fishgutmartyr

Fair enough. We'll see how much that list shrinks after the final cut, though. There's a bunch of camp fodder on there.

The original post was about the oline being off the field to nurse injuries, but the brunt of the thread is about Coughlin killing careers by forcing players to play injured? VG, that high school coach should have had his sorry ass fired.

A LOT of those names are not exactly irreplaceable. There's at least a few that might not make it out of training camp this year, let alone worry about losing them next year. And if we must have them, I feel pretty secure in knowing that there won't be much of a bidding war for Adrien Robinson, Jayron Hosley, and Brandon Mosley. And I wouldn't exactly consider JPP "core" at this point, even if he plays again (I know you didn't use the word "core," bigblue, but your post had that great list). He's no longer a guy you build a defense around--unless he has a miraculous recovery. The only guys I would lose sleep over being on other teams are Manning and Amukamara, and Prince spends a lot of time on the bench with injuries. There's other players I would prefer keeping, like Randle, McClain, and Ayers, but they're not critical to any other team but ours. There are 1-year deal guys we might be sorry to see go--or just the opposite. I'm not even all that sure that the "core" is that critical considering the level of play we've seen in the last 4 years. A core should personify a team, and propel it to wins--where has that been over the last few years?

Yes, those Steelers teams were darn good...probably better than the Giants teams most of that period. Certainly better than the 2004-2005 teams, the period when Roethlisberger made his name. You can't really make light of the off field issues--because the likelihood is that we would be dealing with a post-Roethlisberger team by now, probably for a few years. I highly doubt the same situation here would have permitted him to finish his last contract, let alone get an extension; and longevity (even due to this) certainly is a factor in cost. NY doesn't put up with people that get caught. (When did I get this cynical?) I'd also like to move on from the cost argument--it's really a myth at this point. Yes, we gave up draft picks, but less than other teams have both before and after that draft to grab the first pick. That, coupled with not knowing who we would have picked and knowing how utterly spectacular the 2005 offseason was with both free agency and the draft, makes me wonder if the "cost" was as big as it appears even on paper. If we have all the picks, do we still grab who we did in free agency? Fewer free agents? Which would we have done without? Would we have drafted players that would have helped? Unanswerable. There's something to said for simply being on the field as well. A second-string QB hasn't touched the field for the Giants since 2003 (Eli was a starter in-waiting in 2004, but if you want to count that, it's still impressive). Quantity has a quality all it's own. Roethlisberger isn't exactly a delicate snowflake, but he has missed games. If you're willing to make excuses for River's playoff failures, I hope you make them for Manning as well. I still don't understand why he gets grief over 2005 and 2008.

Roethlisberger, maybe. But his teams were built differently than the Giants teams of the past 10 years, so it's anybody's guess; and who knows how things work between him, Gilbride, and Coughlin--especially with his off-field bullshit? Honestly, I don't think he'd survive NY after the motorcycle accident, let alone the rape accusations. Pittsburgh has a completely different head than NY/NJ when it comes to football. No way with Rivers--do you remember some of the teams that guy had? Both Antonio Gates and Tomlinson leading the league annually, Merriman and Castillo before they fell apart; an incredibly weak division--and he couldn't get it done. That team should have cruised into the playoffs for years, despite Norv Turner. Instead, they managed to make it difficult for themselves, and only made the championship game once with that lineup. What possible reason is there to think Rivers could have taken any of these Giants teams, much less the 2011 team, to win as many Lombardis as Eli?

I really don't care about rankings, but this kind of comment is fucking idiotic--no shit that a QB on any team needs a combination of defense and running game to succeed. Peyton can't do it, Fouts couldn't do it, Brees can't do it--certainly not with any consistency. At best, a QB will be able to carry a team to a Lombardi without a defense or running game 1 or 2 times in a career, and only by playing out of his mind. That's what made 2011 so amazing, and why I have so much respect for John Elway for what he accomplished with Reeve's Broncos. Or Marino's Dolphins, for that matter. Frankly, this team has asked Eli to win without a running game, defense, or offensive line since 2011. As much as I admired MacKenzie for his time here, he was barely an obstacle his last year here--same with Diehl and Snee in their twilights. The only thing this team has had going for it for a few years now is Eli and a few wide receivers--and the wide receivers have had a hellacious time staying on the field together. Comparing Manning to Cutler is ridiculous--Cutler is a QB with an attitude problem on an average team. The Giants teams that have actually stayed on the field since 2009 have rarely been average. And I've never heard anyone say something about Manning's attitude--his appearance, sure--but not his attitude. Nas, I don't get the Roethlisberger love either--other than he benefited from a great line/running game/defense early in his career, which let him win. He looked just as bad during Pittsburgh's rebuild.

Nonsense-- I still pick on "Dandy" Randy Dean, and I don't think he even had a quote in a paper. I still think he was the worst QB to start for an NFL team, ever.

Oh, man, you have my pity--I saw that shit-show, too. Both teams managed to blow field goals in OT, and at a certain point, I just wanted the embarrassment to end, and didn't care who won. Considering how die-hard I was at the time, that says a lot.

Like I said, I'm not an apologist for Brown--if you're waiting for me to justify the pick, you might want to get yourself a copy of War and Peace to occupy your time. I'm just saying that he only had Hampton around him, an aging offensive line, and an ancient defense that was still living on past glories. That team was shot, and no amount of denial is going to excuse Young for that. Nonetheless, Young has 2 superbowls that are unquestionably the result of his work, and that's more than could be said for the other two. LOL, I totally forgot that Brown also had a raging ego...what a jackass.

3-12-1, with the tie being against the Cardinals. That game was so bad neither team deserved a win. To be fair, by the time Brown took over, that team was already done--Taylor had retired, Banks was ancient, and most of the starters were already well into or past their prime. Right about there picks like Khanavis McGhee started taking their toll. So while you'll never hear me say a good thing about Brown, he wasn't completely the cause of the shitty play we saw. And he was still better than Pisacik, Golsteyn, and Randy Dean. Handley? The Ego quit after the draft, so all the name coaches were gone. Bellicek was already committed, so whatever Young thought about him is pretty irrelevant. Coughlin already left for BC (imagine him taking over for Parcells!). Handley wasn't an unreasonable choice on paper--he just sucked in the real world. And Young did right in the situation: cut him some slack his first year, canned his sorry ass the second. Again, he failed the 3rd rebuild, but those first two were gold standards as far as I'm concerned.

Oh, I understand the Dark Side--my hatred of the Eagles is like unto the mighty Amazon: murky, filled with deadly creatures. It runs deep and long. I long for the return of Ray Rhodes to the Philly sideline--he is the coach they deserve, not the one they need. I blame Parcells for the hiring of Handley--an offense that shall never be forgiven, and if Young is responsible for him never being a Giant coach again, then I want to vote for Young a second time for not falling for that raging ego's bullshit again. Yes, Parcells rebuilt teams after the Giants--but when did he ever stick around long enough to finish the job? Did Young's decisions cause a failure in rebuilding a 3rd time (1979 and 1984--after Parcells fucked the dog)? Sure. It ended a golden age of his creation. But without him, we might still be reminiscing about guys like Huff and Gifford--and how horrible would that be?

Being an agent for an NFL player must be more frustrating than training squirrels. I mean, how simple can the rules be: 1) don't smoke weed before the draft; 2) don't do stupid, potentially dangerous shit before the contract's signed. It's not like the teams want you to fail a drug test--hell, they announce them. And if you are negotiating for a shit-ton of guaranteed money, you wrap yourself in bubble-wrap. After the contract's signed, then you can blow your hand off. Even Rothlesberger's minimalist brain figured that one out before the motorcycle accident. I feel bad for the kid, but wow. Until guaranteed money is done, you stick with fucking sparklers, and smile about it.

tch...kids... Look at where the GMs started, and what they accomplished. Neither Accorsi or Reese had to start with such complete incompetence as Young did. When Young took over in 1979, the team hadn't seen a playoff game since 1963, and the team's owners weren't even on speaking terms. The Giants were in the same category as the Saints, the Bucs, and the Lions. Perennial doormats. The coaches were inept. Out of the players, the only ones that saw pro bowls on any consistent basis were Harry Carson and the punter, Dave Jennings. Occasionally Van Pelt and Kelly. In 15 years, they had 2 winning seasons. The last one was over half a decade before Young was hired. What he had to accomplish was probably more difficult than starting off with an expansion team--he didn't have luxury to start from scratch, he had to tear down an entrenched culture of failure first, then start from scratch. And do it without a ringing endorsement from the owners. Oh, and do it entirely through the draft, since there really wasn't any such thing as free agency. Within 3 years, we won a playoff game. Within 5 years, we were playoff contenders annually. And say what you will about the 1990's (they were some boring teams with awful offenses), the bottom line is there were only 4 losing seasons in the entire decade, including one under Accorsi's watch. True, Young never really got the hang of free agency--but at the time, no one really did (San Fran cheated, Dallas got its rings via Hershel Walker and slowly dwindled throughout that decade). But neither Reese or Accorsi comes close to what Young accomplished. I don't have to criticize either one of them to claim that.

Butch Woolfolk. When you have a 1st round running back in the days of Schembechler's Michigan, you would think that he could gain some yards. Let's just say that if they didn't draft Little Joe in the second round, the 80's would have been far different.

Nah, I just assume anyone who didn't vote for George Young is too young to know better.

Sadly, the joint they're probably referring to is the knee.

Pugh at left tackle (like some of you guys wanted at the beginning of last year, remember?); Flowers at RT. That puts vet with youth on both sides of the line--Schwartz with Flowers, Pugh with whomever gets the LG spot. No point in freaking out--we did ok when Diehl replaced Pettigout.

Hey, we're grabbing Canada's top picks at UDFA prices. If even one or two pan out, we just tapped completely unused resources, and got the jump on the rest of the league. I like it.

7th rounder, raw, and from a lower division. If we get a backup out of him, we drafted well. If not, he was a 7th rounder, raw, and from a lower division. I'm curious about all the Canadian linemen we signed.

I don't see how anyone can really be unhappy with this draft--LT isn't an urgent need so much as guard. Flowers needs coaching? OK, let him play next to Beatty for a year, and fill the hole in the process; while the guard we signed from Canada and the guard we drafted learn the spot. He adjusts to the NFL level of play, stays on the left side, and gets to watch an NFL level LT's technique. We needed safeties--not only did we get the best one available in the draft, we got him in the second round. Another one in the 4th. And yet another as a UDFA. We needed a DE--we got a perceived high 2nd-rounder in the third. As far as I can tell, we got value and need simultaneously. At least in theory. But honestly, drafts are so mocked and re-mocked even ranking these guys is an exercise in futility. Calling someone a "reach" because they're drafted a little higher in the same round is absurd; since it would depend on who you ask, and when you ask them.

Now, if only there was a running back named "Snatch" this year...our double-entendre goals would be complete.

Giants give up on Cox.

This is such an excellent idea, because we got so much from our last 1st round running back. And the one before that. And the one before... Basically, Hampton in about 45 years. I can't wait until mock season is over.

Unless he's a sure-fire HOF'er, he won't be touched until at least the second round. Mario Manningham was projected 1st round, did the same shit, and we drafted him in the 3rd. Granted, Manningham wasn't ranked as highly, but the GMs will consider the "stupid factor" of Gregory's actions. I wouldn't rule him out completely, either. Sure there's Will Hill, who was too stupid to even stay clean knowing about drug tests; but we also kept Tyree after getting busted with a pound of pot in the trunk of his car, and the aforementioned Manningham.

Wonder how he does under a different LB coach.