Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 08:46:22 AMYes, but it's frustrating to hear fans talk like Jones has been put in a normal NFL QB situation.  Jones has had shortcomings; like any QB (potentially more), Jones has shortcomings.  It's just frustrating that some fans seem not to acknowledge the terrible (and it's really been some of the worst in the NFL) support he has received in his NFL career.

That is fair. I have never denied that Jones' circumstances are substantially less than ideal if not downright poor. The whole team has been downright poor (or perhaps mediocre in some areas). I just don't think this 100% absolves Jones himself from his frequently poor play, nor do I think it 100% accounts for his lack of durability either. I appreciate that, based on your response above, you don't seem to feel that way either. I guess where we may differ is I have never seen any evidence (either before or after Jones arrived in the NFL) that he is going to be particularly good. You have said if everything around him gets better he can be a top 10 starter. I can't see that myself, but I'd certainly be delighted if it happened while he's still a Giant, which in my opinion is unlikely to extend beyond 2024.

Quote from: kingm56 on Today at 09:27:27 AMThe better question: How can you have a quality conversation when the opposing viewpoint reframes aggregate responses to benefit thier position?  Pray Tell, show me where the "Jones Critics" dismissed his 'brilliance.' Indeed, DJ's had some wonderful games/movements.  However, that's not the majority point.  The point was, and still is, a lot of professional QBs have moments of brilliance, especially QBs with 60 starts.  However, you chose to completely ignore that point, presumably because you don't have a good response; thus, you simply reframed the oppositions' position to give yourself the moral and intellectual high-ground.         

Even now, instead of hearing what I said and making an effort to understand my point, you only listen to the extent needed to formulate some sort of rebuttal

 

I used to disagree with Ed in terms of debate.  Ed opposed debate, while I thought it could be fun.   I think the problem is what we saw as debate.  I guess I saw the debate as discussing differing points of view, while I suspect Ed was seeing it as never listening to what the other side said and instead focusing all of one's efforts to try and prove that person wrong.

I spent considerable thought and effort trying to improve the quality of discourse, only to have those comments fall on deaf ears, and the issues I raised were just added to. I don't know what else I can do.

 

You win, whatever it is you think you are winning.  I can't keep going around in circles like this.

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 09:20:35 AMMatt,

I am confused.  The expectation for the Eagles (and this seemed to be a strong consensus) was that they would be returning to the Super Bowl.  How does putting up 11 wins (and making the playoffs) while suffering an embarrassing end-of-season loss to the Giants and immediately getting booted from the playoffs in a butt-kicking by the Bucs suggest the Eagles met expectations?

Expectations by whom?

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 09:15:46 AMThis comment sort of reflects the issue with discussing Jones.  Uncle Mickey had "showed flashes of brilliance" as a part of an argument.  The Jones critics focused on that part of the argument and first claimed Jones never showed brilliance.  Then, when you show historic accomplishments that any reasonable person would say was a flash of brilliance, the goalposts were moved, and it was claimed failed QBs had shown flashes of brilliance (not sure what that even means in context to UM's original point).  Finally, we have an entire point Uncle Mickey made thrown out, and it's declared the point that Jones has shown flashes of brilliance is now the entire argument, and clearly, that argument is a "bad one."

How can there be quality conversation in conditions like that?

The better question: How can you have a quality conversation when the opposing viewpoint reframes aggregate responses to benefit thier position?  Pray Tell, show me where the "Jones Critics" dismissed his 'brilliance.' Indeed, DJ's had some wonderful games/movements.  Nobody dismises that point; some, put them into context, like @Jess who noted most occurred during his rookie campaign.   However, that's not the majority point.  The point was, and still is, a lot of professional QBs have moments of brilliance, especially QBs with 60 starts.  However, you chose to completely ignore that point, presumably because you don't have a good response; thus, you simply reframed the oppositions' position to give yourself the moral and intellectual high-ground.         

Quote from: AYM on Today at 09:23:41 AMThey replaced Dan Quinn with Mike Zimmer who is probably just as good a DC.

Maybe, but he's 67 and spent the last couple of seasons kicking around the college ranks as an analyst/consultant.   At his prime, I would say you are correct, but it almost seemed like he was in semi-retirement and now is coming back.  Such returns are not always certain.

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 08:54:51 AM@DaveBrown74 and @kingm56

Remember last year when everyone ignored the Eagles' losing both their OC and DC and predicted a repeated trip to the Super Bowl? The Cowboys lost their very talented DC this past offseason (along with a number of veteran starters). Those sorts of losses tend to go under the radar but are often the most impactful.

They replaced Dan Quinn with Mike Zimmer who is probably just as good a DC.

Quote from: nb587 on May 03, 2024, 04:48:41 PMBingo.  It's scary what the Giants would have been like if George Young never came.  And, Wellington would never have hired him if he wasn't forced to.

The Detroit Lions, that's what we would've been.

Quote from: kingm56 on Today at 09:07:19 AMYet, they still won 11 games and made the playoffs.   This place went crazy when we won 9 games; so, I don't see 11 wins as a failure, despite how they finished.

If OC/DC were the primary issue, they would have struggled out the gate as players were learning the new systems; however, the reverse happened.  Even good teams go through spells; it happens all the time.  Regardless, I suspect they'll win double-digit games again this season, but will wait until Aug to make any real predictions. 

Matt,

I am confused.  The expectation for the Eagles (and this seemed to be a strong consensus) was that they would be returning to the Super Bowl.  How does putting up 11 wins (and making the playoffs) while suffering an embarrassing end-of-season loss to the Giants and immediately getting booted from the playoffs in a butt-kicking by the Bucs suggest the Eagles met expectations?

Quote from: Trench on Today at 09:10:22 AMEvery QB has had flashes of brilliance. That is not a good argument

This comment sort of reflects the issue with discussing Jones.  Uncle Mickey had "showed flashes of brilliance" as a part of an argument.  The Jones critics focused on that part of the argument and first claimed Jones never showed brilliance.  Then, when you show historic accomplishments that any reasonable person would say was a flash of brilliance, the goalposts were moved, and it was claimed failed QBs had shown flashes of brilliance (not sure what that even means in context to UM's original point).  Finally, we have an entire point Uncle Mickey made thrown out, and it's declared the point that Jones has shown flashes of brilliance is now the entire argument, and clearly, that argument is a "bad one."

How can there be quality conversation in conditions like that?

Quote from: Jclayton92 on Today at 09:05:11 AMBut that's what happens when Qbs go to a bad team, they either rise above it or they don't. I don't hear anyone going to bat for Evan Neal or any other offensive player that have equally been failed by being on a team with Daniel Jones, but it's ok for them to all be used as an excuse for him. A 6th year player who still puts up advanced stats like a backup in year 6. Just wild that some can't see Jones is a huge reason for the bad offense.

Jess,

QB's rising above terrible situations is extremely rare.  Sometimes, what appears to be a QB rising above a bad situation is more illusion than reality.  The Texans and CJ Stroud is a perfect example.  The 2022 Texans were a terrible team.  Yet, between FA additions, an extremely good draft, and a major coaching upgrade, the 2023 Texans were much better regardless of the addition of CJ Stroud. 

I guess you can look at first-overall pick QB like Lawerence or highly touted Herbert as players who put up pretty good stats (although in situations considerably better than Jones had).  Still, while their raw stats were pretty good (although in the case of Lawerence, they are on par with DJ's), their team's success didn't reflect their QB's success