Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: T200 on Today at 02:11:29 PM     

Just felt like messing with you!     

1) Yes
2) Not sure
3) If #2 were true, I have a hard time believing fans are looking forward to seeing WDR than they are Nabers. In terms of popularity, as polarizing as Jones is, I think he has enough of a following that will easily eclipse the WanDale Robinson fan club.

I did get a chuckle...you know I respect and appreciate what you do!  We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. 

Quote from: AZGiantFan on Today at 02:06:36 PMWell, that same marketing department thought it was a good idea to give fans a soda for fan appreciation day, so there's that.

That was more than likely thier public affairs aperture and not marketing...those are two completely separate sections. 

Quote from: T200 on Today at 01:53:44 PMSorry, still don't buy that this flyer without Jones will generate more revenue, since you say that's the bottom line, than it would with him.

Tim,
Can I ask you a few questions, which I hope will better articulate my point?

1. Do yo believe the Giants have an extensive marketing department?
2. Do you believe the Giants conducted research pertaining to the players the fanbase was most excited about, which coupled with thier internal data (e.g. jersey sales, media request, etc) allowed them to glean who thier most marketable players are?
3. If you believe 2 occurred, isn't it logical to place the players that polled/rated the highest on the marquee?

Also, to Ed's point, the Giants would look foolish to promote DJ, only to go in a different direction early in the season. 

From my perspective, I just have a hard time believing a multi-billion dollar organization randomly chose three players to promote without doing extensive research.   

Quote from: T200 on Today at 01:23:18 PMI get your point. I just don't agree with it.

Winning is the ultimate goal. You win, people want to see/pay for your product.

We have several members here who gave up their PSLs and tickets because of the piss-poor product that has been trotted out over that past 10+ years.

Despite the efforts to replace Jones, it would behoove the organization to have this kid's head on straight and his ego intact. Throw him a bone and show that the entire organization is behind him and he is the face of this franchise, at least for this season.

And, if not Jones, on the flyer, at least put the #1 pick up there. There's more hope about what lift he can provide the offense than what WDR can. Just sayin'.

I hear you, Tim, but the data simply doesn't support your sentiments; 6 of the top 10 most valuable franchise have stunk for 3 or more years...5 of the 6 have stunk for more than a decade; The Bill, Lions and Bengals are #30, 31 and 32. It's fairly clear winning has absolutely nothing to do with profitability. Concerning the PSL, the Giants could care less who buys thier tickets.  The NFL ticket exchange ensures they get a cut of ticket sales from all third party vendors. So, while some fans elected to forgo thier PSL(s), other fans have stepped in to purchase them, if solely for the purpose of reselling thier tickets via said exchange to make a profit.   

More to the point, the Giants marketing department does not care about throwing players a bone or winning games; their job is to sell tickets.  It really is that simple, my friend. I believe some fans conflate the entertainment side of the business with football operations; they're two separate things...

#2 Pats
#4 Giants
#5 Bears
#6 Raiders
#7 Jets
#8 Commanders

Quote from: T200 on Today at 12:55:00 PMI like WDR and hope he has his breakout season. But... what has he done to this point to warrant being on the flyer?

The Giants will go as far as Jones takes them. FWIW, IMHO, he should have been on there.

Tim,

The Giants are in the entertainment sector; their job is to generate buzz for the sole purpose of selling tickets and/or merchandise.  I'm not entirely sure what rewarding players via a spot on a flyer has to do with those efforts. The Giants are a multi-billion dollar privately owned business, with an extensive marketing department.  I'm sure thier research discovered fans are excited about WDR protentional; thus, they chose to promote him over more well established players. Fundamentally, a football organization #1 goal is to generate profit, vice winning games.  The flyer is concerned with the former and not the latter.

Quote from: T200 on Today at 11:46:24 AMBlame the person who created the flyer and blame the person who approved it.

Haters gonna hate hate hate...

To be fair, DJ is just not marquee player.  The Giants are in the entertainment business and need to promote players that will actually sell tickets and/or merchandise.

Thanks Lenn and H-Town!

Quote from: H-Town G-Fan on Today at 10:20:25 AMYou can't support your actual point, so instead you demand someone prove a negative?

Let's break this down quickly: you asserted people on the board are pinning it all on Jones based on a quote which didn't actually support that prospect, got that pointed out, continued to provide some random quotes which similarly didn't support your point. But instead of conceding, you double-down by requesting that others prove that people didn't assert your point?

Sorry, but that's not how it works. Either you can back up what you assert or you can't. Pretty clear where we've landed on that right now.

I had the same reaction, but you beat me to it.  Asking someone to prove a negative is completely unfair. 

Quote from: sxdxca38 on Today at 09:27:48 AMCan you please show me in the quotes where it doesn't say that he isn't?

You're claiming the absence of a statement must mean it's true!? If I proclaim Evan Neal is a terrible RT, does that automatically equate to him being the sole reason for the Giants failures?

Also, where does it say in those statements that DJ won't become an AP by the time he's 35?  I mean, if the absence of a statement is evidence of intent, we can make anything up...

Quote from: Giant Jim on May 10, 2024, 02:37:49 PMThat has to be the corniest thing I've ever read here, but I'm still laughing.

lol. That's just funny, Jim!

Worse than Bryce Young?  Come on...

Quote from: AZGiantFan on May 09, 2024, 12:29:43 PMSo, better than Mahomes 2023 season*?  Pretty high bar.

* 4183/27/14/3/0

If DJ is the 2024 SB MVP, those top 10 numbers will be 'forgiven.'

This is a nothing burger; most camps carry 4 arms to ensure the skilled positions/olines get a enough work.

Quote from: Ed Vette on May 04, 2024, 07:36:07 PMNo Receivers.

Interesting observation, Ed.  As a byproduct of 'recent' rule changes, I have to believe this will change in the near future.  If Justin J can remain healthy, I suspect he'll have the best chance.  It's also possible that if Jerry Rice wasn't a victim of the '87 player strike, he would have been the MVP.  His 23 TDs in 10 games garnered him 30 votes; Elway nudged him out with 36 votes.  I could be wrong, but I believe that was the closest any WR came to MVP honors.

Quote from: sxdxca38 on May 05, 2024, 12:49:13 AMIf you want to say that Brady playing behind a top five offensive line, for the majority of his career had absolutely no impact on his performance, well then be my guest.

And then after doing so provide only one year, that is right, just one year (2011) of Eli Mannings fifteen-year career (2004-2018) to make your point, and then build an entire world view around it.

So let us begin to expose the faulty line of reasoning.

In 2011, the only year that you shared, what you failed to bring out, was that he had three elite WR's to help him out, in Hakeem Nicks, Victor Cruz, and Mario Manningham.

"If you want to say that Brady playing behind a top five offensive line, for the majority of his career had absolutely no impact on his performance, well then be my guest."

REBUTTAL:  Where did I, or anyone, state Brady and Manning did not benefit from playing behind top tier OLs?  You're reframing your own premise for reasons only you know.  What I stated, and objectively proved is both QBs were ALSO successful playing behind poor-to-terrible OLs. Thus, they did NOT always benefit from "elite level line play to give them time to dissect a defense."  Yes, Eli and Brady played behind some very good OLs, and benefited as all QBs do; however, that doesn't invalidate thier numerous successes playing behind bottom 10 OLs; in fact, both had AP/MVP-type seasons playing with the NFLs' literal worst Olines.. 

"And then after doing so provide only one year, that is right, just one year (2011) of Eli Mannings fifteen-year career (2004-2018) to make your point, and then build an entire world view around it."

REBUTTAL:  As I accurately predicted, and stated, your mind is already made up and no amount of objective data will sway you. So, why waste time providing a cogent, time-consuming response? I also reject the notion I only provided one years worth of data; in response to Rich, I provided 9 years worth of data to support my supposition, in addition to providing 3 years worth of Patriot data.  However, since you brought it up, I will do so again, this time with aggregate PFF OL rankings."

"So let us begin to expose the faulty line of reasoning."

REBUTTAL:   You remind me of Blue Fire; any opposing views and/or rebuttals were classified as "faulty." Do you automatically assume anyone who disagrees with you is wrong and/or employs fault logic? I knew from past research that your statement was factually inaccurate and did my best provide a response predicated on facts.

"In 2011, the only year that you shared, what you failed to bring out, was that he had three elite WR's to help him out, in Hakeem Nicks, Victor Cruz, and Mario Manningham."

REBUTTAL:   This is factually incorrect; in response to Tonka, I explicitly stated "Cruz was as integral to the Giants' 2011 success as JPP."  Besides, you're moving the goal post, presumably because you were unaware of the Giants' 2011 OL ranking. You explicitly stated "Go and look up the offensive line rankings Tom Brady and Eli Manning both played with in the prime of their career" and "It is no coincidence that both had elite level line play to give them time to dissect a defensee.""  BTW, I suspect the majority of fans would avoid classifying Manningham (good) or Nicks(stints as very good) as 'elite', especially the former.  How did both do without Manning?  You're also torpedoing your own assertion: "What is more important to the QB than the WR is the offensive line."; to explain the 2011 season, you're suggesting it was byproduct of WRs talent.  What about Mannings other 3 Pro Bowl seasons when you played with bottom 10 Olines?  In fact, his two best seasons were 2011 and 2015, when he was paired with bottom 3 pass-protection.  As you highlighted, he did enjoy a solid WR trio in 2011 and superstar WR in 2015 (OBJ).  So, based on your input, it appears the reverse is true (i.e. wrs are more important than the OL).  At a minimum, we should discuss this assertion as it appears it has some merit.  I digress though as WR(s) weren't our focus; you introduced them after learning about the Giants' 2011 OL rankings

BL: Your premise that Manning and Brady's successes were predicated on "elite OLs" during "thier prime" is objectively false. 

Eli's aggregate Oline Rankings:

2008    11  (Unk) * Made the Pro Bowl
2009    6  (12 Pass Blocking)
2010    13 (17 Pass Blocking)
2011    31 (31 Pass Blocking) * Made the Pro Bowl/MVP and AP votes
2012   11 (21 Pass Blocking) *Made the Pro Bowl
2013    28 (31 Pass Blocking)
2014    20 (28 Pass Blocking)
2015    20 (28 Pass Blocking) *Made the Pro Bowl
2016   20 (24 Pass Blocking)

2008*   27   16   289   479   60.3   3238   21   10   86.4   66.9   PB
2009    28    16   317   509   62.3   4021   27   14   93.1   71.7   
2010    29    16   339   539   62.9   4002   31   25   85.3   57.7   
2011*   30   16   359   589   61   4933   29   16   92.9   64.2   AP CPoY-6, PB
2012*   31   16   321   536   59.9   3948   26   15   87.2   67   PB
2013    32    16   317   551   57.5   3818   18   27   69.4   38.6   
2014    33    16   379   601   63.1   4410   30   14   92.1   61   
2015*   34   16   387   618   62.6   4432   35   14   93.6   57.9   PB
2016    35   16   377   598   63.0   4027   26   16 86.0   45.7
   
Note – I did not include 2017 through 2019 as the OP explicitly stated "in the prime of their careers."  On average, QBs not named Brady start to regress around their mid-30s; this was true for all of Manning's 2004 draft contemporaries (e.g. Big Ben and Rivers).

Key Takeaways:
1. With the exception of 2013, Eli's output remained consistent
2. Eli's statistical best two seasons (2011 and 2015) occurred when paired with bottom 3 Pass Blocking lines; he did have Cruz, Nix and OBJ
3. Eli's best season was 2011, playing behind the NFL's worst OL
4. Eli's worst season was 2013, playing behind the NFL's 28th OL
5. Eli's 4 PB seasons occurred playing behind the 11, 31, 11 and 20 rated lines.
6. 3 of 4 of his PB seasons were accomplished playing with bottom 10 pass blocking line; 2 of 4 were bottom 3 (31, 21, and  28)
7. During his Prime, Eli's aggregate OL ranking was #18
8. During his Prime, Eli's average pass protection ranking was #24
9. On average, Eli did NOT benefit from "elite level line play to give them time to dissect a defense"; in his prime, the exact opposite was true....he had a bottom 7 pass blocking oline
10 The same is true for Tom Brady; in his prime, he remained consistent, independent of his OL rankings.  His 2015 MVP season was accomplished behind the NFL's worst pass-blocking line.

The data is remarkably clear; Brady and Manning outputs were NOT wholly predicated on thier OL performances.  Both literally prove the opposite of the premise introduced; each remained consistent during MULTIPLE seasons with poor Olines in thier prime. In short, it's possible for QBs to be HIGHLY successful (e.g. MVPs/APs) playing behind terrible olines.   Looking at the data, can we at least agree on that point?  Can we agree Eli and Brady enjoyed MULTPLE Pro Bowl/SB seasons playing behind bottom 10 olines? If true, can we also agree that it's possible for Top-Tier QBs to be successful without elite, or even good OLs?   I will agree with the notion that 36 through 38 year old Manning needed a plus offensive line to be successful, as the data supports that conclusion; however, Prime Eli did not.

IMO, it's a disservice to Eli's greatness to perpetuate a false-narrative that his success was predicted on an elite (or even good) Oline; the fact is, for the majority of his prime, his Oline stunk.  From a more macro perspective, it's unnecessary to perpetuate these false claims to support the notion that QB failures are a byproduct of poor oline play.  Prime Eli quite literally proves the opposite.