fishgutmartyr

I don't see the point of keeping Hasselbeck if you are getting Fiedler. I'd rather lose him, and get a low draft choice/UDFA. At best, you develop a second-stringer or trade bait, at worst, you cut him after a year and start again. If you are down to your 3rd-stringer, you're screwed anyway.

I'm curious what Jennings can do. Ponder is a great KR, but doesn't seem to be going anywhere as a WR. Jennings was a KR in NFL-E, might as well see what he can do as a WR. It would be nice to see Taylor stay on the field as well.

...As an Eagle hater, I got a rush.

Check out the comments, it's like reading a diary.

Check the date of the article. THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW YET!!!!

Thank you, Google.

Let the Eagles take him. Him and Trotter have so much chemistry together.

I dont mind you having your opinion but at least speak with some intelligience.

 

Carl BAnks is clearly making a comparision about 2 qbs ( eli and phil)

in their 2nd year. Banks see's a more impressive ELi in his 2nd or 1st full season.

I was there also and watched simms in his 1st and 2nd year and to be honest simms

was bad. Eli has simms beat hands down in his 2nd year.

 

Its a fact that Eli played better in his first full season than phil simms.

 

As far as career goes that has yet to be determined!

 

Please give us facts not hate reviews it makes you sound like a angry child!

 

Martin,

I don't want to hit this too hard, but Phil didn't exactly have the NFL all-stars on offense his first two years. When you have weapons like Doug Kotar, Billy Taylor (RBs), Gary Shirk (TE), Tom Mullady, Johnny Perkins, and Earnest Gray(he was the good wide receiver ), you just aren't going to look good.

Considering the only Suburbanite on the team in 1979 was Benson, and he was a rookie starting at LT, you kind of start to understand why Simms was injured so much early on.

I don't mean this as a denegration of Manning's accomplishments to date: I'm just pointing out the situations that he and Simms started with couldn't be more different. Well, all right, Manning's OL left a little to be desired in 2004 as well.

At least let the front offices know what's going on so they stop jerking around the players and fans. Can you imagine being told you're fired, and then getting called back and hearing "oops"? It's insane.

Collins might not be leaving after all...

Isaac Bruce was on the market for a while, then off...maybe, sorta.

:brooding:

I'm not even looking until Thursday.

I won't even pretend to understand this anymore.

Most likely no with the other talent available out there.

Another question: With the delay in FA, how much of the talent that was released is going to be picked up by their teams again? I think I've read that the NFL is going to cut the teams that released players because of the cap some slack because of the changing situation.

Again, curious, because the current situation is giving me bed-spins.

We were looking at Chris Hovan last year--does the front office look at him again this year?

Just curious.

If James leaves I can still see the colts winning that division and still having a prolific offense. Don't forget, they have Dominic Rhodes behind James, and Rhodes rushed for 1000 yards when James went down with is knee injury. Whille James leaving would deal them a blow, the damage might not be as bad as one would think if Rhodes can return to the form of three or four years ago...

Absolutely! I didn't mean to infer that they'd drop from contention, just that they'll be playing on a mortal plane again.

I just can't wait for the Colts Giants game. I know it's going to be prime time, schedule makers would be stupid not to do that. The question is when. If it's week 16 or week 17 I seriously may consider skipping my vacation to watch that game (yes im insane).

 

Some teams are going to improve, some teams are going to get worse and some teams are going to be the same. If we get double digit wins, we have earned it looking at the schedule now. But of course, half these teams we say will be super bowl contenders could fall apart like the eagles did.

I don't expect too many changes for the Jags, Panthers, Bucs, or Seahawks. They're all rock-solid teams that need only minor adjustment. The only way they really decline is through injuries. I can't imagine that Chicago wouldn't concentrate on offense this off-season, so they should improve. Philly will improve, they're simply not a 6-10 team, although I do think their 13-3 seasons are over.

The Colts are interesting. Their offense is going to be determined by James--does he stay or go? If he goes, how badly will he be missed? And it's going to depend on when we see them as well. Their defense started to wear down a little towards the end of the season. Freeney definitely did. So we'll see.

I don't think our problems at LB are as profound as people seem to assume. Getting back a healthy Green and/or Emmons is a plus, and Pierce and Torbor are good players. To me, the Secondary has more pressing issues. If Green still fits into future plans, I doubt they go with a LB in Round 1 ... DT (if Clancy leaves or Robbins gets the axe) or Secondary seem to be the ways to go, assuming equal available talent.

I guess I'm a little gunshy about drafting defensive backfield in the 1st: our last two, Williams and Allen, were decent players but both are a little disappointing. We still don't know about Peterson, and we drafted Webster with our first pick last year. Personally, I think we have enough young guys back there, and need a little more experience. I've got my fingers crossed for Rhonde.

I like your idea for DT. Even if Clancy stays, I don't think Robbins will be around too much longer.

If we get an LT this year, then the primary back-up for Luke will be a rookie. You can't carry 4 tackles ... rosters aren't flexible enough to do so. So whatever rookie we hypothetically draft would replace Whitfield as the primary back-up at LT. In other words, the Giants would be one back spasm away from having a rookie protecting our franchise QB's blind side. While a lot of teams face those problems, the Giants currently have the resources (Whitfield) to avoid such a situation. My desire to not address LT this year has more to do with confidence in Whitfield and less to do with reluctance to "bite the bullet."

We're looking at the same body of evidence and we're seeing two different but reasonable points of view: you're saying we've got a good backup in Whitfield (and I agree with you), so we're set for when Luke goes down for his 1-2 games this year. I'm looking at the same information, and saying that the following season, when Luke goes down 3-4 games, we're going to have a rookie back-up (Whitfield can't stay around forever). This is more of a disagreement (if you can even call it that) on timing, not the move itself. So I guess I'll see you in the parking lot in 15 minutes. Swords or pistols?

Figured I'd get this in before some idiot hits "quote+ reply."

I agree with most of what you wrote, although it would pain me to get a CB in the first (prefer a LB, but take the best player).

This part bugged me:

Even though Petitgout will be here next season, the Giants would be wise to investigate potential future replacements, however, I would prefer to see Bob Whitfield return in 2006 to be Petitgout's back-up. I do not want to see a rookie LT being forced into action when Petitgout inevitably gets injured. I feel that the Giants have the available resources to postpone their search for a new LT another season.

Your point would seem to me make my argument for getting an LT this year. If Pettigout will "inevitably" get injured this year, it would seem even more likely next year, or the year after. I like Whitfield as well, but the Giants are going to have to bite the bullet sometime, and I'd prefer they do it while Pettigout's back is relatively stable.

Other than that, great job. Hope your term paper was this well-written.

I kinda like "That big mutha fucka over there" myself.

:lol:

I'd love to hear Madden say that...

Gotta love schadenfreude :lol:

In my magical kingdom (where the salary cap exists for everyone but the Giants, and all the other GMs are lobotomized and heavily sedated), I would love to steal Brandon Lloyd from the 49ers. That kid was making some serious catches with "Ike Anthrow"-level QBs.

well, if Rhonde is available and we don't find a way to get it done, that would show there is something wrong in the front office...If and when Rhonde is released, we have the inside track, and he would most likely come here for less money than it would take him to go elsewhere...

True, but looking at Pizan's thread (thanks Pizan!), it looks like Rhonde would be entering a seller's market. It kind of looks like he's going to have a choice of top dollar or playing with his brother. I'm not betting on that one.

I would actually prefer to see both Emmons and Green on the team next season, but more likely than not, one of them is going to be gone. Plus, we have Torbor behind Emmons, who is a very solid young player and no one behind Green at this point. Emmons release this offseason would not surprise me in the least...but hey, who knows? We could sign a LB in FA and take Ryans in the First round and cut both of them loose...not likely, but possible..

speculating is fun

Just get a CB in FA--If they can get Ronde, do it! That's all I'm asking for. With Pierce in the middle, we can handle draftee LBs.

I don't think it unreasonable, after looking at who we are playing next year and where, to think we're going to be at least 9-7 next year. I think we'll probably split with Dallas and Philly, sweep Washington. Yes, I realize Washington was a good team this year, but they have some serious house-cleaning to do to get under the cap. How they do it is going to tell what kind of season they have.

I don't see Houston, NO, or Tennessee improving enough to not expect wins (which of course means, we shouldn't expect wins ), and I would figure we beat either the Bears or Bucs. The Texans and Saints are disasters, and the Titans are still in cap hell. The Bears and Bucs are good teams, but they aren't all that scary at home. Seattle is beatable--we were a field goal away from proving that.

I'm thinking 6-2 at home, and 3-5 away.

Who knows? With all the fur flying around Vick and his brother, maybe this is the year we finally beat them.

Giants home games:

Dallas Cowboys

Philadelphia Eagles

Washington Redskins

Chicago Bears

Houston Texans

Indianapolis Colts

New Orleans Saints

Tampa Bay Buccaneers

away games:

Dallas Cowboys

Philadelphia Eagles

Washington Redskins

Atlanta Falcons

Carolina Panthers

Jacksonville Jaguars

Seattle Seahawks

Tennessee Titans

(schedule blatantly ripped off from BBI)

Doh! I'm assuming upgrades on defense.

I never said we will cut Emmons, but if we are going to get rid of either Emmons or Green, Emmons is more likely to go. He is older, has had, albeit not as bad as Green, Injury problems, and complained when put on IR late last season(which he was justified in doing, but im sure Coughlin didn't appreciate that). Plus, he is due to make, I think, around 3 mil next season, and seeing as we have Torbor behind him(who might be just as good as Emmons at this point) releasing Emmons is not as improbable as one may think...

I didn't mean to infer that you were saying that we were cutting Emmons. I just didn't understand the logic of cutting Emmons before Green. The old guy is on the field, the young guy is on the couch. And I guess I'm a little annoyed that he wasn't IR'd in preseason, basically keeping Hollowell off the roster. Hollowell may not have been a great LB, but we sure could have used him at the end of the season. Hindsight is 20/20...

One could argue that wanting to play while not being 100% is exactly the kind of attitude Coughlin wants, although he might not have appreciated the venue where Emmons expressed this.

I don't think 3 mil is a small amount, but if that can be lowered (and I think Emmons is reasonable enough to work with Accorsi), I don't see a reason not to keep him around.

Then again, ask me after the draft.

I seem to remember seeing the names Duff and Shivers from last years' draft. Are they any good, just underdeveloped; or just lower-tiered talent?

Either way, letting NFL-E do some development on so many players is a smart move. Even if only 1 or 2 guys stick, we have decent back-ups at dirt-cheap salaries.

If it were me, I'd go FA with CB and WR--no one spectacular, just someone who won't embarrass us. We don't need another young guy in the defensive backfield, and I'm hoping Jamaar Taylor finally gets out of his injury phase. I'd look for a backup QB as well--Lorenzen is just too much of a head case to justify. I'm assuming we re-sign Clancy, or someone at his level.

I'd like to get a LT to replace Pettigout in 2007, a few outside linebackers, and a DT in the draft. I don't think Robbins is going to be around too far past this year, and we got real lucky finding Kendrick Allen.

I'm hoping we draft Carpenter, because I like what I've read about him, and frankly, I'm a sentimental old fool. I remember his dad, and he had the mentality of a linebacker anyway. Other than that, I go along with what Reese/Coughlin suggest, since they have been kicking ass the last few years. And no, I'm not taking a swipe at Accorsi, it's just the scouting dept. has been finding players under rocks lately.

Maybe, just maybe to get our full ability out of our players, we can do a rotation. Green, Pierce, Emmons, and Torbor all have potential. Obviously, Pierce is an every down starter but those three can do very good things each and to save them for the long haul, early in the season we can rotate them in, possibly for the first half.

 

Just another crazy idea B)

Emmons is a little past potential--wysiwyg. But a rotation is a good idea--extends Emmons career, and gives Torbor a chance to learn under him. Again, my only gripe with Green is he can't stay on the field. If he shows he can--great. But theres NO WAY I don't draft a couple of LBs this year, and I don't assume he's the starter.

Barrett Green is most likely going to be our starting WILL going into next season, so the chances he is cut are very minimal. Emmons has much more a chance of being released than does Barrett. When Green was 100% in 2004 he was showing that he was a very good young LB. Great Athlete, always around the ball, playmaker. If he returns to that form next year, he will add a huge boost to our D....

 

That said...I would not mind us bringing in a WILL through the early rounds of the draft or free agency...Depth never hurt anyone...

I never really understood that line of thought. Emmons, albeit playing hurt, has been on the field a lot more than Green has. I'll grant you Torbor isn't a huge dropoff at this stage compared to Emmons, but he's not a huge upgrade either. Emmon's salary isn't all that bad, either.

Green showed ability when he actually made it onto the field, but he just isn't on the field enough. I wouldn't cut him now, but if he gets dinged in pre-season, I wouldn't stick it out with him. Especially at the price of a promising draftee.

You guys realize that transferring post counts is one of the things "the Blade" didn't notice in that infamous article, don't you? Just a thought.