NeMesiS Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 www.bleacherreport.com I know he drops alot of balls. So he'll be a perfect fit for our WR corps. <_> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Interesting....did you read the comments section. Tons of inexplicable New York hatred. That is why when the salary cap gets blown up under the next collective bargaining agreement...the Giants should go whole hog and become the Yankees of football. No more of this good for the league bullshit as most of the pugues around the country have no clue that the Giants along with a couple of other cornerstone franchises (Cleveland was one of them) made the league what it is today. As for the Browns....so the Mangina is an improvement over what you had before....to me he is a Jets Handley with a little bit more of a clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueInCanada Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Interesting....did you read the comments section. Tons of inexplicable New York hatred. That is why when the salary cap gets blown up under the next collective bargaining agreement...the Giants should go whole hog and become the Yankees of football. No more of this good for the league bullshit as most of the pugues around the country have no clue that the Giants along with a couple of other cornerstone franchises (Cleveland was one of them) made the league what it is today. As for the Browns....so the Mangina is an improvement over what you had before....to me he is a Jets Handley with a little bit more of a clue. If this was the case the league would come down to the Giants, Cowboys, NE, Green Bay and maybe Oakland(whats his face still has the money). The teams with the money would compete while the others would just falter out, yeah that what I want to watch in sports Man that would be an exciting season. Glad I still have the CFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 "no." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigblue25 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Interesting....did you read the comments section. Tons of inexplicable New York hatred. That is why when the salary cap gets blown up under the next collective bargaining agreement...the Giants should go whole hog and become the Yankees of football. No more of this good for the league bullshit as most of the pugues around the country have no clue that the Giants along with a couple of other cornerstone franchises (Cleveland was one of them) made the league what it is today. As for the Browns....so the Mangina is an improvement over what you had before....to me he is a Jets Handley with a little bit more of a clue. The Browns fired Romeo Crennel, to get another Romeo Crennel they are almost exactly the same guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ppodlesny Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I would not want Edwards...I think they are fine with receivers, unless a Boldin is available or Plax comes back which I doubt. But hey that's me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 The Browns fired Romeo Crennel, to get another Romeo Crennel they are almost exactly the same guy Exactly....I could not remember Romeo's name for the life of me. I wouldn't name the Mangina my DC much less my HC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 www.bleacherreport.com I know he drops alot of balls. So he'll be a perfect fit for our WR corps. Nem, I highly agree with you. I think that Edwards has the highest reward potential for the least cost in a trade scenario. Why give up 2 high picks for a Boldin when you can get Edwards likely for a 2nd rounder at most? It's not like Edwards is garbage, he played tremendously in 2007, and perhaps a change of scenery is all he needs, if he needs anything at all to get back to Braylon '07 version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9697 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Nem, I highly agree with you. I think that Edwards has the highest reward potential for the least cost in a trade scenario. Why give up 2 high picks for a Boldin when you can get Edwards likely for a 2nd rounder at most? It's not like Edwards is garbage, he played tremendously in 2007, and perhaps a change of scenery is all he needs, if he needs anything at all to get back to Braylon '07 version. HE drops a lot of easy catches but makes some real great ones too. Sounds to me like his drops could be coached out of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lowhe826 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I would not want Edwards...I think they are fine with receivers, unless a Boldin is available or Plax comes back which I doubt. But hey that's me. Were we watching a different Giants team than each other? We were not fine with our WRs after losing Plax. Without Plax, Manning had 3 TDs and 5 INTs in the last 6 games(Loss to Eagles in Playoffs included). With Plax, Manning threw 18 TDs and only 7 INTs in the first 12 games. We need a big Go-To wide receiver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Were we watching a different Giants team than each other? We were not fine with our WRs after losing Plax. Without Plax, Manning had 3 TDs and 5 INTs in the last 6 games(Loss to Eagles in Playoffs included). With Plax, Manning threw 18 TDs and only 7 INTs in the first 12 games. We need a big Go-To wide receiver. Agreed. I want Plax back, because he was the WR that we had when we were dominating and also when we won it all. I'd take another big go to receiver, but if he dont get jail time, I want Plax back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarence the Blue Puppet Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 If this was the case the league would come down to the Giants, Cowboys, NE, Green Bay and maybe Oakland(whats his face still has the money). The teams with the money would compete while the others would just falter out, yeah that what I want to watch in sports Man that would be an exciting season. Glad I still have the CFL. How many times does that have to be proven wrong? If that were true, the Cowboys would have won the Super Bowl, the Yankees would have won 14 World Series in a row. Get over the "teams with money are the only ones who compete" philosophy. I see it proven wrong every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueInCanada Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 How many times does that have to be proven wrong? If that were true, the Cowboys would have won the Super Bowl, the Yankees would have won 14 World Series in a row. Get over the "teams with money are the only ones who compete" philosophy. I see it proven wrong every year. Yeah under a sport with a salary cap. Just think about how a team can go out and spend 300million on a roster of nothing but all stars while other teams are begging for college scraps. Yeah thats the real spirit of competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarence the Blue Puppet Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Yeah under a sport with a salary cap. Just think about how a team can go out and spend 300million on a roster of nothing but all stars while other teams are begging for college scraps. Yeah thats the real spirit of competition. Tampa Bay Devil Rays, Philadelphia Phillies, St. Louis Cardinals, Chicago White Sox, Detroit Tigers, Florida Marlins. All teams that have proven you don't need a high payroll to compete and/or win in a sport with NO salary cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lughead Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Tampa Bay Devil Rays, Philadelphia Phillies, St. Louis Cardinals, Chicago White Sox, Detroit Tigers, Florida Marlins. All teams that have proven you don't need a high payroll to compete and/or win in a sport with NO salary cap. Well that's Fine and dandy if The Giants were in the MLB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarence the Blue Puppet Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Well that's Fine and dandy if The Giants were in the MLB Just pointing out that the team with money isn't always the team on top, in most cases karma catches up to them and it back fires. In a beer league, the stacked team will win 99.9999999999% of the time. Pro sports is another area entirely. 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