoped the reference to "surviving hookers" would have given that away. Would you prefer Rod Babers? Keith McCants?

In the later rounds, I believe they put the names of the remaining players in a circle, and have one of the surviving hookers spin one of the dozens of empty Chivas bottles in the center of the circle. Then the guy who comes closest to coherent tries to press the speed dial button. If he can't pronounce the name, they slap the hooker until she spins again. That would certainly explain James Brewer and Greg Jones.

Eh, Zimmerman was a HOF'er, too. Wasn't a bad choice, if he had come on board. We wound up with 2 2nd round picks in 1986 for Zimmerman's rights: That second round gave us Mark Collins, Greg Lasker, Erik Howard, and Pepper Johnson. That's not bad at all.

What?! And pass on an opportunity to bash a guy who was drafted in the 4th round for not starting his rookie season?

I'll be honest, Manning's quote scares the shit out of me. But since these plays haven't even been run in a practice, and there's no cool pictures of Buddy Ryan punching McAdoo, I suppose I can withhold judgement.

I always had my doubts about Rivers. The fact that he had a team with Tomlinson at his peak along with Gates, a strong line and a weak division and still couldn't get it done is telling. Those San Diego teams last decade should have gotten much further than they actually did.

What a waste.

1)...or he might. Besides, you can't randomly select the last two games and say he's not playing. Effectively, the season was over after the second Dallas game--should we have stopped playing him then? He could have just as easily been injured in any of those games. That doesn't even take into consideration his starting streak, which I think is silly and not a big deal, but is important to Manning. So he would have started no matter what, and then would have been pulled for the second half--he was injured in the first half of the Redskin game. 2) A rookie with no oline isn't NFL-game experience, it's a disaster. There's a difference between scrambling and running for your life--he would not have learned that last season. It wouldn't have been productive game experience, and might actually have retarded his development. 3) So? For all we know, they want to keep Nassib for his entire contract and beyond. It isn't time to send Manning to the glue factory, but he isn't exactly a young player anymore, either. 4) Even if we lost both games, we would have drafted no higher than 8th(?). If we really wanted to get someone that early, we could trade up. But from the look of things, the guy we want at 8 is probably just as likely to be there at 12.