Big Blue Huddle

A couple of things occur to me.

- Over the last 10-15 years collegiate play-calling has become more influential on the pros.  While teams still want pro-style quarterbacks, innovations at the collegiate level defined success criteria differently and have put considerably more emphasis on athleticism and a quarterbacks ability to run.  This has necessarily meant that the "best" incoming talent into the NFL is now incomplete from what the standard was in years past.  You are getting more prospects like Lamar Jackson, Anthony Richardson, Jalen Hurts, Kyler Murray, etc.  By augmenting their game with designed runs, they pass for fewer yards and often convert touchdowns with their legs at a much as their arm.

- In addition to the different profile of quarterback that's incoming, the rookie wage scale and contract length demand that rookie quarterbacks start immediately.  You generally only have 3 years with an incoming quarterback to determine whether or not he's the future of the franchise before you're going to have to pony up, exercise the 5th year option, etc.  This means teams have to start quarterbacks sooner than they might ideally like to - and the result is that young QBs make more mistakes than vets.

- Because of both of the above there are two competing dynamics.  The modus operandi of many franchises that don't have a good quarterback is keep drafting quarterbacks until you find one that sticks.  This only compound bad quarterback play as you're going to have roughly 20-25% of the league starting rookie or 2nd year play-callers.  There are 8 teams right now that are in that category, 9 if you were to include the Vikings who would have started a rookie if he hadn't gotten hurt. You are also seeing a slew of teams who think they've found their franchise quarterback to dole out ungodly sums to quarterbacks who are largely still unproven.  Look at the quarterbacks who got big money this past off-season or last year.  Many of them are actually quite middling (Trevor Lawrence looks that way, Joe Burrow runs hot/cold, Kyler Murray, DeShaun Watson, Tua Tagovailoa), etc.  Then you're stuck in QB purgatory - a place Giants fans should feel familiar with now in our 6th season of mediocrity because we paid too much to Daniel Jones.   

Before I put this out there - teams need a good running back.  They do NOT need an expensive running back.  Those don't have to be mutually exclusive but....

2022/23 - Isiah Pacheco
2021 - Sam Akers & Sony Michel
2020 - Leonard Fournette
2019 - Damien Williams
2018 - Sony Michel
2017 - Legarette Blount

I can keep going but I think you get the point.  Those are the leading rushers from the Superbowl team that year.  Without a quarterback, a running back won't get you to the top.  With a quarterback, you don't need an expensive running back.

I would literally have to relinquish my fandom of the Giants if they picked Shadeur Sanders.  While I don't want to make the son responsible for the sins of the father, his father is such an off-putting personality and blow-hard that I would throw up in my mouth with this selection.  Whatever team picks him needs to be prepared to see national news stories when Papa Sanders pops off in the media about how that team is wronging his son, or if they're winning how it's all because of his son. 

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on August 22, 2024, 09:08:08 PMWhat ever happened to the claims Flores made that Dolphins owner Stephen Ross directly offered to compensate Flores extra for losing games on purpose? That was a serious accusation. Was it determined that Flores completely made those stories up out of thin air?

For me, it all comes down to the above. The Tua stuff is a side-story relative to that. If Flores made up the stuff about Ross bribing him to throw games, then I will agree with any claim that he is a "terrible person."

If however he was telling the truth there and his unwillingness to play ball and lose on purpose got him fired, and he just wasn't able to come up with a smoking gun that that happened, then he has every right to be bitter, and we should be talking about Stephen Ross' character, not Flores'.

The snowflake stuff with Tua pales in comparison to the above in importance, as far as I am concerned. The above is much more important and much more of a deciding factor as to the character of this man than whether he yelled at Tua or wasn't always a teddy bear with him.

So this is not a cut/dry answer.  The NFL did find evidence that Stephen Ross made it known that he believed the Dolphins' position in the draft should take priority over the team's win record.  They did not find any evidence that people within the coaching ranks or players deliberately tried to lose games. 

As to the alleged bribe, there were varying "recollections" although ultimately it was determined that yes he did say he would pay 100k for every loss but that those present believed it was not a real offer and was made in jest.

Quote from: madbadger on August 22, 2024, 12:54:59 PMIt hamstrings his case because he's claiming that the Giants didn't hire him because of his race but now any jury is going to hear how he abusive he to his quarterback which directly impacted his teams performance. Giants can say that they weren't interested in hiring a coach with a track record of being abusive to his players regardless of skin color.

Given that Tua just made these claims they aren't admissible.  If someone divulged to the Giants during the process that they thought he was an abusive coach and should steer clear, they can rely on that.  But you can't use info that comes to light years later that ostensibly the Giants were not aware of.

1 - I'm failing to see how this kills the case against the Giants (or anyone) related to discrimination.  I don't think that occurred with the Giants, nor do I think much of his charges in general other than the directive to tank the season, but I don't think this hamstrings his case. 

2 - Overall mixed feelings about what Tua is saying.  Theres clearly been a departure from "old school" football mentality where everything was earned and disparaging a player/tough love was par for the course.  You could argue it was wrong in the first place.  You could argue it was effective for a LOT of coaches, including Parcells.  You could also argue that players today are too sensitive to criticism and while Tua might feel better with his current coach, whether or not his coach gets maximum production from him or wins a Superbowl remains to be seen.  I get the impression the truth is somewhere in the middle.  Players today should toughen up and coaches probably stray into destructive behavior sometimes when belittling a player. 

Honestly, I'm not even sure why IR and the inability to return is still a thing.  The NFL has made some changes over the last few years but the original "issue", if there ever was one, has long since past.

The NFL implemented IR rules and the inability to return before the salary cap era.  It was done as a safe-guard mechanism that would prevent teams that were loaded with talent from stashing "young" talent on the IR as a way to bypass roster limitations.  Back then a rookie might have been asked/told that they were going on IR because the drafting team might already have a full complement of linebackers (for example).  By making IR a full-year sit out, the team was then disincentivized from doing this because access to that "bench" player was off-limits and an injury to one of your starters was more keenly felt. 

The NFL has changed so much since then.  Rookies don't want to sit.  Coaches and GMs don't want rookies to sit.  They're cheap talent and you realize an uplift on your salary cap when you have players on rookie contracts playing above their pay-scale.  Players would never agree to go on IR unless they truly were going to be out the full season.  The salary cap has made it next to impossible to stockpile talent like the pre-salary cap era. Why do we still impose a limitation on when a player can come back? 

Don't worry guys he's got a massive career as a rapper in front of him.

Laughable.  The rookies should clearly not be graded - they've never taken a snap.  And I don't see any universe where one could definitively put Anthony Richardson (who played 4 whole games last year) or Bryce Young ahead of him.

As I alluded, I doubt there will be any investigation or punishment.  That doesn't mean it's not a problem.  Of course players are going to make friendly wagers.  In the pre-social media era, that would not be a problem.  It actually probably wouldn't be a problem now either should they have kept their gentleman's wager to themselves.  The fact that neither thought twice about telling the media is a big deal.  And the fact that while this is a gray area that likely has no teeth - the simple reality is that NFL players should not bet on anything NFL related in any capacity. 

"You know what else doesn't hurt the league's integrity? Two first-year players doing their best to win Offensive Rookie of the Year. Because that's what they hopefully would have done anyway. A little side-wager for if one actually wins is simply icing on the cake for the victor."  I could not disagree more with this.  While it's true that it incentivizes them to perform, it also now incentivizes them to play for themselves.  You could say "it's 10k and not a big deal to either".  Well, what if this was 100k?  or more?  How long before Nabers starts screaming at Daniel Jones and coaches that he needs to get more looks and targets?  How much does it influence Jayden Daniels to try and make a miracle play rather than eating a sack or throwing the ball away? 

Malik Nabers and his former LSU teammate Jayden Daniels (selected 2nd overall) have confirmed across a couple podcasts that they have a 10k wager on Offensive Rookie of the Year. 

https://sports.yahoo.com/malik-nabers-jayden-daniels-10-144629179.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK31MPpUflp7eX36ri48jUqOR9s9pWz2_JO_PuyF7xDWW3s-gVptfcQdhCHi0AsC4kqcOPPMgeY3Z4aBt7SOpIUHNAe6h05b6ZCcA9yxzLjm1BPmcw5rI1Ta2TnQf3VKsE26okeJb42L_3bkHk-CpBd6hFNd2Noq-Qt6ysTfncfc

Well written article and candidly points out how desensitized young players are now with regards to gambling.  They've grown up in an environment where it was a laughable offense to now where it's totally legal.  The NFL does NOTHING to discourage gambling, they saw free money and they took it and yet try to hold players to a standard that belies how complicit they are.  They slapped a few players with suspensions a few years ago and have since moved the goal-posts and changed the rules.  I don't know that anything will become of this, but shame on Malik Nabers for not knowing the rules.  Shame on him for unabashedly and publicly admitting to gambling.  Shame on Nabers and Daniels for making 5 figure bets in a profession they ultimately have not proven themselves in and their lifetime earnings may not reflect what they think they're going to make.  And shame on the NFL for not better educating players on the policy.

I think people are expecting too much production in college for a 3rd round pick.  He's a slot corner - I imagine that plays into the lack of INTs.  Typically the wideouts he'd cover are not deep-speed guys, they're jitter-bug guys with quick acceleration who run digs and slants, maybe a seam route against a zone.   Not exactly routes or throws that are more likely to be picked off.

There's nothing wrong with this for a 3rd round pick.  If he's as studious and aware as advertised, that's a "whole is worth more than the sum of the parts" kind of player that can be a valuable role player.  If there's any concern from me, and it's been echoed around here, isn't this Cordale Flott version 2.0? 

It's a really good question and there's a very high likelihood his fate has already been decided.  Didn't we already play this game going into 2022?  Is there any 1-year resume that washes out bad taste of 2023 from our mouths? 

Schoen has shown some real prudence by not reaching for a new quarterback (or any position really).  He didn't give up a big ransom to move up to 3.  He didn't panic and take JJ McCarthy.  He understands the implications contracts have on the cap and generally has the economics under control.  Next off-season, there are no rules for him.  Frankly it's sad that we'll have to wait until Year 3 of a GMs reign to see what he'll actually do when there are no handcuffs on him. 

From what I read they're still investigating but don't have any update and won't before the draft.  I did see quite a bit regarding the Falcons' and their potential tampering with Kirk Cousins - that one appears to have some legs and looks likely they'll get smacked.  Nothing on the Eagles and Saquon though. 

Most Giants fans (and fans in general) have such a fundamental lack of understanding of draft positioning and value I couldn't imagine why we would care what they think. Most fans seem to think the addition of a wide receiver is transformative, and it's typically not.  The rest of the fans think Daniel Jones sucks, and he mostly does, but they're in such a rush to get his successor that they're not really concerned with who that is, or what the team might have to sacrifice to get there.  Trade up for JJ McCarthy?  It only takes one team, but I would imagine most draft boards have him nowhere near the top 10 in terms of value.