gmenroc

I don't know that he necessarily strung anyone along. I think the delay was a result of the appeal process and the finalization of the suspensions. I think it's further delayed by the the not-yet-released suspensions of the players involved. So I don't see it fair, pinning the declination of his services on Parcells.

I think too, with Parcells being in his 70s, despite not being a me-first guy, he might want to enter the hall of fame while still alive. I read somewhere that had he returned to coaching, it would've delayed his eligibility by 5 years.

In other words, had he already been inducted into the HOF, and then had this opportunity....or had the suspensions been reduced so he only had to coach 1/2 a season as opposed to a full season...or had the Saints fired Payton and given the job to Parcells permanently so as not to create a lame duck coach...all could have lead to his accepting the position as opposed to passing on it.

If Blackburn signs elsewhere, I'd be pissed.....not saying Blackburn is a pro-bowler, but at least he understood his fucking job, which was better than any of the rookies could do.

 

This year, I say let him compete for the job, and if he doesn't start, he'd make an excellent backup, plus help on special teams.

 

I'm still pissed that Tollefson is gone.

I'm with you, I want Blackburn back. I think there's something about him that just fits with us that wouldn't necessarily transition onto a new team. Can't say what it is.

I'm not too pissed at Tolly. I would've like him back, but given the lineup in front of him, it's not like he was going to start anytime soon. So for him to leave for a starting position, I can't bitch. If he was going to a situation where he was 4th on the depth chart, getting the same money as we would've paid...then I'd be irked. I fully expect Osi to go next year....it's a feeling we're going to have to get used to as our Super Bowl winning team starts hitting free agency.

And that's why we build through the draft and coach up guys. It's how you have to do it in order to be a mainstay come playoffs. Free agency can be used to plug a hole or to create flexibility come draft day, but that's really where it ends.

I really only give Roethlisberger credit for one ring. His first one, it was all about running the ball with Bettis and playing good defense. When a QB averages just over 20 throws per game, while I wouldn't go so far to say that you're winning in spite of him, I would say that he isn't the reason you're winning the game. He's neither winning it for you, nor losing it for you. Add to that his off the field distractions and I don't put him top 5.

My top 5 can take receivers and make them better. My top 5 can put the team on their back and deliver the W. My top 5 can play AND be the offensive coordinator when called upon to manipulate defenses. Roethlisberger is close, but not quite over than hump in my opinion.

1. Rodgers

2. E. Manning

3. Brady

4. Brees

5. P. Manning

Rivers, Roethlisberger, Ryan, Stafford, Newton round out the top 10 for me.

Vick, Romo are in top 15

If Goff signs elsewhere, than I'd consider Fletcher. Signing Fletcher would hurt the Redskins far more than it'd help us.

I like what we saw from J. Williams last year. He made some good plays as a young player. Blackburn filled in beautifully late in the season. I know with Osi entering his final year, there are thoughts of bringing Kiwi back to DE, which of course, would create a hole at LB.

For this season, I'd be fine with Goff, Boley, Kiwi...backed up by G. Jones, C. Blackburn, and draft pick/Paysinger. If Goff or Blackburn don't re-sign, than I'd be fine with pursuing Fletcher.

Fletcher should not get anything more than a 1 or 2 year deal topping out at about 3 mil.

I'd take a 6th or later on him, but that's about it. If he drops that far, it'd hopefully be the dose of reality he seemingly needs.

Then again, I'd want his contract laden with distraction/motivation clauses and with rookie wage scale, I don't know if that is even possible.

If we got him with a late pick I wouldn't be mad.

Something's telling that here this guy is...in the one and only application process he has...to show his talents to 32 teams who already have piqued interest...and he isn't prepared and fails to perform. It says a lot.

Motivation - not on par...otherwise he'd have been prepared.

Big moment performance - not on the same level as others...he failed when it was up to him to do well

Add to this the fact that he's been noted as a headcase, and I'll gladly pass. He might have talent, but unless we pick him up in the round where our philosophy switches from BPA to Best Athlete Available.

I don't recall.. what did he lie about?

 

But I guess in the bigger scheme of things, when a player doesn't live up to expectations before the draft and drops.. sometimes the team that ends up drafting them get a pretty good value... Mario and Bradshaw come to mind.

Wasn't it smoking pot or something like that that's so widespread anymore that it's deemed relatively minor?

I think this Need vs. BPA discussion is why Fleener is there for the Giants in most mocks. If still there at 32, he could be argued as the BPA and at the same time, fill a need.

Now, I've read reports that Beckum is set to be okay by the regular season. If he's there, and Bennett is there...the need for a TE is much less than previously thought. That said, I think Ballard is signed for just one more year, Bennett is signed for only a year...so if you're thinking long term, TE will be a big need next offseason. Drafting Fleener this year would give greater flexibilty next offseason.

OT is also sketchy right now. Beatty coming off injury, Brewer being relatively unknown, Diehl starting to show a little age, and McKenzie not being resigned...leads to a fairly large question mark. Now, I've seen McKenzie hasn't been signed by anyone, let alone us. I'd not be opposed to him coming back for a year or two at vet minimum...just for assurance purposes. He could easily be cut in favor of an upcoming rookie draft pick, be it a guy we get this year or be it Brewer.

RB, we need to draft someone with Jacobs' leaving. I don't know that Scott or Ware is ready for the increase in carries. Neither instills much confidence...in me anyhow. Scott only has a season under his belt, so I think he should still get some touches this season, but there's definitely a need here. I don't believe this to be so crucial as to spend our first rounder on it, but top 3 rounds for sure.

cbssportsline or something like that has player rankings/reviews.

nfl draft exchange was a good one, but it's sketchy anymore.

Tolly was underrated and a very good backup to Osi, Tuck, and JPP. If the Giants are serious about keeping Osi, then they have to make room. If they're serious about paying Nicks and Cruz, they have to make room. I believe there's something about carrying over extra cap space from one year to the next. If true, that could play into this as well.

With the guys we have still, we could still attack offenses in such a way that whatever backup is in there in Tolly's place, they'll face single teams...so they need only hold their own...not necessarily need to be dominant.

Massie put up decent numbers at his pro day, still he is probably a mid 2nd rounder like you said, I have seen him mocked to us in round one. I know Giants scouts were at OSU's pro day and liked Adams. Pittsburgh also seemed to like Adams and I think he has top ten talent, with some character issues (suspended two in 2009 for having drug paraphernalia and was part of that OSU tattoo incident, that he was suspended five games for) he could even surprise, though and go has high as ten to Buffalo, Reiff has been kinda dropping. Brewer played a few snaps at special teams and nearly got Tynes killed. Beatty can be really good, still we would need someone across from him. If we go anywhere else, I am hoping for WR, if Kendall Wright was there at 32.

I'd be really surprised to see us pick a WR #1 knowing that we have Nicks and Cruz, with upcoming Jernigan and Barden entering perhaps the most important part of his career

Gmenroc, to me, this whole 3rd safety thing is way overblown. Sure, you want a good 3rd safety, and 4th safety, for that matter, for depth. But keep in mind, the reason Fewell went to the 3 safety safety defense was because the personnel dictated that. Amukamara was hurt, we lost T2 for the season, we lost Witherspoon, we lost Coe. Not only that but we didn't have a strong middle linebacker candidate until Chase was signed. So really, it wasn't about a 3-safety system that Fewell likes, but it was because that was the way to get the best group of 11 defenders on the field. Really, Rolle was playing nickel corner a lot of the time, so it wasn't so much a 3 safety thing as much as it was a traditional nickel defense, with one guy playing out of position.

 

And when there was those 3 safeties on the field when the opposing offense really dictated the base 4-3 look, it was because Deon Grant was a better "linebacker" than the other choices we had at the time. I think we saw less and less of that look in those situations as Jacquian Williams' play improved late in the year, and when Chase Blackburn was signed and began to start again.

 

I don't think you will see a lot of Rolle, KP, and _______, whether that blank be filled by Sash or Chad Jones or any other candidate, on the field at the same time unless injuries to our db's and/or linebackers dictate that.

 

I'd much rather see Prince Amukamara in the slot in nickel packages next year, with Rolle and KP playing traditional FS/SS roles, with Boley and possibly Williams (Goff?) also on the field, and I'm pretty sure Fewell would agree.

I wasn't arguing for or against that package...simply stating that with that set, there would be a spot for Jones or Sash given Grant not being signed.

I too agree that Fewell adjusted based on what he had at the time. I also agree that with Prince, T2, and CWeb being healthy...that the 3 S look will be shelved. Any development by the young LBers and should Goff return...would only lessen the number of times we see the 3 safety approach....because we'd have guys who are NOT liabilities in coverage, yet have the size to play the run AND go up against the quicker, taller TEs in the game. That said, given we had success running the 3 safety package in the past...I don't know that we should completely do away with it. Keeping it in the rotation would not be a bad thing in my opinion.

Soaking in the sun...looks like Eli might need it...pasty-ass white boy.

Chad Jones I don't have a hard time remembering, due to his accident/recovery story.

one thing is for sure, if bradshaw goes down for a while i would not be comfortable with ware/scott being our rushing attack.

 

i hope we add a vet or draft someone earlier than later.

If Bradshaw does go down for a number of games, I honestly can't say who'd I have more faith in: Ware, Scott, or a draft pick.

Did Tollefson sign with another team?

Visited Browns I thought, didn't sign to my knowledge.

It's time to draft someone to take Bradshaw's place in the near future. Maybe Scott is the answer....I saw some preseason flash, but regular season fumbles, so I'm not the cheerleader I used to be.

 

Bradshaw's feet are shot.

 

Reese let Jacobs stroll over to the 49ers for 500k......that might be a decision he regrets this season.

Bradshaw taking more carries, offseason participation or not, is a huge concern for most Giants fans I'd think. Scott/Ware/draft pick behind them is a little sketchy I think, but then again, in an ever passing-friendly league...we could be ahead of the curve in putting lesser demand on the RB position.

Agreed... Ware is not flashy or dominant but I can't say he sucks either.. he was a 3rd stringer for a reason... and a healthy ware is better than an old BJ. I see us going with Bradshaw backed by Scott and Ware remaining where he is unless another RB steps up. And what good is a RB if your OL can't move people out of the way... we saw a huge drop after O'Hara went down due to injury and I'm not sold on Baas.. maybe they need time to jell maybe he's just not an O'Hara... which is why I will be happy with a 1st round OT.

No question the Oline needs help. Brewer will be entering his 2nd year and Beatty will return with Diehl being in the mix as well. There are certainly some question marks there. Baas played better later in the season I thought. Petrus and Snee work well as far as I'm concerned at guard. So depth is a need and so is quality of play. I think part of what made O'Hara so good was continuity. It was the same group along the Oline for quite some time. That helps I think, more than a lot of other individual stats.

It's called White DB Dismissive Disorder. It affects a huge portion of the football-viewing public.

lol...he's white? Not sure why the Giants signed/drafted him in the first place if that's the case....(I keed, I keed)

We still have Scott & Ware... + the draft. The Giants plan ahead which is why our pix are never sexy like someone put it... Odds on we're planning on losing Diehl in a year or two. I think we're in good hands overall... drafting a RB, TE, OT and WR will keep us going strong.

Scott I'll give you. Ware could get cut in the next 5 minutes and I'd be perfectly okay with that. We do plan ahead, but I guess what we all hope for is not simply planning to replace guys when they age, but having contingency plans to back up our regular plans as well, to ward against injuries/to ward against draft pick busts/to upgrade the guys we already have.

The article makes some valid arguments, but it's a bit too far on the sunshine and rainbows side for me.

I think Massie would be a reach at #32. He's slated as a mid 2nd last I saw.

I can't see Hightower getting past Pittsburgh unless they fill the hole left by Farrior before the draft.

I think we pull a WR at some point in the draft, but I don't know about day 1, or 2 even.

Fleener could be BPA and fill a need at 32...leading me to think he's definitely a possibility. I also think that OT is a possibility with a guy like Mike Adams. Now, Adams is getting more praise and is rising slightly, so he might not be there. A RB like Wilson or Miller would be a sexy pick, but we rarely do sexy here with the Giants.

You'd think Sash has the 3rd S pretty much locked up?

I actually keep forgetting about Sash, but you're right.

We still need to add depth to the position with Jacobs leaving. Bradshaw will certainly take on a bigger role, but his durability will definitely be questioned and challenged given his past history.