I agree.
https://www.bigblueview.com/2024/5/6/24147428/is-the-giants-2024-roster-better-than-the-one-joe-schoen-inherited-after-the-2021-season
These unit-by-unit comparisons are interesting, and I didn't see anything I would strongly disagree with in the article.
Still, as they say, team building is not the same as collecting talent. I don't have a good answer as to how to best compare teams or evaluate teams to get a better sense of the direction a team is going. It is something I have been thinking about though- how to best evaluate a team to get a better sense of the direction it is going in.
QB- Neutral. There is no basis to suggest that Daniel Jones, even if healthy, will be any better or worse than he has been. Better depth, yes, as it could hardly have been worse. Still, it's really all about DJ.
RB- Neutral. Even if Barkley has a great year with the Eagles, as he did for a couple or three of his 6 seasons with the Giants, I can't help but to think of him as a "boom or bust" RB. That may be unfair, but I feel no loss in his departure. Still, while I am optimistic about the new additions and current roster, and so don't feel it to be Worse, I can't yet rate it as other than Neutral.
TE- Neutral. We can hope but there is no real basis to think or to say otherwise.
OL- Better. It could hardly have been worse. Except for questions regarding Neal and ORT, which I expect to sort itself out either there or at ORG and otherwise to be a better net roster overall.
DL- Better. Even with the loss of Williams at the 3-tech, I see the addition of Burns to Thibs and Ojulari at Edge or 4-Man as more than compensating for what was not a good Wink D overall.
LB- Better. Best in many years both Inside and Outside with those mentioned above and with Okereke, McFadden, and Simmons at MLB and ILB.
CB/Safety- Worse. Until proven otherwise, I certainly can't say Better and feel that Neutral would be a cop out. I can say, however, that I am pleased to have Shane Bowen as the new DC. In regard to the play in and of the Secondary, I will guess off-the-ball / bend don't break coverage outside the 20s while none tougher/better/ stingier in the Redzone.
In any case, for now quien sabe?
Cheers!
Is the Giants' 2024 roster better than the one Joe Schoen inherited after the 2021 season?
Is the New York Giants' roster today better than the one Joe Schoen inherited from Dave Gettleman when he took over as general manager in 2022?
There are 11 players on the current 90-man roster who were drafted or signed by Gettleman. They are:
WR Darius Slayton, LT Andrew Thomas, DT Dexter Lawrence, edge Azeez Ojulari, CB Aaron Robinson, PK Graham Gano, LS Casey Kreiter, RB Gary Brightwell, LB Carter Coughlin, CB Darnay Holmes, QB Daniel Jones.
A breakdown:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/is-the-giants-2024-roster-better-than-the-one-joe-schoen-inherited-after-the-2021-season/ar-BB1lU7Gl?ocid=BingNewsSerp
Quote from: Painter on May 07, 2024, 12:17:38 PMQB- Neutral. There is no basis to suggest that Daniel Jones, even if healthy, will be any better or worse than he has been. Better depth, yes, as it could hardly have been worse. Still, it's really all about DJ.
RB- Neutral. Even if Barkley has a great year with the Eagles, as he did for a couple or three of his 6 seasons with the Giants, I can't help but to think of him as a "boom or bust" RB. That may be unfair, but I feel no loss in his departure. Still, while I am optimistic about the new additions and current roster, and so don't feel it to be Worse, I can't yet rate it as other than Neutral.
TE- Neutral. We can hope but there is no real basis to think or to say otherwise.
OL- Better. It could hardly have been worse. Except for questions regarding Neal and ORT, which I expect to sort itself out either there or at ORG and otherwise to be a better net roster overall.
DL- Better. Even with the loss of Williams at the 3-tech, I see the addition of Phillips plus Burns to Thibs and Ojulari at Edge or 4-Man as more than compensating for what proved to not be a good Wink D overall last year
LB- Better. Best in some time both Inside and Outside with those mentioned above and with Okereke, McFadden, and Simmons at MLB and ILB.
CB/Safety- Worse. Until proven otherwise, I can hope, but certainly can't say Better and feel that Neutral would be a bit of a cop out. I can say, however, that I am pleased to have Shane Bowen as the new DC. In regard to the play in and of the Secondary, I will guess off-the-ball / bend don't break coverage outside the 20s while none tougher/better/ stingier in the Redzone.
In any case, for now quien sabe?
You can infer what you will from my comments above re Ed's earlier query unless and until I feel a need for revision.
Cheers!
For my thoughts, see Better or Worse above. Or below as it may be.
Cheers!
Is it better? I would say yes. O line is better, D is better, we have a star receiver, and our special teams are better.
Is it as improved as it should be after three offseasons since Schoen's hiring? I would have to say no.
The article touched on the problem that confronted Schoen caused by making the playoffs in 2022. There is no way they give Jones his contract if they were bad as most expected them to be. Making the playoffs and having to deal with Barkley along with a meddling owner (in my opinion) forced decisions Schoen no doubt regrets. Nevertheless I think he has a plan that will work if given time.
Quote from: Painter on May 11, 2024, 03:36:50 PMQuote from: Painter on May 07, 2024, 12:17:38 PMQB- Neutral. There is no basis to suggest that Daniel Jones, even if healthy, will be any better or worse than he has been. Better depth, yes, as it could hardly have been worse. Still, it's really all about DJ.
RB- Neutral. Even if Barkley has a great year with the Eagles, as he did for a couple or three of his 6 seasons with the Giants, I can't help but to think of him as a "boom or bust" RB. That may be unfair, but I feel no loss in his departure. Still, while I am optimistic about the new additions and current roster, and so don't feel it to be Worse, I can't yet rate it as other than Neutral.
TE- Neutral. We can hope but there is no real basis to think or to say otherwise.
OL- Better. It could hardly have been worse. Except for questions regarding Neal and ORT, which I expect to sort itself out either there or at ORG and otherwise to be a better net roster overall.
DL- Better. Even with the loss of Williams at the 3-tech, I see the addition of Phillips plus Burns to Thibs and Ojulari at Edge or 4-Man as more than compensating for what proved to not be a good Wink D overall last year
LB- Better. Best in some time both Inside and Outside with those mentioned above and with Okereke, McFadden, and Simmons at MLB and ILB.
CB/Safety- Worse. Until proven otherwise, I can hope, but certainly can't say Better and feel that Neutral would be a bit of a cop out. I can say, however, that I am pleased to have Shane Bowen as the new DC. In regard to the play in and of the Secondary, I will guess off-the-ball / bend don't break coverage outside the 20s while none tougher/better/ stingier in the Redzone.
In any case, for now quien sabe?
You can infer what you will from my comments above re Ed's earlier query unless and until I feel a need for revision.
Cheers!
I think overall a slightly better roster than he inherited after three drafts and FA is pretty poor. Rich posted the five year average PFF support teams and 2022 the year he inherited was the best year for the Giants.
A neutral rating for QB and RB is reasonable but I'll point out that Barkley was four years younger. I believe the DL is worse but the Edge/OLB is stronger. Together that could be a neutral for me.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on May 11, 2024, 03:53:13 PMIs it better? I would say yes. O line is better, D is better, we have a star receiver, and our special teams are better.
Is it as improved as it should be after three offseasons since Schoen's hiring? I would have to say no.
I would agree with that. But I'd add that Neal was a no brainer pick that any GM in the league (save Gettleman) would have taken in that spot and if he had turned out to be even serviceable that changes things in my opinion. If Neal was good the team would be much better off overall, although they'd still have a QB problem I suppose.
Quote from: Gmo11 on May 11, 2024, 05:33:21 PMI would agree with that. But I'd add that Neal was a no brainer pick that any GM in the league (save Gettleman) would have taken in that spot and if he had turned out to be even serviceable that changes things in my opinion. If Neal was good the team would be much better off overall, although they'd still have a QB problem I suppose.
I dont agree that every GM would have taken Neal. Possible another passes because of his lack of testing or looks at data or does interviews differently.
Would every GM have drafted Saquon and his more obvious talent out of college than Neal?
Quote from: Gmo11 on May 11, 2024, 05:33:21 PMI would agree with that. But I'd add that Neal was a no brainer pick that any GM in the league (save Gettleman) would have taken in that spot and if he had turned out to be even serviceable that changes things in my opinion. If Neal was good the team would be much better off overall, although they'd still have a QB problem I suppose.
They could have taken Ekwonu 5th overall but they prioritized Thibodeaux. There was an active debate as to who was better between Neal and Ekwonu. So far Ekwonu has been the materially better player (mainly due to Neal being so awful).
But even despite the Neal conundrum, Schoen has done a very poor job overall dealing with the O line mess since taking over prior to this offseason. Every free agent he has brought in has been brutal and every draft pick, so far at least, has either looked awful, gotten hurt quickly, or both. The O line coach left a lot to be desired until this offseason as well, and while that may have been Daboll's hire, Daboll is Schoen's hire so ultimately Schoen is responsible.
By the way, I've been a pretty steady Schoen supporter and still am, but I'm not going to gloss over areas where I don't think he has done a good job to this point. Let's hope the decisions made in this most recent offseason lead to better O line play in 2024 and beyond.
I thought it was a pretty good breakdown overall. Part of me wanted the front 7 ranked as a unit rather than separating DL and LBs into 3 groups.
Totally disagree with this:
"The Giants haven't had the assets to be able to trade for a package of draft picks that would turbo charge their roster building efforts."
They had the assets. If Neal and Thibodeaux were considered home runs at this point, this team would have an entirely different outlook.
Quote from: Ed Vette on May 11, 2024, 04:05:15 PMI think overall a slightly better roster than he inherited after three drafts and FA is pretty poor. Rich posted the five year average PFF support teams and 2022 the year he inherited was the best year for the Giants.
A neutral rating for QB and RB is reasonable but I'll point out that Barkley was four years younger. I believe the DL is worse but the Edge/OLB is stronger. Together that could be a neutral for me.
The one thing you can take away is that we are investing in premium positions. The premium positions on this roster have been addressed, have they all been home runs absolutely not but Wr, Tackle, CB, Edge, and even to a certain extent Qb have been addressed while positions that aren't as big of a premium have shed their high price tags ie Safety, RB, and so on.
Quote from: Jclayton92 on May 11, 2024, 09:31:27 PMThe one thing you can take away is that we are investing in premium positions. The premium positions on this roster have been addressed, have they all been home runs absolutely not but Wr, Tackle, CB, Edge, and even to a certain extent Qb have been addressed while positions that aren't as big of a premium have shed their high price tags ie Safety, RB, and so on.
A different angle in looking at it but one I believe is important to evaluate in terms of overall value at both a player level and, collectively, at a unit level. We can definitely see the trend move this way since 2021 and, hopefully soon, the results will follow.
Peace!
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on May 11, 2024, 07:33:29 PMThey could have taken Ekwonu 5th overall but they prioritized Thibodeaux. There was an active debate as to who was better between Neal and Ekwonu. So far Ekwonu has been the materially better player (mainly due to Neal being so awful).
But even despite the Neal conundrum, Schoen has done a very poor job overall dealing with the O line mess since taking over prior to this offseason. Every free agent he has brought in has been brutal and every draft pick, so far at least, has either looked awful, gotten hurt quickly, or both. The O line coach left a lot to be desired until this offseason as well, and while that may have been Daboll's hire, Daboll is Schoen's hire so ultimately Schoen is responsible.
By the way, I've been a pretty steady Schoen supporter and still am, but I'm not going to gloss over areas where I don't think he has done a good job to this point. Let's hope the decisions made in this most recent offseason lead to better O line play in 2024 and beyond.
But that's the thing. He played it exactly right because he wanted an OL and Thibs. I imagine their grades on both OL were basically the same. But Thibs was the best pass rusher they were going to find. So he got both. Nobody not a single solitary soul questioned that pick on draft day because it made all the sense in the world. We were told Neal was the most pro ready OL in the draft. He clearly was and is not but at the time the pick was a no brainer. And if it goes the other way and suddenly the Giants have bookend tackles for the next decade that makes the whole thing look a lot better.
Quote from: Gmo11 on May 11, 2024, 11:37:36 PMBut that's the thing. He played it exactly right because he wanted an OL and Thibs. I imagine their grades on both OL were basically the same. But Thibs was the best pass rusher they were going to find. So he got both. Nobody not a single solitary soul questioned that pick on draft day because it made all the sense in the world. We were told Neal was the most pro ready OL in the draft. He clearly was and is not but at the time the pick was a no brainer. And if it goes the other way and suddenly the Giants have bookend tackles for the next decade that makes the whole thing look a lot better.
We were told that, yes, by pundits and draftnik types. None of us actually scouted the guy. And by scouting I mean actually going to visits, workouts, interviews, watching Alabama games standing on the sideline, reviewing high school tape, talking to his coaches, talking to opposing coaches, etc. We didn't do the work. The Giants did. The Giants decided they wanted to prioritize Thibodeaux over having the first O line pick in that draft. Would they have taken Ekwonu over Neal? We'll never know that. But their course of action is still their responsibility.
Also what about all his other O line decisions? Why does it just come down to Neal? He could have still done a lot better with the O line than he has, even with the bust Neal pick.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on May 12, 2024, 09:25:47 AMWe were told that, yes, by pundits and draftnik types. None of us actually scouted the guy. And by scouting I mean actually going to visits, workouts, interviews, watching Alabama games standing on the sideline, reviewing high school tape, talking to his coaches, talking to opposing coaches, etc. We didn't do the work. The Giants did. The Giants decided they wanted to prioritize Thibodeaux over having the first O line pick in that draft. Would they have taken Ekwonu over Neal? We'll never know that. But their course of action is still their responsibility.
Also what about all his other O line decisions? Why does it just come down to Neal? He could have still done a lot better with the O line than he has, even with the bust Neal pick.
JMS has not looked like a good center yet as a 2nd round pick. Even if Neal improves, JMS needs a big jump as well.
Quote from: Philosophers on May 12, 2024, 09:58:17 AMJMS has not looked like a good center yet as a 2nd round pick. Even if Neal improves, JMS needs a big jump as well.
Precisely my point. The failures (to this point) go well beyond the Neal pick.
All that we fans are really good at is second-guessing and never better than when we are practicing on ourselves as I am right now.
For me at least, rooting requires optimism and thus anticipates improvement which is something I expect we will see this year. Yeah, I know that's not bucking the odds by much when last season Our Heroes were ranked 29th overall on Offense and 27th on Defense.
I have already mentioned how much the addition of a true star No. 1 WR will add to what I believe will be a top-notch Receiver Corps overall, and that I believe the loss of Barkley will be less of a liability than some might think- especially given the addition of guys like Singleterry and Tracy, Jr to whatever is Gray's potential. That assumes, of course that there will be a notable improvement from last year's abysmal Oline play.
As for the Defense, I think I already have made clear my view that the additions which have since been made to the Front 7 not only compensate for the loss of Williams but will make it the best it has been in quite some time. As for the Secondary, although still an area of concern until proven otherwise, I feel better now that they've added Nubin, Phillips and McCloud to the mix. And, I must say also that I am quite comfortable with Shane Bowen replacing Wink as DC.
And so now, for better or worse, cop-out or otherwise, I am neutral and non-predicting when it comes to Giants' Quarterback play and that of Daniel Jones in particular in what must be viewed as his make-or-break future with the Giants...and perhaps also for some other notables.
In any case, I have only now realized that should Daniel Jones start a total of just 12 games this year, he will have made the third most starts (73) of any Giants QB since Eli's 246 and Phil's 139, and thus of all 25 other QBs since 1970 (post-Conerly/Tittle) including guys like Kerry Collins, Dave Brown, Scott Brunner, Craig Morton, Jeff Hostetler, Fran Tarkenton, etc. Proves nothing, but kinda interesting of sorts, huh?
Cheers!
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on May 12, 2024, 10:59:04 AMPrecisely my point. The failures (to this point) go well beyond the Neal pick.
To be clear I'm not absolving him of anything. I was only saying that despite the other things he's tried if Neal had been as advertised it helps an awful lot. And on that one pick I don't really blame him. Busts are gonna happen to everyone in that position but you can either do your best to minimize the risk or do the opposite like Gettleman. I prefer schoens approach.
I'm also not ready to write off JMS who I really did like as a prospect. I think he's got a leap in him perhaps with a proper OL coach now he'll make it.
Quote from: Gmo11 on May 12, 2024, 08:43:46 PMTo be clear I'm not absolving him of anything. I was only saying that despite the other things he's tried if Neal had been as advertised it helps an awful lot. And on that one pick I don't really blame him. Busts are gonna happen to everyone in that position but you can either do your best to minimize the risk or do the opposite like Gettleman. I prefer schoens approach.
I'm also not ready to write off JMS who I really did like as a prospect. I think he's got a leap in him perhaps with a proper OL coach now he'll make it.
I hear you and don't disagree. If Neal had lived up to his billing and turned into a Tyler Conklin/Tristan Wirfs caliber RT, things would have been very different.
To me, you can argue whether the team is better but, to me, it comes down more to process than personnel. The big issue in truly judging Schoen's tenure is that he has not had a chance to get HIS QB. The Giants have played themselves out of the top QBs in each year he's been here.
And in looking at that article, the one place where I'd say they definitely haven't improved is the D-line simply because I don't know if there's anyone there with significant upside beyond Dex. With a group like the secondary, it may not be better NOW than it was when Gettelman left, but it could very well be in the future (gotta see how guys like Banks, Phillips and Nubin progress). When Schoen took over, I doubt many people would have expected James Bradberry to still be here in 2024.
Instead of Neal we could.of drafted G Wilson
Every GM misses
But its more important why they missed
What did they see in Neal
That he is not doing now
Also what faults did they see and thought they were able to.fix and why isnt it being fixed
Quote from: ralphpal1 on May 12, 2024, 10:15:02 PMInstead of Neal we could.of drafted G Wilson
Every GM misses
But its more important why they missed
What did they see in Neal
That he is not doing now
Also what faults did they see and thought they were able to.fix and why isnt it being fixed
I think one of the issues with Neal is that they drafted a LT to play RT and not everyone can make that switch.
Quote from: jgrangers2 on May 12, 2024, 09:32:58 PMAnd in looking at that article, the one place where I'd say they definitely haven't improved is the D-line simply because I don't know if there's anyone there with significant upside beyond Dex. With a group like the secondary, it may not be better NOW than it was when Gettelman left, but it could very well be in the future (gotta see how guys like Banks, Phillips and Nubin progress). When Schoen took over, I doubt many people would have expected James Bradberry to still be here in 2024.
You and I have a different perspective as to whether or not the D-line may be better this year than it was last year. Let me begin by saying that I was never able to recover from having witnessed the abomination of last season's 2-8 start in which the Wink Defense gave up 265 points bookended by 0-40 and 17-49 losses to the hated Cows. Whatever may be the why and how of it, process or personnel, I'm still gagging from the thought of it.
Okay, that was then and this is for now. And so, upon quieter reflection, I must acknowledge that my optimism may be flawed, and certainly is weakened by my "can't get any worse" perspective. That said, I do believe that Brian Burns will prove to be an major asset wherever Bowen places him among 3-,4-,5-man fronts.
In any case, I'm troubled to have to imagine myself in the more usual litany of fan behavior:
Raters gonna rate.
Baiters gonna bait...or bate as the case may be.
Haters gonna hate.
Skaters gonna skate.
Waiters gonna wait.
That last one does have some appeal.
Cheers!
Larry,
That's one of the reasons I wish they would have graded the front 7 as a group and not had Burns and Thibodeaux as OLBs. Seems like they used "base" defense lineups to grade this even though teams are in "base" less than 30% of the time.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on May 13, 2024, 02:24:21 PMLarry,
That's one of the reasons I wish they would have graded the front 7 as a group and not had Burns and Thibodeaux as OLBs. Seems like they used "base" defense lineups to grade this even though teams are in "base" less than 30% of the time.
I think of it and feel the same as you, Matt. As for Burns and Thibs and indeed for Ojulari, I see them as Edge players who in a given situation may line up as a DE in a 3- 4-, or 5- in making up of the front 7 with Okereke, and McFadden, or Simmons at ILB.
Cheers!
Quote from: uconnjack8 on May 13, 2024, 02:24:21 PMLarry,
That's one of the reasons I wish they would have graded the front 7 as a group and not had Burns and Thibodeaux as OLBs. Seems like they used "base" defense lineups to grade this even though teams are in "base" less than 30% of the time.
I all comes down to positional responsibilities. The 3/4 Mike has more coverage responsibilities and the 3/4 Edge do not. That's why I separate the LB's from the DLine. I am curious if Thibs and Burn have the sand in their pants to transition to DE responsibility. If so, the Giants are a 3 Tech away. Simmons would be my Will and McFadden my Sam.
Quote from: Ed Vette on May 13, 2024, 03:54:19 PMI all comes down to positional responsibilities. The 3/4 Mike has more coverage responsibilities and the 3/4 Edge do not. That's why I separate the LB's from the DLine. I am curious if Thibs and Burn have the sand in their pants to transition to DE responsibility. If so, the Giants are a 3 Tech away. Simmons would be my Will and McFadden my Sam.
A savvy analysis and questioning, Ed. In any event, we should expect to see a different approach to Defense from Shane Bowen who, while more Zone-orientated on the back end, has had much more success against the run than did Wink. Still, as you suggest, it can be as much a question of personnel as of positioning.
It may be a while before we get an answer in that regard, but it will still be time better spent wondering about Burns and Thibodeaux than it is for those among us who seem unable to stop hating on Daniel Jones.
Cheers!
Quote from: Painter on May 14, 2024, 10:47:41 AMA savvy analysis and questioning, Ed. In any event, we should expect to see a different approach to Defense from Shane Bowen who, while more Zone-orientated on the back end, has had much more success against the run than did Wink. Still, as you suggest, it can be as much a question of personnel as of positioning.
It may be a while before we get an answer in that regard, but it will still be time better spent wondering about Burns and Thibodeaux than it is for those among us who seem unable to stop hating on Daniel Jones.
Cheers!
And Ojulari. The other hated Player that everyone has given up on. Of course it's not hate. Only the whatabouts call it hate. I call it being realistic.
Quote from: Painter on May 14, 2024, 10:47:41 AMA savvy analysis and questioning, Ed. In any event, we should expect to see a different approach to Defense from Shane Bowen who, while more Zone-orientated on the back end, has had much more success against the run than did Wink. Still, as you suggest, it can be as much a question of personnel as of positioning.
It may be a while before we get an answer in that regard, but it will still be time better spent wondering about Burns and Thibodeaux than it is for those among us who seem unable to stop hating on Daniel Jones.
Cheers!
My question is will his defense do a much better job of stopping the run. As horrifically bad as the o-line was in 2023 the run defense wasn't much better.
Quote from: Ed Vette on May 13, 2024, 03:54:19 PMI all comes down to positional responsibilities. The 3/4 Mike has more coverage responsibilities and the 3/4 Edge do not. That's why I separate the LB's from the DLine. I am curious if Thibs and Burn have the sand in their pants to transition to DE responsibility. If so, the Giants are a 3 Tech away. Simmons would be my Will and McFadden my Sam.
Ed,
I get your point, and I think Thibs and Burns are going to spend considerable more time trying to be get in the backfield then in coverage. I could be wrong, but from what Daboll has said about being more of an "attacking" defense, I am guessing those guys will be deployed mostly as penetrators.
Burns did not grade out as a good run defender which, for me, is why your question/point is a good one.
I can't help but see another Buffalo similarity here. Buffalo's DL likes to get up field and disrupt. And they have mostly been good at it. Seems like that's the direction Daboll wants this D to go.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on May 14, 2024, 11:19:48 AMEd,
I get your point, and I think Thibs and Burns are going to spend considerable more time trying to be get in the backfield then in coverage. I could be wrong, but from what Daboll has said about being more of an "attacking" defense, I am guessing those guys will be deployed mostly as penetrators.
Burns did not grade out as a good run defender which, for me, is why your question/point is a good one.
I can't help but see another Buffalo similarity here. Buffalo's DL likes to get up field and disrupt. And they have mostly been good at it. Seems like that's the direction Daboll wants this D to go.
Wink's approach was of little benefit to the Giants Rushing Defense whereas Bowen's has had a good history in that area. As for what Burns may or may not bring to the table, it's hard to imagine that Bowen played no role in the decision to trade for him. We shall see, I reckon.
Cheers!
Quote from: Painter on May 14, 2024, 12:07:49 PMWink's approach was of little benefit to the Giants Rushing Defense whereas Bowen's has had a good history in that area. As for what Burns may or may not bring to the table, it's hard to imagine that Bowen played no role in the decision to trade for him. We shall see, I reckon.
Cheers!
The absence of a solid 3T and two Receivers who will struggle in Run Support is somewhat concerning for me. Zone coverage will require the ILB's to have Coverage responsibilities. Read and React. I hope it doesn't take three games to get up to speed.
Quote from: Ed Vette on May 14, 2024, 12:32:45 PMI hope it doesn't take three games to get up to speed.
It shouldn't be much of a challenge for them to give up less than the 98 total points they did in their first 3 games last year. But then that may be just the optimist inside of me talking. <:-P
Cheers!
Quote from: Ed Vette on May 14, 2024, 12:32:45 PMThe absence of a solid 3T and two Receivers who will struggle in Run Support is somewhat concerning for me. Zone coverage will require the ILB's to have Coverage responsibilities. Read and React. I hope it doesn't take three games to get up to speed.
Do you see McFadden as a good fit for this system?
Quote from: uconnjack8 on May 14, 2024, 05:59:33 PMDo you see McFadden as a good fit for this system?
Perhaps not.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on May 14, 2024, 05:59:33 PMDo you see McFadden as a good fit for this system?
Given what we saw of his play last season, which was a breath of fresh air in a dyspnea of a Defense, I can't but think of him as a good fit. I quite clearly recall that even as rookie, he was one of the few Giants Defenders who seemed engaged and effective in those otherwise early debacles against the Cows and Niners.
Moreover, as he has previously been rated as an above average Pass Defender from the LB position, there is all the more reason to feel positive about his "fit" in Bowen's scheme. Quite frankly, as I saw it, the only thing that kept McFadden from greater appreciation was the excellent performance of Okereke in Wink's otherwise shitty Defense as it was even well before the Williams trade.
Cheers!
Quote from: Painter on May 16, 2024, 11:08:56 AMGiven what we saw of his play last season, which was a breath of fresh air in a dyspnea of a Defense, I can't but think of him as a good fit. I quite clearly recall that even as rookie, he was one of the few Giants Defenders who seemed engaged and effective in those otherwise early debacles against the Cows and Niners.
Moreover, as he has previously been rated as an above average Pass Defender from the LB position, there is all the more reason to feel positive about his "fit" in Bowen's scheme. Quite frankly, as I saw it, the only thing that kept McFadden from greater appreciation was the excellent performance of Okereke in Wink's otherwise shitty Defense as it was even well before the Williams trade.
Cheers!
I thought his forte was Run and Dog, not coverage. I'll defer to you instead of my memory snapshots.