Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: katkavage on Today at 08:04:28 AMWorks both ways, MG. The defenders and the detractors. That is why it has remained a hot topic. Banks can call out the defenders as easily as the detractors. Both are guilty here but he chooses the latter group to call goofy.

That's the thing, Kat, you really can't.   When you tally up the posts, there are far more negative posts than positive posts.  If you really study the dynamics, much of what could be perceived as positive post about Jones are usually posts responding to criticism.   Hell, even my mini-rant was nuanced.  I didn't say it was wrong to have a negative view (which stands in stark contrast to the accusations of "making excuses".  I didn't even say that Jones will prove to be a franchise QB (which, again, stands in stark contrast to critics who claim Jones will never be a franchise QB). 

The "both sides do it" argument is just a way to defend that which really can't be defended, in my opinion.

I guess we should be careful not to cheer too much for Daniel Jones lest our enthusiasm be perceived as a "goofy"overreaction.

This is just the never ending struggle of Papa and Banks to find something to talk about in May.

Carl Banks has a voice for the Giants. I do not. However I know I have been wrong many times on this board even when I thought I was communicating accurate facts. Trying to analyze the value of someone else's opinion and its accuracy is a fool's game, and Carl is the fool. Stick to football Carl and next time someone says something you think is "goofy", give your reaction to the mirror first. I think you will find how it reflects on you may not be what you expected. 

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 07:41:07 AMI think the frustration that Bob and Carl expressed has more to do with how fans go overboard in their criticism of Daniel Jones, rather than their opinion of Daniel Jones.  We have seen that sort of thing here.  A post is made about the Giants having the worst offensive line, and you get posts about how people are making excuses for Daniel Jones.   People here will cherry-pick facts and spend an inordinate amount of time curating facts about other QBs just to criticize or put Daniel Jones down.  Hell, we have even seen posts mocking his facial expression or posts about bleaching one's eyes because you read DJ will be the starting QB.

I have seen game threads that were filled with "Jones' throw was poor," "Jones held on to the ball too long," and "Jones missed the open man." I have even seen Jones blamed for offensive linemen jumping early.   Then Jones throws a TD and you get crickets or a nice catch (by the receiver Jones throws to) or on occasion a begrudging "good throw" (this is the rare thing).

Jones isn't the only target.  People who don't share the strong negative views on Jones are accused of "making excuses" if they dare to consider the terrible situation Jones has dealt with since entering the NFL.   I have seen people accuse those people of undergoing mental gymnastics to defend Jones.

Someone mentioned Evan Neal.   Evan Neal, by any objective standard, has been far worse (considering his draft position) than Daniel Jones, but it's rare to see people putting the man down.  Most are still hoping he will do better, or they have given up on him, but he isn't injected into every conversation.  People are not scouring the league to find other OTs to compare Neal to so they can show how much worse Neal is in comparison.  All of that is a unique situation of Daniel Jones.

So, I can understand Carl and Bob's frustration.   It's not like either of them are saying Jones is doing great.  Neither is suggesting that Jones needs to step up his game or even that Jones is the long term answer.  It's just that the amount of time and energy and the frequency DJ's critics put into putting the man down really gets tiring.  The man's performance needs improvement, but he is still the starting QB of the team we root for.   It's sort of hollow to talk about how one "I don't dislike the guy" if all you do at every opportunity is put the man down and work tirelessly to put him in the worst light possible.

Daniel Jones is a good man who works his ass off for the team.  Even if you don't think highly of him, at least give the man the benefit of the doubt and try to be supportive.  I have always said about fan boards that no one will ever fault you for saying positive things about the team (unless that positive is directed at Daniel Jones).  When it comes to criticism, think about cooking with strong spices, a little goes a long way.

Works both ways, MG. The defenders and the detractors. That is why it has remained a hot topic. Banks can call out the defenders as easily as the detractors. Both are guilty here but he chooses the latter group to call goofy.

Quote from: uconnjack8 on Today at 07:28:33 AMStill,  the 2006 squad had 2md round pick, 3rd that was signed from another team and a 5th along with two UDGAs.  The current squad has two high #1s and a 2nd.  Is the CBA why 2 of those high picks haven't developed? Were all the other teams in the NFL able to develop UDFAs and late picks as well in 2006.

I can't answer with certainty, but I think there is a good chance the answer is yes.  You listen to any linemen or coach talk about practice and the offensive line, and they always talk about the only time it really helps is when the pads go one (which is quite rare now).   Prior to 2011, if an offensive lineman struggled, they would get extra practice (with pads) after the regular practice.   That simply isn't allowed anymore.   As I said, there is a chronic shortage of quality linemen these days.  That's because the guys don't have a chance to develop into NFL-caliber linemen.   There is only so much an offensive linemen can develop blocking against air or in padless practices.

I think the frustration that Bob and Carl expressed has more to do with how fans go overboard in their criticism of Daniel Jones, rather than their opinion of Daniel Jones.  We have seen that sort of thing here.  A post is made about the Giants having the worst offensive line, and you get posts about how people are making excuses for Daniel Jones.   People here will cherry-pick facts and spend an inordinate amount of time curating facts about other QBs just to criticize or put Daniel Jones down.  Hell, we have even seen posts mocking his facial expression or posts about bleaching one's eyes because you read DJ will be the starting QB.

I have seen game threads that were filled with "Jones' throw was poor," "Jones held on to the ball too long," and "Jones missed the open man." I have even seen Jones blamed for offensive linemen jumping early.   Then Jones throws a TD and you get crickets or a nice catch (by the receiver Jones throws to) or on occasion a begrudging "good throw" (this is the rare thing).

Jones isn't the only target.  People who don't share the strong negative views on Jones are accused of "making excuses" if they dare to consider the terrible situation Jones has dealt with since entering the NFL.   I have seen people accuse those people of undergoing mental gymnastics to defend Jones.

Someone mentioned Evan Neal.   Evan Neal, by any objective standard, has been far worse (considering his draft position) than Daniel Jones, but it's rare to see people putting the man down.  Most are still hoping he will do better, or they have given up on him, but he isn't injected into every conversation.  People are not scouring the league to find other OTs to compare Neal to so they can show how much worse Neal is in comparison.  All of that is a unique situation of Daniel Jones.

So, I can understand Carl and Bob's frustration.   It's not like either of them are saying Jones is doing great.  Neither is suggesting that Jones needs to step up his game or even that Jones is the long term answer.  It's just that the amount of time and energy and the frequency DJ's critics put into putting the man down really gets tiring.  The man's performance needs improvement, but he is still the starting QB of the team we root for.   It's sort of hollow to talk about how one "I don't dislike the guy" if all you do at every opportunity is put the man down and work tirelessly to put him in the worst light possible.

Daniel Jones is a good man who works his ass off for the team.  Even if you don't think highly of him, at least give the man the benefit of the doubt and try to be supportive.  I have always said about fan boards that no one will ever fault you for saying positive things about the team (unless that positive is directed at Daniel Jones).  When it comes to criticism, think about cooking with strong spices, a little goes a long way.

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 06:53:30 AMThe 2006 was before the 2011 CBA.  The owners traded away practice time for more money.  As a result there has been a chronic shortage of offensive linemen because there isn't enough time to properly develop them.

Still,  the 2006 squad had 2md round pick, 3rd that was signed from another team and a 5th along with two UDGAs.  The current squad has two high #1s and a 2nd.  Is the CBA why 2 of those high picks haven't developed? Were all the other teams in the NFL able to develop UDFAs and late picks as well in 2006.

I didn't like it at first but it has grown on me.

Having said that, I'm not sure how it'll look in the heat battle.

Quote from: uconnjack8 on May 17, 2024, 09:18:11 PMA stunning difference in ROI for the OL.

The 2006 was before the 2011 CBA.  The owners traded away practice time for more money.  As a result there has been a chronic shortage of offensive linemen because there isn't enough time to properly develop them.

Man, that's ugly.

In those early days, the players got so muddy you couldn't make out the colors after five minutes. But in 2024, we'll be seeing those colors in hi-def for four hours every game. Haven't Giants fans suffered enough?

I know the fielder has the right to  make the play, the base runner must avoid contacting him. In this case the base runner is automatically called out. I'm pretty sure the batter gets first base though, I don't think there can be two outs called on this play as you described it. So, my answer is A.