Big Blue Huddle

Not too sure we need anotehr thread to intimate that we have no idea. Unless we want to confirm any bias of being correct.

QB or WR - it's been this for months.

Did Lance garner the highest return with the 4th they got from the Cowboys?

I'm not entirely convinced the book is written on him but the others. Sheesh. That's a tough class outside of Lawrence.

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/jets-agree-to-trade-zach-wilson-to-broncos

Jets give up on Wilson completely.

Roll on Thursday.

Excellent recount, Jeff.

Superb stuff. As you say, very business like.

Roll on Tuesday. I've already instructed my Mrs to take a nap so she can be awake at 0000. We will be sat in the same positions.

Let's go. 15 wins to go. This is a special group.

I'm pumped. Cannot wait for this evening.

Rangers in 5.

16 wins to go.

LGR.

Quote from: sxdxca38 on April 19, 2024, 03:23:47 PMI would say that the competition that Tyrod and Devito played against was a bit easier than the buzzsaw that DJ ran into in the first five games of the season.

Also in 2022, the Giants faced far fewer top 10 defences.

I'm for a mix of both. You need elite star players at core positions, ideally QB and a WR.

You can have good players elsewhere that eliminates the below average/weak players.

Although the salary cap is an issue - too many stars and you won't be able to afford to re-sign them.

Ultimately, a mix of both is required for any sustained success.

For me, I think it's about the situation regarding the players/staff that are already in the building. Some will respond to the fire and shouting approach, others will respond better to a softer more collaborative approach. It's important that every person knows their role in the organisation the details of their position and responsibilities.

I don't subscribe that there is one particular way to manage but the key is being adaptable and able to manage expectations. But the person at the top needs the respect (which is earned and not given) of those who he is managing and the subordinates need to follow. They cannot go off script and devise their own approach - everything flows from the top but it's important to listen to the voices below, take on feedback and ultimately be adaptable to the needs of those around you.

I have a similar Daboll v Wink situation in my workplace. I am an Associate Professor (our titles work differently than the US, where all teaching staff are called professor) at a UK University, last year a position arose to lead our relatively large Faculty as the Research Director. This role would be beneficial for career in terms of making the next step to full Professor and the Deanery approached me to apply.

One other person applied and were unsuccessful. Since August, all this person has tried to do is undermine the decisions I make, put on their own events and basically not playing ball. The upshot is they have formed a little clique that basically operate on their own - which is not what the Faculty wants. This time of year is when researchers have to apply for research remission and this will be partly based on productivity in the last academic year. His productivity has been low, he rejected a mid-year review of performance and basically not engaged with any of the processes I installed to increase research outputs, He's basically done nothing. As such, his research remission (in terms of time off teaching to write) will be drastically reduced or nil. This will cause problems in terms he will be unhappy and further problems will arise in terms of behaviour/performance. Everything is metric driven around outputs in UK academia, so we need everyone pulling in the same direction.

I can't help but draw some minor parallels with the Dabs situation and sympathise with him. The end result of winning NFL games v Academic research performance is not analogous at all, but the points surrounding it would be. My life would be exponentially easier if my 'Wink' resigned, so I'm on Dabs' side in this one, you can't have people basically driving their own little circle and freelancing.

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 18, 2024, 02:18:02 PMJones outplayed the 3 Ps of support, which is really what one expects a franchise QB to do.  Coaching was adequate to above average, but protection was below average, and playmakers (in terms of receivers) were non-existent.  Despite that, in terms of the quality stats, Jones was top 10 to 12, in that range.

Out of interest, what was Barkley's stats and productions through the first 8 weeks of '22.

Whilst he doesn't fit into your 3 P's, I suspect he was pretty darn good.

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 18, 2024, 02:15:27 PMThat's the thing about trading down.  Eventually, you need to get some blue-chip players on your team.  If you are constantly trading down to create quantity, it's more difficult for you to add those coveted and badly-needed blue chippers

Exactly. If the tier 1 QB isn't there. Take the tier 1 Wideout.

You need tier 1 players.

I really want them to get a game changer. There should be a WR there and potentially a QB.

Pull the trigger, I say.

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 18, 2024, 01:29:35 PMOne thing, so far, is that, unlike Gettleman, we haven't witnessed Joe Schoen outright lie.  Schoen tends to speak in a manner that makes him difficult to pin down (most of the time) rather than using Gettleman's ham-handed, just lie-to-the-people approach.

I guess we will wait and see.

Quote from: EDjohnst1981 on April 18, 2024, 01:23:27 PMThere's a saying in England we use for politicians - don't believe anything until it's been officially denied.

Furthermore, it's smoke and mirrors season. Why show your hand 7 days before the draft.

But people can swallow up whatever they want. Nothing will change opinions until either a) they draft a QB or b) make a decision next year.

Still can't see anything other than WR or QB, personally.