Daniel Jones would have beaten Dallas if playing for the Chargers

[Bob In PA]

A healthy Daniel Jones would have won tonight's game for the Chargers against Dallas. 

Herbert's non-throwing hand was injured, but I don't think that played much of a role in the outcome.

With the type of OL protection Herbert enjoyed all night (but for the last series) Jones would have come out on top.

Bob

[TrueBlue1970]

Bad take. Jones is not even close to Herbert. Stop being delusional.  We could only wish we had Herbert.

[katkavage]

A healthy Daniel Jones would have won tonight's game for the Chargers against Dallas. 

Herbert's non-throwing hand was injured, but I don't think that played much of a role in the outcome.

With the type of OL protection Herbert enjoyed all night (but for the last series) Jones would have come out on top.

Bob

You have to understand Bob's sense of humor to appreciate this post.

[True Blue]

Bad take. Jones is not even close to Herbert. Stop being delusional.  We could only wish we had Herbert.

Imposter!!!! 

[DaveBrown74]

You have to understand Bob's sense of humor to appreciate this post.

I also took this as tongue-in-cheek.

As a side point, with that said, as high as I am on Herbert's talent, he seems to come up on the short end of these close, down-to-the-wire games more than I'd like to see if I were a Chargers fan. Interestingly, Philip Rivers was similar in this regard. Really good QB but tended to struggle in the 2 minute drill and often had late game INTs.

None of the above is to say Jones would be doing better than Herbert there. Was more just an isolated observation on Herbert.

[T200]

A healthy Daniel Jones would have won tonight's game for the Chargers against Dallas. 

Herbert's non-throwing hand was injured, but I don't think that played much of a role in the outcome.

With the type of OL protection Herbert enjoyed all night (but for the last series) Jones would have come out on top.

Bob

Where's Bob and what have you done with him?!?     

[Bob In PA]

Where's Bob and what have you done with him?!?     

Some of you know me "too well." It was indeed tongue-in-cheek but not for the reasons mentioned so far.

It could be read as sarcasm demeaning Jones but actually I did it as a counter-weight to even things out.

In addition to taking a beating on the field, Jones has also taken one HERE and from other fans/writers.

I wanted to demonstrate that if it's ok to make outrageous or speculative NEGATIVE statements about Jones then it's also ok to make outrageous and speculative POSITIVE statements.

Some criticism has been just (and some not-so-just) but at this point IMO there has been "enough" and this was my way of suggesting that y'all will back off for a while.

Bob

[katkavage]

Some of you know me "too well." It was indeed tongue-in-cheek but not for the reasons mentioned so far.

It could be read as sarcasm demeaning Jones but actually I did it as a counter-weight to even things out.

In addition to taking a beating on the field, Jones has also taken one HERE and from other fans/writers.

I wanted to demonstrate that if it's ok to make outrageous or speculative NEGATIVE statements about Jones then it's also ok to make outrageous and speculative POSITIVE statements.

Some criticism has been just (and some not-so-just) but at this point IMO there has been "enough" and this was my way of suggesting that y'all will back off for a while.

Bob

Bob, making sure the $40 million dollar man is better protected and kept safe than that dastardly offensive line in front of him.

[Giant Obsession]

Not so sure if Jones could have won that game.  Their coach leaves MUCH to be desired.

How do you twice eschew FG in an obvious low scoring game where points are a premium.

[Bob In PA]

Not so sure if Jones could have won that game.  Their coach leaves MUCH to be desired.

How do you twice eschew FG in an obvious low scoring game where points are a premium.

GO: Yeah, he didn't do too well last night. 

I think he's a good coach but you've got to either be a "gunslinger" go-for-it type or a stodgy plodding type, and he couldn't decide last night which type of coach to be.

That wishy-washy approach bit him in the rear end when all was said and done.

Bob

[Giant Obsession]

Bob you are dead on.

There seem to be a lot of coaches who have no "feel" for a game beyond the scoreboard.

I have yet to figure which one we have though after Sunday the scale has shifted somewhat.  Seems to me that these HC need a "bench coach" (baseball term i.e. Don Zimmer for Joe Torre).  They are just too submerged in too many other aspects of the game on game day.  Just my opinion.
[/quote]

[Bob In PA]

Bob you are dead on.

There seem to be a lot of coaches who have no "feel" for a game beyond the scoreboard.

I have yet to figure which one we have though after Sunday the scale has shifted somewhat.  Seems to me that these HC need a "bench coach" (baseball term i.e. Don Zimmer for Joe Torre).  They are just too submerged in too many other aspects of the game on game day.  Just my opinion.

GO: Interesting you made that observation... someone else here also criticized Daboll for his apparent "wishy-washy" approach in coaching the Bills game.

I think I agree, although I don't think it should be considered unusual for a head coach to have two different game-day styles for each QB.

Another factor, is play selection. With far fewer reps than Jones, Tyrod (and therefore Daboll/Kafka) likely had far fewer plays available for the Bills game (in addition to the likelihood that there are probably some plays designed especially for Jones, the starter.

Bob

[4 Aces]

I like the 10,000' view.

The Giants already made their evaluation on DJ. We spend so much time analyzing DJ but the current regime and decision makers have already evaluated him. They made him a very rich man. I can almost hear Kevin Gilbride say what katkavage said above:

"They've got their QB, now they need to protect him."

Gilbride said the same exact thing about Eli Manning.

Given the Giants have already invested in DJ as their franchise QB, the discussion should be less around Jones and more around keeping him upright so he can do his job. Contrary to popular belief, no NFL QB plays well with consistently bad protection over the long haul. It doesn't happen. The only interesting debate around DJ is whether's he's David Carr'd. (IMO.)

[Bob In PA]

I like the 10,000' view.

The Giants already made their evaluation on DJ. We spend so much time analyzing DJ but the current regime and decision makers have already evaluated him. They made him a very rich man. I can almost hear Kevin Gilbride say what katkavage said above:

"They've got their QB, now they need to protect him."

Gilbride said the same exact thing about Eli Manning.

Given the Giants have already invested in DJ as their franchise QB, the discussion should be less around Jones and more around keeping him upright so he can do his job. Contrary to popular belief, no NFL QB plays well with consistently bad protection over the long haul. It doesn't happen. The only interesting debate around DJ is whether's he's David Carr'd. (IMO.)

Aces: You're right, but it was noted yesterday that the Giants left themselves an "escape hatch" with Jones.

His contract, while huge, is ultra-short so the coaches/owners/GM still have the leeway to change their minds.

Regardless, I agree they shouldn't have entered into a "big-money" type of contract and then failed to follow up with the next logical step by failing to give the guy a serviceable offensive line. That's just plain dumb.

Bob

[DaveBrown74]

I like the 10,000' view.

The Giants already made their evaluation on DJ. We spend so much time analyzing DJ but the current regime and decision makers have already evaluated him. They made him a very rich man. I can almost hear Kevin Gilbride say what katkavage said above:

"They've got their QB, now they need to protect him."

Gilbride said the same exact thing about Eli Manning.

Given the Giants have already invested in DJ as their franchise QB, the discussion should be less around Jones and more around keeping him upright so he can do his job. Contrary to popular belief, no NFL QB plays well with consistently bad protection over the long haul. It doesn't happen. The only interesting debate around DJ is whether's he's David Carr'd. (IMO.)

So if the Giants finish with something in the 3 to 6 win range and are picking in the top 10 in the '24 draft, you're ruling out any chance of them picking a QB, correct?