Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: katkavage on March 20, 2025, 10:29:58 AMThey can. Unless one they might want signs with another team before the draft further limiting their options. Why wait if you know all those who are available now? The only reason that makes any sense is that they are waiting on Rodgers as are the Steelers. But the Steelers are a playoff team. The Giants are a three win team with coach and GM on the hot seat.

They will not be a competitive team next year regardless of who plays QB.  They lack depth almost everywhere plus have marginal starting talent.

OL starters below average and subs are awful.  Lose Nabers and marginal WR corps.  Lose Tracy and nothing.  I can keep going.

I say focus on draft to find QB and play him next year and use other draft picks to get more starting talent.  Find a QB after cuts but play the kid.

We are not at the 1 yard line from being a competitive playoff team no matter what the optimists here say.

If our drafted QB is terrible, we go into 2026 Draft looking again as we will then be a likely 3 win team and able to pick high.  Think Eagles.  Crash then build.

Quote from: Philosophers on March 20, 2025, 10:53:31 AMThey will not be a competitive team next year regardless of who plays QB.  They lack depth almost everywhere plus have marginal starting talent.

OL starters below average and subs are awful.  Lose Nabers and marginal WR corps.  Lose Tracy and nothing.  I can keep going.

I say focus on draft to find QB and play him next year and use other draft picks to get more starting talent.  Find a QB after cuts but play the kid.

We are not at the 1 yard line from being a competitive playoff team no matter what the optimists here say.

If our drafted QB is terrible, we go into 2026 Draft looking again as we will then be a likely 3 win team and able to pick high.  Think Eagles.  Crash then build.

I agree with all that. My response is to why they are waiting. I don't care when they sign that back up, but they are obviously waiting on Rodgers because maybe, just maybe he can save their jobs.
 They are not close to being a QB away from competing. That's the reality.

Quote from: Philosophers on March 20, 2025, 10:53:31 AMThey will not be a competitive team next year regardless of who plays QB.  They lack depth almost everywhere plus have marginal starting talent.

OL starters below average and subs are awful.  Lose Nabers and marginal WR corps.  Lose Tracy and nothing.  I can keep going.

I say focus on draft to find QB and play him next year and use other draft picks to get more starting talent.  Find a QB after cuts but play the kid.

We are not at the 1 yard line from being a competitive playoff team no matter what the optimists here say.

If our drafted QB is terrible, we go into 2026 Draft looking again as we will then be a likely 3 win team and able to pick high.  Think Eagles.  Crash then build.

Play the kid regardless of whether he is ready or not? I agree that 2025 isn't going to be a stellar season and although they may go to the playoffs via wildcard, it's not going far. Don't you think it would be wise to have a veteran who can start while they break the kid in and to set the example of how to prepare? Otherwise, if you want to see who's left, I would stick with Drew Lock and marry the kid to his QB Coach.

At this point we should just draft a QB and hope he's Daniels and start him day 1


And to think that the Giants are NOT waiting on Rodgers is crazy work.... It seems like they arent 'wasting" money right now.... but it is abundantly clear that the Giants are just waiting to SPEND that money.... they want Rodgers and its easy as hell to see.... so no... they are NOT being prudent with money

I think it would be funny if Giants and Steelers both say "I'm out" and move on, at this point.

Quote from: Ed Vette on March 20, 2025, 10:06:54 AMIf you think John Mara doesn't care about losing his own fan base, then I have to strongly disagree with you.

John Mara's primary concern lies in preserving and increasing the overall valuation of his franchise—a goal in which he has clearly succeeded. According to recent Forbes valuations, the New York Giants have ascended to become the fourth most valuable NFL team, estimated at over USD 6 billion, despite underperforming on the field for much of the past decade.

Moreover, the idea that the Giants risk losing their fan base by failing to acquire a particular quarterback is largely rooted in fan sentiment rather than empirical evidence. Consider the franchise's closest local comparison: the New York Jets. Despite not fielding a stable, high-caliber quarterback in decades, the Jets maintain robust ticket sales and currently rank among the top ten most valuable franchises in the league—recent estimates place them at around USD 5.4 billion. A similar situation exists for the Chicago Bears, who have not had a consistently strong quarterback in well over a decade; yet, they regularly sell out home games and sit comfortably near the top ten in franchise valuations (over USD 5.8 billion).

In a league structured around revenue sharing and powered by lucrative broadcasting and licensing deals, the market for tickets remains strong regardless of on-field success. If one fan decides not to purchase season tickets, another will, potentially as a profitable resale opportunity. In short, the Giants—and other historically robust franchises—retain a consistently high market valuation due to substantial, diversified revenue streams that are not strictly tied to wins, losses, or the identity of the starting quarterback.

Quote from: Ed Vette on March 20, 2025, 11:40:04 AMPlay the kid regardless of whether he is ready or not? I agree that 2025 isn't going to be a stellar season and although they may go to the playoffs via wildcard, it's not going far. Don't you think it would be wise to have a veteran who can start while they break the kid in and to set the example of how to prepare? Otherwise, if you want to see who's left, I would stick with Drew Lock and marry the kid to his QB Coach.

I said play him.  Maybe not game 1 if not ready but by game 6 yes and he better be ready because that's why he was drafted at 3.  If he's a 4th round pick, I agree to give him more time.  I dont care if it's Drew Lock.  Aaron Rodgers was very frustrated playing behind the Jets OL.  Wait til he plays behind the Giants.  We are not built to compete now so save the money that Rodgers and others expect.

Quote from: Philosophers on March 20, 2025, 10:15:05 AMWhy do they need a QB now?  They can draft one and get a veteran after cuts.

Exactly, Brother. Other than appeasing the fan base, there is absolutely no strategic reason to sign a bridge quarterback at this time. 

Quote from: kingm56 on March 20, 2025, 02:24:56 PMExactly, Brother. Other than appeasing the fan base, there is absolutely no strategic reason to sign a bridge quarterback at this time. 

Oh they want to appease the fan base that's why they are waiting. They want Rodgers. They very much wanted Stafford. Their play is so obvious. Other than Rodgers, you are right. If Rogers said, I want to play for the Giants, they would sign him yesterday. Desperation knows no bounds.

Quote from: katkavage on March 20, 2025, 02:27:36 PMOh they want to appease the fan base that's why they are waiting. They want Rodgers. They very much wanted Stafford. Their play is so obvious. Other than Rodgers, you are right. If Rogers said, I want to play for the Giants, they would sign him yesterday. Desperation knows no bounds.

If Vikings didnt have JJ, Stafford would be perfect for a win now team loke them.  Not for the Giants.

Quote from: katkavage on March 20, 2025, 02:27:36 PMOh they want to appease the fan base that's why they are waiting. They want Rodgers. They very much wanted Stafford. Their play is so obvious. Other than Rodgers, you are right. If Rogers said, I want to play for the Giants, they would sign him yesterday. Desperation knows no bounds.

If the Giants "very much wanted Stafford", he would be wearing blue. However, the organization's willingness to walk away—evidenced by the Los Angeles Rams ultimately extending Stafford on a four-year, $160 million deal—shows the Giants held firm to a preset valuation and refused to exceed it.  Thus, it's more accurate to claim "the Giants wanted them at a specific price." The same principle applies to any Rodgers discussions; if their sole goal were to appease fans by securing a marquee quarterback, they would simply outbid other teams, regardless of cap impact or future ramifications. Instead, they have demonstrated measured restraint, which runs entirely counter to your persistent claims hat they are acting out of desperation. Consequently, your ongoing critiques of Schoen's offseason performance seem unfounded, given the organization's commitment to securing young, ascending players, rather than short-sighted attempts at a quick fix.  Isn't that reason for some positivity?  I actually appreciate the Giants restraint, as it applies to the FA QBs. 

I am

Quote from: kingm56 on March 20, 2025, 07:06:04 PMIf the Giants "very much wanted Stafford", he would be wearing blue. However, the organization's willingness to walk away—evidenced by the Los Angeles Rams ultimately extending Stafford on a four-year, $160 million deal—shows the Giants held firm to a preset valuation and refused to exceed it.  Thus, it's more accurate to claim "the Giants wanted them at a specific price." The same principle applies to any Rodgers discussions; if their sole goal were to appease fans by securing a marquee quarterback, they would simply outbid other teams, regardless of cap impact or future ramifications. Instead, they have demonstrated measured restraint, which runs entirely counter to your persistent claims hat they are acting out of desperation. Consequently, your ongoing critiques of Schoen's offseason performance seem unfounded, given the organization's commitment to securing young, ascending players, rather than short-sighted attempts at a quick fix.  Isn't that reason for some positivity?  I actually appreciate the Giants restraint, as it applies to the FA QBs. 

Sounds like you are ensconced in the Giants bubble. And actually I like the free agency approach as it pertains to the defense. It was nice of the Giants to let Stafford use them as leverage knowing he was never coming here. He should send a thank you note

Quote from: katkavage on March 20, 2025, 07:37:31 PMI am Sounds like you are ensconced in the Giants bubble. And actually I like the free agency approach as it pertains to the defense. It was nice of the Giants to let Stafford use them as leverage knowing he was never coming here. He should send a thank you note

"According to NFL Network host Rich Eisen, the Giants not only matched the Rams' trade demands for Stafford, they also offered him a more lucrative contract than the deal he signed with Los Angeles. Despite that, Stafford chose to return to the Rams."

https://www.si.com/nfl/matthew-stafford-rejected-lucrative-offer-from-giants-stay-with-rams-rich-eisen#:~:text=According%20to%20NFL%20Network%20host,to%20return%20to%20the%20Rams.

Quote from: Ed Vette on March 21, 2025, 07:06:43 AM"According to NFL Network host Rich Eisen, the Giants not only matched the Rams' trade demands for Stafford, they also offered him a more lucrative contract than the deal he signed with Los Angeles. Despite that, Stafford chose to return to the Rams."

https://www.si.com/nfl/matthew-stafford-rejected-lucrative-offer-from-giants-stay-with-rams-rich-eisen#:~:text=According%20to%20NFL%20Network%20host,to%20return%20to%20the%20Rams.

I agree the Giants were Stafford's pawn. His age, playing the second half of the season in the cold, and the Giants' patchwork offensive line were too much for him to truly consider leaving California.

Quote from: Ed Vette on March 21, 2025, 07:06:43 AM"According to NFL Network host Rich Eisen, the Giants not only matched the Rams' trade demands for Stafford, they also offered him a more lucrative contract than the deal he signed with Los Angeles. Despite that, Stafford chose to return to the Rams."

https://www.si.com/nfl/matthew-stafford-rejected-lucrative-offer-from-giants-stay-with-rams-rich-eisen#:~:text=According%20to%20NFL%20Network%20host,to%20return%20to%20the%20Rams.

Yeah, I don't know where King was getting his facts. I heard the same thing. I think we just have to understand where they are in their QB search. They wanted Stafford badly. Missed on him. They want Rodgers badly or they would, like the Vikings, have said no thanks. They aren't showing any fiscal restraint. There has been no money offer to Rodgers as far as I know. They and Pittsburgh are just waiting for him to decide. I'm a Giant fan, but the desperation for the QB is pretty obvious.