smarcou Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Since we lost out out on Edwards, what is the latest news on Cato June? He would be a really good pick up and hopefully we don't lose out on this because Reese is too cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feefifoefum Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Since we lost out out on Edwards, what is the latest news on Cato June? He would be a really good pick up and hopefully we don't lose out on this because Reese is too cheap. Sometimes "smart" gets misconstrued as "cheap". This FA period has been very frustrating because the Giants haven't done much, but when you step back and realize how much money some of these average at best players are getting, well... you get the picture. I know this will sound a little far fetched to some, but the New England Patriots NEVER overspend on anyone, and look where it's gotten them. You have to start somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smarcou Posted March 11, 2007 Author Share Posted March 11, 2007 Sometimes "smart" gets misconstrued as "cheap". This FA period has been very frustrating because the Giants haven't done much, but when you step back and realize how much money some of these average at best players are getting, well... you get the picture. I know this will sound a little far fetched to some, but the New England Patriots NEVER overspend on anyone, and look where it's gotten them. You have to start somewhere. I guess that's true, but I would like to get a proven guy so we don't have to rely on the draft which is so unpredictable. IF we pay too much for one guy I don't think it's a big deal as long as we don't go nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lubeck Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 I guess that's true, but I would like to get a proven guy so we don't have to rely on the draft which is so unpredictable. IF we pay too much for one guy I don't think it's a big deal as long as we don't go nuts. That is because you do not understand football. Nate Clements would absolutely love to have you as an agent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virginia Giant Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Sometimes "smart" gets misconstrued as "cheap". This FA period has been very frustrating because the Giants haven't done much, but when you step back and realize how much money some of these average at best players are getting, well... you get the picture. I know this will sound a little far fetched to some, but the New England Patriots NEVER overspend on anyone, and look where it's gotten them. You have to start somewhere. Thats true, but creative massive holes and not adequately filling them is not smart either. I like what reese has done so far for the most part, I don't dissagree with a single cut he's made and i'm glad that he's not paying backups super star ,money. But right now we have what, an OLB combo of Short/Wilkerson/Torbor? OLB is a must fill position in FA, at least 1. Are we gonna draft 2 OLB's and have them come in and start? Again, i think what reese has done so far is near brilliant, but should have made a move on something at the linebacker position. Though i'm not completely sold on June. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 I'm with you VG. It's great that we're not breaking the bank for average players, but we've got some holes to fill too. Anyone have a link to possible June 1st cuts? Cuz after the draft it looks like that's where we'll have to go to fill the empty spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeMesiS Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Thats true, but creative massive holes and not adequately filling them is not smart either. I like what reese has done so far for the most part, I don't dissagree with a single cut he's made and i'm glad that he's not paying backups super star ,money. But right now we have what, an OLB combo of Short/Wilkerson/Torbor? OLB is a must fill position in FA, at least 1. Are we gonna draft 2 OLB's and have them come in and start? Again, i think what reese has done so far is near brilliant, but should have made a move on something at the linebacker position. Though i'm not completely sold on June. I agree VG. We need a physical, fast LB and Cato June is not it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Thats true, but creative massive holes and not adequately filling them is not smart either. I like what reese has done so far for the most part, I don't dissagree with a single cut he's made and i'm glad that he's not paying backups super star ,money. But right now we have what, an OLB combo of Short/Wilkerson/Torbor? OLB is a must fill position in FA, at least 1. Are we gonna draft 2 OLB's and have them come in and start? Again, i think what reese has done so far is near brilliant, but should have made a move on something at the linebacker position. Though i'm not completely sold on June. I'm mixed on this. Reese is probably anticipating Wilkinson to start one position, and feels the need is one starter, one backup. So his choices are get a starting FA, and draft a backup; or get a FA backup, and draft a LB in the first round. Plus, if I remember correctly, the LB we had on the practice squad was pretty good last summer, so maybe he steps up this year in camp. Keep your fingers crossed. Oh, and Short is a free agent as well. The only thing I can say is that I'd rather try to fill the holes now rather than mid-season, which is when the wheels would typically fall off of Emmons and Arrington. And if you are going to have two young guys on the field, Pierce is probably the best kind of guy to have on the field with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boohyah Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 They should re sign Short, that would be a smart move. June is not the answer, but I could see the Giants taking him. Missing 2 linebackers, hopefully one gets filled in the first round, but we need another. Chase Blackburn Gerris Wilkerson Reggie Torbor Not sure you could sleep well with any of these 3 as starters right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so-cal dub Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 It's a theory, but I seriously think Reese is playing chess. Sacrificing a pawn to move in position. Thinking two steps ahead, or in this case 1 or 2 seasons ahead. It seems to me he is throwing this upcoming season away to better next season. If this continues, we are big time players in next years FA and possibly draft. I got frustrated before with him, but now when I think about it, he's brilliant. Of, course after I say this, he'll go and blow my whole theory, but we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boohyah Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 It's a theory, but I seriously think Reese is playing chess. Sacrificing a pawn to move in position. Thinking two steps ahead, or in this case 1 or 2 seasons ahead. It seems to me he is throwing this upcoming season away to better next season. If this continues, we are big time players in next years FA and possibly draft. I got frustrated before with him, but now when I think about it, he's brilliant. Of, course after I say this, he'll go and blow my whole theory, but we'll see. I can't see us throwing a season for that reason. Even if we have a winning season, Reese can still fire Coughlin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 They should re sign Short, that would be a smart move. June is not the answer, but I could see the Giants taking him. Missing 2 linebackers, hopefully one gets filled in the first round, but we need another. Chase Blackburn Gerris Wilkerson Reggie Torbor Not sure you could sleep well with any of these 3 as starters right now. I could live with Gerris. (Is is Wilkerson or Wilkinson? I thought it was Wilkinson, but I seem to be the only one using that name.) He's going to make mistakes, but he's got to learn sometime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BronxRik Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 I could live with Gerris. (Is is Wilkerson or Wilkinson? I thought it was Wilkinson, but I seem to be the only one using that name.) He's going to make mistakes, but he's got to learn sometime. It's GERRIS WILKINSON #59 . I thought it was WilkERson as well, but (not surprisingly), I am wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 It's GERRIS WILKINSON #59 . I thought it was WilkERson as well, but (not surprisingly), I am wrong. Oh, OK. I thought I was being stubborn in error, again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so-cal dub Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 I can't see us throwing a season for that reason. Even if we have a winning season, Reese can still fire Coughlin. I said nothing about TC, but sure. Either way, there's no reason to sleep in FA with as many holes as we have. Of course the crazy money this marlet is generating could be an excuse, but I dont think thats the case. He could easily fill these holes with some 2nd or even 3rd tier players. He isn't. He'll do it through the draft which basicaly means he isn't hoping much for this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*SDMF* Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 I could live with Gerris. (Is is Wilkerson or Wilkinson? I thought it was Wilkinson, but I seem to be the only one using that name.) He's going to make mistakes, but he's got to learn sometime. Keep up the logic. GS came in and did nothing toprove he was even worth a draft pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Keep up the logic. GS came in and did nothing to prove he was even worth a draft pick. 2 starts. 22 solo tackles, 5 assists, 2 forced fumbles, and 1 pass defended Not HOF stats, but not too bad for a rookie, part-time player. In the games he started, 9 total tackles and 1 forced fumble. If the coaching staff didn't have such a hard-on for vets, he probably would have wound up with comparable numbers to Emmons, if not better. As it is, he managed to get nearly half the total tackles that Emmons had in considerably less playing time. Not bad at all for a rookie 3rd round pick. Chase Blackburn's numbers. (edit: Just to be clear, I'm not trashing Chase.) And just to make everyone cry: Our starting WIL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 f the coaching staff didn't have such a hard-on for vets, he probably would have wound up with comparable numbers to Emmons, Is that a hard thing to do? I wish I could sit around cashing thousand dollars worth of checks and not do a gosh darn thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Is that a hard thing to do? I wish I could sit around cashing thousand dollars worth of checks and not do a gosh darn thing. No, not really. I'm just pointing out that if the worry is that there would be a drop in production at that position with Wilkinson, I don't think that will happen. And if they had kept the kid in, he would have had more to offer this coming season without losing much this past season. Emmons set the bar pretty damn low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 No, not really. I'm just pointing out that if the worry is that there would be a drop in production at that position with Wilkinson, I don't think that will happen. And if they had kept the kid in, he would have had more to offer this coming season without losing much this past season. Emmons set the bar pretty damn low. I agree. I also didn't know it was possible to tear the same pectoral muscle like 3 years in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakeMeSomeFoodHo Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 the giants have to draft a LB in the first round...lets not forget that Pierce isnt getting any younger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemmiwinks Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 the giants have to draft a LB in the first round...lets not forget that Pierce isnt getting any younger. Pierce turned 28 in Oct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*SDMF* Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 2 starts. 22 solo tackles, 5 assists, 2 forced fumbles, and 1 pass defended Not HOF stats, but not too bad for a rookie, part-time player. In the games he started, 9 total tackles and 1 forced fumble. If the coaching staff didn't have such a hard-on for vets, he probably would have wound up with comparable numbers to Emmons, if not better. As it is, he managed to get nearly half the total tackles that Emmons had in considerably less playing time. Not bad at all for a rookie 3rd round pick. Chase Blackburn's numbers. (edit: Just to be clear, I'm not trashing Chase.) And just to make everyone cry: Our starting WIL. Thats weird? GW did not have 22 tackles in 2 starts. Maybe thats what he got through a season. As far as Blackburn goes, he didnt start one game this year. OK he started in Philly. I think, if memory serves. I dont know what TV I was watching because I dont remember GW doing all that in 2 starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Thats weird? GW did not have 22 tackles in 2 starts. Maybe thats what he got through a season. As far as Blackburn goes, he didnt start one game this year. OK he started in Philly. I think, if memory serves. I dont know what TV I was watching because I dont remember GW doing all that in 2 starts. You misread me, bud. 9 total tackles in two starts. If he had 22 tackles in two starts, we wouldn't be having this discussion :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now