FOR ALL THOSE WHO INSIST THAT WE DRAFT A QB FIRST

[H-Town G-Fan]

Basically: "Let's not pick a QB who could be a bust, instead let's pick an OL who could also be a bust." Sorry, not buying this.

QB is the most important position on the team and the Giants are woefully undertalented compared to the rest of the league. If you have the opportunity to get a QB, you do it and figure the rest out later. There are no guarantees a guy will be available (or affordably within reach) next season or the season after. Sure, some perfect situation (top-10 OL and WR corps) can prop up an otherwise middling QB... but then you're the Andy Dalton-led Bengals. Congrats on mediocrity. The Bengals climbed out of that hole by taking Burrow first, then Jamarr Chase the next year... not Penei Sewell (to much chagrin at the time).

[Jclayton92]

We've got to stop wanting the franchise to play scared. That's what they've basically done the past 10 years, they played it conservative including resigning Jones which continues to kill this organization.

This isn't the same Era were an above average to good qb will win at a high level. You need an elite qb or you need to draft one until you hit on one.

It's amazing what an elite qb will do for an Oline, Wrs, and the Rb by comparison.

We don't need to draft more olinemen. We need to sign 2 guys in FA that are plug and play instead of hope and develop.

I'd rather we draft a qb every year until we hit on one instead of avoiding the position. Jones is absolutely horrible and there's not assurances that he ever plays again or wouldn't get beat out by a delivery boy, so yeah please draft someone.

[NY47GIANTS]

Nitpicking 1st Round QBs that didn't work out is easy work.

Most difficult position in all of sports, maybe second only to the goaltender position in hockey to draft and develop.

That's why QBs are drafted as high as they are and really shouldn't be a reach when selecting them. (i.e. Giants 1st pick, 6th overall in 2019)

The Giants have WHIFFED on nearly every 1st round pick since 2005.

Philip Rivers/Eli Manning being their most obvious best selection.

That's nearly 2 decades of ineptitude.

I would argue the Giants biggest need is competent ownership and not much will change, otherwise.

There's a rule of thumb that botching a 1st round pick, especially at the QB position, can set a franchise back 10 years.

Yikes.

I really hope there are no multipliers.

DRAFT A QB.

Running it back, as is, would be negligent at this point.

[ozzie]

If Schoen and Daboll find a QB they like and take him in the first round, I'm ok with that and trust them to make a good choice. But if we don't pick a QB this draft, I won't lose any sleep over it. With so many holes to fill, I wouldn't draft a QB just to draft a QB. Make sure the QB you draft is the right one.

[DaveBrown74]

Others have commented already so I won't be repetitive, but the aversion some seem to have to drafting a QB this year, given the precise situation we are in, really boggles my mind.

But fair enough - everyone is entitled to their opinion.

[Bob In PA]

Basically: "Let's not pick a QB who could be a bust, instead let's pick an OL who could also be a bust." Sorry, not buying this.

QB is the most important position on the team and the Giants are woefully undertalented compared to the rest of the league. If you have the opportunity to get a QB, you do it and figure the rest out later. There are no guarantees a guy will be available (or affordably within reach) next season or the season after. Sure, some perfect situation (top-10 OL and WR corps) can prop up an otherwise middling QB... but then you're the Andy Dalton-led Bengals. Congrats on mediocrity. The Bengals climbed out of that hole by taking Burrow first, then Jamarr Chase the next year... not Penei Sewell (to much chagrin at the time).

H-T: I do understand your approach, but the salary cap must be included in the analysis. They can only pay one high 1st-round QB at a time in today's NFL. It's not like they're the Steinbrenner Yankees. The Bengals are a good example for your point of view, but IMO they were just plain lucky. If either the QB or the WR had been a bust, then where are they? When you pay for a high first-round player you have to give him every chance to succeed, and if you pick the QB first (1 of 11 guys you need to be really good) then the consequences for the blunder are magnified significantly. Further, the Bengals had an above-average (at least) offensive line before they picked either Burrow or Chase.

I agree it's best to "not pass" on a guy you really believe in, but think that that would be an exception to my asserted "general rule" rather than a standard to follow blindly. In an attempt to further refine my thoughts, I'd say you should need no more than two additional starters on offense at the time you spend a high first-rounder on a QB. In that case, you have the same draft year to hopefully also grab one of the two you need and the next year to take two shots at getting the other, so your QB will be "ready" to earn his keep in two years at most.

The Giants need at least three more players on offense, IMO, probably four. This year is theoretically one year too soon unless they also believe they'll have the money to fill one or two of the non-QB slots during free-agency. In that case, they'll be "ready" to grab a QB in whom they really believe in the 2024 draft, but IMO it's likely they'll have to surrender their 2025 first-round pick to move up high enough to get him.

Bob

[Doc16LT56]

To Bob and anyone else who may think it's the wrong time to draft a QB:

There's never going to be a time when you have all of the players you need (OL, WR, RB) and can then go shopping for a QB. It doesn't work like that in the real world. A lot of the players you think will be good won't work out. Some of the players you think are working out will get hurt. There's never going to be a perfect time to draft a QB.

On top of that, you don't really know when you'll have an opportunity to get one. When the opportunity presents itself you have to take it regardless of what the rest of the roster looks like.

Yes, luck is part of the equation. You're going to have to hope your skill and preparation meet at the right opportunity to get lucky.

No one said building a great team would be easy. The problem the Giants face right now is trapping themselves in QB hell by lying to themselves about the quality of their players, especially the QB. Cut your losses and move on. Give the next generation of players a chance to succeed where this group of core players failed.

Daniel Jones and the players around him have failed many times over. Although the team is stuck with him on the roster for one more year, we should all be clear eyed in understanding that he isn't the answer and neither are Tyrod Taylor nor DeVito.

This organization needs a major infusion of talent at the QB position. If this year's draft gives us an opportunity to get a guy, then great, we have a shot. If it doesn't, then we're stuck in QB hell for at least another year.

[Uni]

QB is the position that will elevate the offense more than any other.

We would need to draft at least two OL to upgrade the line
We could draft WR but who is throwing to him?
RB? Forget it
And keep in mind, any OL or WR can bust just as well as any QB. Also, the list of probowl WR and OL are dotted with numerous 2nd and third day picks. QB? Not so much.

One QB will give you more bang for the buck

[Ed Vette]

To Bob and anyone else who may think it's the wrong time to draft a QB:

There's never going to be a time when you have all of the players you need (OL, WR, RB) and can then go shopping for a QB. It doesn't work like that in the real world. A lot of the players you think will be good won't work out. Some of the players you think are working out will get hurt. There's never going to be a perfect time to draft a QB.

On top of that, you don't really know when you'll have an opportunity to get one. When the opportunity presents itself you have to take it regardless of what the rest of the roster looks like.

Yes, luck is part of the equation. You're going to have to hope your skill and preparation meet at the right opportunity to get lucky.

No one said building a great team would be easy. The problem the Giants face right now is trapping themselves in QB hell by lying to themselves about the quality of their players, especially the QB. Cut your losses and move on. Give the next generation of players a chance to succeed where this group of core players failed.

Daniel Jones and the players around him have failed many times over. Although the team is stuck with him on the roster for one more year, we should all be clear eyed in understanding that he isn't the answer and neither are Tyrod Taylor nor DeVito.

This organization needs a major infusion of talent at the QB position. If this year's draft gives us an opportunity to get a guy, then great, we have a shot. If it doesn't, then we're stuck in QB hell for at least another year.

In a perfect world, they would want to have an established OLine and a couple of weapons before drafting a QB, but you're right. They will study, scout, and interview every QB in this Draft that they believe has potential and may be right for them. If they find the right QB and it won't devastate the next two drafts, they should get him. If that QB is not there or there are doubts, then they have to pass. There is always a FA out there they can sign for one year. To move up it's going to cost them a second this year and a third and next year's first and second or third depending on how far they have to move up. Of course they may have their guy fall to them.

I think they figured they would give Jones two years and if he improved in 2023 they would give him 2024 and then decide, If they trade or cut him, then would draft a QB in 2025. After this year's performance and the injuries, I'm sure they are taking a hard look at this class.

As for Jones, if he's healthy they will play him and see how the season unfolds. He could be trade bait for a team that needs a QB if he plays well and they have their guy in the wings. It's too bad because if he even played like Tommy did this past game and he got injured, they had a shot at trading him. 

[H-Town G-Fan]

H-T: I do understand your approach, but the salary cap must be included in the analysis. They can only pay one high 1st-round QB at a time in today's NFL. It's not like they're the Steinbrenner Yankees. The Bengals are a good example for your point of view, but IMO they were just plain lucky. If either the QB or the WR had been a bust, then where are they? When you pay for a high first-round player you have to give him every chance to succeed, and if you pick the QB first (1 of 11 guys you need to be really good) then the consequences for the blunder are magnified significantly.

In your hypothetical, what if the OL the Bengals draft is a bust? Then where are they? You can play that game with anyone picked high. There's nothing to suggest picking a lineman is the "safe" decision. Just conceptually, I don't believe that picking a bad OL would be preferable to a bad QB. Is the QB more "visible"? Sure. But that's not the same as value. We've bemoaned how bad Evan Neal is and how just one truly below-average player on the OL drags the entire unit down. To hide that, you basically need to hit (either FA or draft) on 3 or 4 of the other OL. That takes resources and time as well.

Further, the Bengals had an above-average (at least) offensive line before they picked either Burrow or Chase.

The Bengals were absolutely one of the worst offensive line units in Burrows rookie season. They improved it in free agency in 2021 to become roughly average.

I agree it's best to "not pass" on a guy you really believe in, but think that that would be an exception to my asserted "general rule" rather than a standard to follow blindly. In an attempt to further refine my thoughts, I'd say you should need no more than two additional starters on offense at the time you spend a high first-rounder on a QB. In that case, you have the same draft year to hopefully also grab one of the two you need and the next year to take two shots at getting the other, so your QB will be "ready" to earn his keep in two years at most.

The Giants need at least three more players on offense, IMO, probably four. This year is theoretically one year too soon unless they also believe they'll have the money to fill one or two of the non-QB slots during free-agency. In that case, they'll be "ready" to grab a QB in whom they really believe in the 2024 draft, but IMO it's likely they'll have to surrender their 2025 first-round pick to move up high enough to get him.

Bob

I will say that in this approach, all you're really doing by waiting another year on the QB is getting one more year of his rookie contract in a competitive window. And if you have to surrender significant draft capital to do so, you're then potentially limiting the competitiveness of the team in the coming years.

I appreciate the perspective, I just think the wait-and-build approach has a couple fundamental issues. Primarily, you don't know what the QB pool will actually look like when it arrives and you don't know where you'll be picking (and thus what it may cost to acquire the QB you want). You don't face either of those issues (or at least they're mitigated) when you are choosing close to the top of the draft like the Giants will be this offseason.

[TDToomer]

OP why the shouting? Why the need to capitalize every letter of your subject header? Are you seeking attention? It's completely unnecessary.

[Bob In PA]

In a perfect world, they would want to have an established OLine and a couple of weapons before drafting a QB, but you're right. They will study, scout, and interview every QB in this Draft that they believe has potential and may be right for them. If they find the right QB and it won't devastate the next two drafts, they should get him. If that QB is not there or there are doubts, then they have to pass. There is always a FA out there they can sign for one year. To move up it's going to cost them a second this year and a third and next year's first and second or third depending on how far they have to move up. Of course they may have their guy fall to them.

I think they figured they would give Jones two years and if he improved in 2023 they would give him 2024 and then decide, If they trade or cut him, then would draft a QB in 2025. After this year's performance and the injuries, I'm sure they are taking a hard look at this class.

As for Jones, if he's healthy they will play him and see how the season unfolds. He could be trade bait for a team that needs a QB if he plays well and they have their guy in the wings. It's too bad because if he even played like Tommy did this past game and he got injured, they had a shot at trading him. 

Ed: You know I agree with all of this. My point is there's no absolute.

2024 could virtually DEMAND that they take a QB, depending on what they do in free-agency AND how strongly they believe in the guy they want AND how much of 2025 draft they must surrender to move up far enough to get him.

My view is: neither my ideal plan nor "we-must-take-a-QB-in-2024-no-matter-what" is set in stone at this time.

Bob

[Bob In PA]

In your hypothetical, what if the OL the Bengals draft is a bust? Then where are they? You can play that game with anyone picked high. There's nothing to suggest picking a lineman is the "safe" decision.

H-T: All great points as expected. But for the record, as of today, I want Marvin Harrison, Jr., more than any college QB (that could change depending on how the remainder of the college season goes) and I want him a lot more than another OL unless it costs us next year's 1st-rounder. The exception would be (as I agree with almost everyone else) if Schoen sees a can't-miss QB. I DO see a can't-miss WR in Harrison. Bob

[H-Town G-Fan]

H-T: All great points as expected. But for the record, as of today, I want Marvin Harrison, Jr., more than any college QB (that could change depending on how the remainder of the college season goes) and I want him a lot more than another OL unless it costs us next year's 1st-rounder. The exception would be (as I agree with almost everyone else) if Schoen sees a can't-miss QB. I DO see a can't-miss WR in Harrison. Bob

MHJ is pretty roundly understood as the top prospect overall in the class. I wouldn't be opposed to it.

[LennG]

I agree, this is the year to go QB. Whether it is with pick #1, 2, or even 3, we have to draft for the future. The problem is, other teams, like the Jets for instance, have been drafting QBs in the top 5 for how many years now and they still don't have a legit one. I'm not knocking the Jets as we all know, we draft what looks like a sure thing, and the next thing we know we may have DJ #2, or any of the other high picks that just can't make the transition. We have no choice, we have to go QB, but with our scouting staff, who knows who will be in blue next year?