Big Blue Huddle

I have to admit, I had no clue what the connection was well into having a bunch of the words. I knew that digits were numbers obviously, but "kinds of numbers" were not a category that crossed my mind until I had a bunch of them. They got me good today. Pretty clever.


Strands #66
"Can you digit?"
💡🔵💡🔵
🔵🔵💡🔵
💡🔵🟡🔵

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on Today at 05:33:06 PMI respectfully beg to differ. Last August there were people on this board arguing that the Giants were going to be "something special this year." I don't think any of those folks, or even a number who were less emphatic but still cautiously optimistic, would have told you last August that the Giant would go 0-5 in those five games.

I think for many of us, the 1st game was a slap back to reality.  It would have been one thing to lose,  but to look completely outclassed was a different story. 

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on Today at 06:17:48 PMI tend to agree. If I'm a betting man, I'd probably give him a moderate edge to be our practice squad QB this year over Tommy D.

Do I think he'll ever see the field this year in a real game if at least one of Jones or Luck is healthy? Nope.

The Luck/Lock predictive text has gotten the better of me multiple times already lol

Quote from: MightyGiants on Today at 08:04:47 AMHe lit it up in the CFL.  He's a bit short at 6' 1", but I think Tommy Cutlets has some serious competition for QB 3.  The Giants claimed Rourke on waivers.   The Pats got him by claiming him on waivers (when the Jags waived him), and they beat out the Texans, who also put a claim in on him.  I think there could be something more than just a camp body in him.

I tend to agree. If I'm a betting man, I'd probably give him a moderate edge to be our practice squad QB this year over Tommy D.

Do I think he'll ever see the field this year in a real game if at least one of Jones or Luck is healthy? Nope.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on Today at 05:33:06 PMI respectfully beg to differ. Last August there were people on this board arguing that the Giants were going to be "something special this year." I don't think any of those folks, or even a number who were less emphatic but still cautiously optimistic, would have told you last August that the Giant would go 0-5 in those five games.

Selective amnesia. Remember how great Jones and Waller looked in the five minutes they played in the pre season?

Connections
Puzzle #332
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟨🟨🟨🟨
🟪🟦🟪🟪
🟪🟪🟪🟪
🟦🟦🟦🟦

I'd be remiss to leave out another broken glass gargler...perhaps the grittiest voice of all the growler singers...Kim Carnes and "Bette Davis Eyes"

Quote from: todge on Today at 01:36:46 PMJones faced the early part of the schedule. Their losses were to: Cowboys, 49ers, Seattle, Dolphins and the Bills. Everyone knew the Giants weren't winning those games.

I respectfully beg to differ. Last August there were people on this board arguing that the Giants were going to be "something special this year." I don't think any of those folks, or even a number who were less emphatic but still cautiously optimistic, would have told you last August that the Giant would go 0-5 in those five games.

I remember how our best weapons was punter Dave Jennings and the D in the 70s.

You talk about godawful offenses, those mid 70s teams were as bad as you could get. Terrific players Brad Van Pelt and Brian Kelley never got the success they deserved.

Quote from: Philosophers on Today at 04:07:54 PMReplace a top 10 performance at toughest and most important NFL position with a rookie likely to do poorly?  Why not just draft one and sit him for a year?

Some around here have argued he was top-10 in 2022, largely based on his QBR that season (he was 6th and largely so due to running contribution). But to me, 2022 would not be good enough in 2024 because it would be a "top-10" season by efficiency. Again, my point was that it hinges somewhat on the "top-10" season we're talking about. If 2024 is like 2022, that "top-10" performance doesn't do the trick.