Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: sxdxca38 on Today at 03:23:47 PMDave,

Thank you for your contributions, and you make an interesting point

Pleasure, and back at you.

Quote from: sxdxca38 on Today at 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.

Fair enough. Jones did face tougher competition in 2023 than the others, that is true. No argument from me there.

Quote from: sxdxca38 on Today at 03:23:47 PMI also think Mighty's point is quite valid, that the return of Andrew Thomas "after" DJ got hurt would have to be factored into how the O line played better.

Ok, but Jones played two of his six games last year with Thomas active, and he looked utterly wretched in both games. He got hurt in the second quarter of one of them, so it's just one and change games (I get not a big sample), but there is no evidence that he was much better with Thomas last year than without him. And we have both seen him start plenty of games with Thomas at LT where Jones looked bad.

Quote from: sxdxca38 on Today at 03:23:47 PMHowever, the data that has been presented is not just for one year, but over a five year period. In those five years the two years where the O line played well, the team and DJ had success.

The team had some modest success in 2022 (9-7-1), although they were a bottom third passing offense. What was the other year that Jones was the starter in which the team had success?

Quote from: sxdxca38 on Today at 03:23:47 PMJust curious, what data can we extrapolate with regards to the O line, and how much of a factor is it in the team's success?

Curious your thoughts? 

I think offensive line play is very important and have certainly never suggested otherwise. Well all know the Giants have had very poor line play for a decade now. I don't think that gives Jones a full pass though, as some seem to. I think he has been bad, even taking that into account, and I would argue that last year was pretty telling in this regard.[/quote]

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on Today at 03:22:02 PMI like cats. We have two right now. I used to not like them before I met my wife, but I grew to like them over time as she had cats when I met her and we have had other cats since.

Dogs are way better in most ways, as they are more affectionate, loyal, fun, playful etc. But they are also much higher maintenance than cats. Our cats are pretty affectionate too. I know some cats are kind of unfriendly and nasty, but not ours. There are nasty dogs too.

I am reminded of this scene from "Meet The Parents." I find it amusing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJFp272w9u8

I forgot that scene, and it made me laugh.    I thought it was going to be Focker saying he milked a cat, or when the cat crapped in Jack's mother's remains. Movie was a classic

Quote from: LennG on Today at 03:23:12 PMNot that being old enough to remember some of these people is great, but the times we lived thru, first with Elvis and then the Beatles, to put it simply, there will never be anything like that ever again. Swift has her millions and millions of fans, but the craziness that surrounded, first Elvis, and then the maniacal fans towards the Beatles. There was nothing, and will ever be anything, to compare with that --- EVER.

That is not to say, as the thread asked, who was bigger in their time, but again, the Beatles are still big today, over 60 years later.

Funny you bring that up Lenn. I just picked up my grandson and had a half hour ride in the car with him. He knows all of today's pop songs, but I have Sirius radio in my car and I paged through it and saw that "Rocky Raccoon" was playing. Nice thing about Sirius, you can hit replay, and it will start the song from the beginning, as often as you want to hear it. So I cranked it up and started it from the beginning. Anyway, he's a teen and knows nothing about the Beatles, and he loved the song. He told me that he thought most music today was "corporate music", etc., so it was a nice change for him. I told him it was kind of an obscure song by them, and explained how everyone went crazy when they came to America. He knew absolutely nothing about them or that time period. I have to have a chat with my daughter when she's back in town tomorrow and find out why she never taught her son about the Beatles, especially since he loves music. When she was growing up (and all my kids), they were subjected to tons of Beatles' songs played by me...and they could sing along with each song because they knew them so well because of their dad!

Vikings seem to have their qb in sights...and are trading up..obviously. But they are going to watch things play smartly, I would believe. Hard to believe the Giants would be a trading partner..though there is always hope.

Who gets picked ahead of our heroes?

Well...the Commodes are squirrely..having last minute qb mixers. I don't believe anything in the  pipeline..rumor mongering etc. Agents are the source almost all the time...just noise.

Oh..do they have an interest in creating value...or perceived ? Of course.

Quote from: katkavage on Today at 03:07:18 PMDB, I'm not discounting the impact of someone like Nabers, but how effective would that impact be if the QB was not good enough to feed him the ball?

Not nearly as, clearly. The hope would be we would get a QB upgrade in the following year.

I never said it was ideal. A lot of things about our team are not ideal. Most, in fact.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on Today at 02:33:18 PMSo we were the 30th last year? Maybe I'm not remembering right, but I had thought the claim made by some here was that the line began to suddenly play much better once Jones went down, allowing the journeyman backup and undrafted rookie third string QB to perform better than Jones did.

If it was indeed the case that Tyrod and DeVito enjoyed better O line play than Jones, how did the line still ultimately only finish 3rd from the bottom of the league?

Dave,

Thank you for your contributions, and you make an interesting point.

I 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.

I also think Mighty's point is quite valid, that the return of Andrew Thomas "after" DJ got hurt would have to be factored into how the O line played better.

However, the data that has been presented is not just for one year, but over a five year period. In those five years the two years where the O line played well, the team and DJ had success.

The three years that it didn't perform well, DJ and the team failed.

Just curious, what data can we extrapolate with regards to the O line, and how much of a factor is it in the team's success?

Curious your thoughts? 

Quote from: y_so_blu on Today at 12:17:50 AMImpossible to say, as I wasn't around for Elvis or the Beatles. And I couldn't have picked Swift out of a police lineup until she started dating Travis Kelce.

 Not that being old enough to remember some of these people is great, but the times we lived thru, first with Elvis and then the Beatles, to put it simply, there will never be anything like that ever again. Swift has her millions and millions of fans, but the craziness that surrounded, first Elvis, and then the maniacal fans towards the Beatles. There was nothing, and will ever be anything, to compare with that --- EVER.

That is not to say, as the thread asked, who was bigger in their time, but again, the Beatles are still big today, over 60 years later.

I like cats. We have two right now. I used to not like them before I met my wife, but I grew to like them over time as she had cats when I met her and we have had other cats since.

Dogs are way better in most ways, as they are more affectionate, loyal, fun, playful etc. But they are also much higher maintenance than cats. Our cats are pretty affectionate too. I know some cats are kind of unfriendly and nasty, but not ours. There are nasty dogs too.

I am reminded of this scene from "Meet The Parents." I find it amusing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJFp272w9u8