Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: AZGiantFan on May 15, 2024, 01:53:41 PMThat's a lot easier to do when you are playing behind a very good OL and not an historically bad OL.

https://www.playerprofiler.com/article/offensive-line-rankings-and-tiers-end-of-nfl-season-review-2024-offensive-line-outlook/

When y'all are crying because they didnt draft a QB, Ill be there to provide comfort and shelter from the storm.

Quote from: Ed Vette on May 15, 2024, 01:55:04 PMAnd the beat goes on...

And it will continue to go on until the Giants demonstrate that they can field a decent (i.e., not top ten, but is hoping for not bottom ten too much to ask?) offensive line.

Quote from: Ed Vette on May 15, 2024, 01:57:36 PMWhen y'all are crying because they didnt draft a QB, Ill be there to provide comfort and shelter from the storm.

You'd be very hard-pressed to find me taking any exception to drafting or not drafting a QB.  I never took a position.

But I apologize for continuing to bring facts, context, and perspective into the discussion.

Quote from: AZGiantFan on May 15, 2024, 02:03:29 PMYou'd be very hard-pressed to find me taking any exception to drafting or not drafting a QB.  I never took a position.

But I apologize for continuing to bring facts, context, and perspective into the discussion.

Must be nice being neutral. After all the unnecessary sacks taken and illustrated on this site and QB comparison on other teams who managed well, your context is subjective. The Offensive Line was clearly an issue, so was the QB.

Quote from: AZGiantFan on May 15, 2024, 02:03:29 PMYou'd be very hard-pressed to find me taking any exception to drafting or not drafting a QB.  I never took a position.

But I apologize for continuing to bring facts, context, and perspective into the discussion.

As it relates to context, should we continue to decouple the Offensive Line from the QB performance? From your posts, I get the impression you believe only the QB benefits from the OL, but fail to acknowledge the OL benefits from sound QB play. If the latter is terrible, it can make the OL appear worse than it is, or at the very least make thier jobs more difficult.  I stumbled across the article below a few years back and kept it to test thier conclusions at the end of each year. I highly encourage you read and consider the points made.  To be clear, I'm not suggesting the Giants OL is great, good, or even average. I acknowledge they stink and negatively impact DJ's performance; however, I also acknowledge DJ's shortcomings contribute to a significant portion of his sacks. IMO, they collectively stunk...

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nfl/are-nfl-quarterbacks-responsible-for-sack-quality 

Quote from: Ed Vette on May 15, 2024, 02:15:57 PMMust be nice being neutral. After all the unnecessary sacks taken and illustrated on this site and QB comparison on other teams who managed well, your context is subjective. The Offensive Line was clearly an issue, so was the QB.

I wasn't coping your point, Ed; you just beat me to it.

Quote from: kingm56 on May 15, 2024, 02:24:24 PMAs it relates to context, should we continue to decouple the Offensive Line from the QB performance? From your posts, I get the impression you believe only the QB benefits from the OL, but fail to acknowledge the OL benefits from sound QB play. If the latter is terrible, it can make the OL appear worse than it is, or at the very least make thier jobs more difficult.  I stumbled across the article below a few years back and kept it to test thier conclusions at the end of each year. I highly encourage you read and consider the points made.  To be clear, I'm not suggesting the Giants OL is great, good, or even average. I acknowledge they stink and negatively impact DJ's performance; however, I also acknowledge DJ's shortcomings contribute to a significant portion of his sacks. IMO, they collectively stunk...

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nfl/are-nfl-quarterbacks-responsible-for-sack-quality 

I was going to drop that point and it's a good one, but I didn't want to have to explain myself in a series of another dozen posts for those in the back of the room.

Quote from: kingm56 on May 15, 2024, 02:24:24 PMAs it relates to context, should we continue to decouple the Offensive Line from the QB performance? From your posts, I get the impression you believe only the QB benefits from the OL, but fail to acknowledge the OL benefits from sound QB play. If the latter is terrible, it can make the OL appear worse than it is, or at the very least make thier jobs more difficult.  I stumbled across the article below a few years back and kept it to test thier conclusions at the end of each year. I highly encourage you read and consider the points made.  To be clear, I'm not suggesting the Giants OL is great, good, or even average. I acknowledge they stink and negatively impact DJ's performance; however, I also acknowledge DJ's shortcomings contribute to a significant portion of his sacks. IMO, they collectively stunk...

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nfl/are-nfl-quarterbacks-responsible-for-sack-quality 

You, me, and a few others have been making this point for years now. It just seems to be too complicated a point for some to wrap their heads around. So we end up seeing all those elementary school level posts as if there are no inputs (other than coaching) to an offensive line's performance.

Quote from: kingm56 on May 15, 2024, 02:24:24 PMAs it relates to context, should we continue to decouple the Offensive Line from the QB performance? From your posts, I get the impression you believe only the QB benefits from the OL, but fail to acknowledge the OL benefits from sound QB play. If the latter is terrible, it can make the OL appear worse than it is, or at the very least make thier jobs more difficult.  I stumbled across the article below a few years back and kept it to test thier conclusions at the end of each year. I highly encourage you read and consider the points made.  To be clear, I'm not suggesting the Giants OL is great, good, or even average. I acknowledge they stink and negatively impact DJ's performance; however, I also acknowledge DJ's shortcomings contribute to a significant portion of his sacks. IMO, they collectively stunk...

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nfl/are-nfl-quarterbacks-responsible-for-sack-quality 

That article is about EPA, I found another EPA stat the other day that was interesting if not alarming.

1st round QBs to post negative EPA/att in EACH of their first 3 years in the NFL:

Joey Harrington (2002-04)
Kyle Boller (2003-05)
Sam Darnold (2018-20)
Daniel Jones (2019-21)
Zach Wilson (2021-23)
Justin Fields (2021-23)

(since 2000, min 200 att/yr)

Per Warren Sharp

Quote from: Ed Vette on May 15, 2024, 01:55:04 PMAnd the beat goes on...

True, there seem to be some fans who think a QB can be in the top 10 playing behind the worst line in the league.  I seriously doubt the NFL coaches and GMs believe that or they wouldn't be spending so much high draft capital and money on offensive linemen if their play didn't have a major impact (or as Jone's critics love to say "make excuses") on a quarterback's play.

That really seems to be the Daniel Jones divide in a nutshell. There are those who believe a quarterback needs at least a mediocre offensive line to function properly (or at least partially offset by the elite receiver(s)), and there seem to be fans who think any consideration of a quarterback's protection is "just making excuses."  Plus I some critics suggest that if Jones can't function behind horrible lines than he needs an elite line or, I have also heard, "he needs to have everything perfect".

Quote from: AZGiantFan on May 15, 2024, 01:44:35 PMGeez, it's called hyperbole.

Well it is in poor taste to make a completely false statement on a message board where we are continually dissecting words and thoughts and then when called out, the answer is it was simply hyperbole. Had it been stated as such in the beginning (or simply admit a mistake was made) we could have avoided a lot of negative back and forth

Quote from: kingm56 on May 15, 2024, 02:24:24 PMAs it relates to context, should we continue to decouple the Offensive Line from the QB performance? From your posts, I get the impression you believe only the QB benefits from the OL, but fail to acknowledge the OL benefits from sound QB play. If the latter is terrible, it can make the OL appear worse than it is, or at the very least make thier jobs more difficult.  I stumbled across the article below a few years back and kept it to test thier conclusions at the end of each year. I highly encourage you read and consider the points made.  To be clear, I'm not suggesting the Giants OL is great, good, or even average. I acknowledge they stink and negatively impact DJ's performance; however, I also acknowledge DJ's shortcomings contribute to a significant portion of his sacks. IMO, they collectively stunk...

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nfl/are-nfl-quarterbacks-responsible-for-sack-quality 

Funny thing is, some here were lauding Tommy DeVito's pocket presence and how much better it was than DJ's, yet despite the fact that the Oline was better when he was playing due to improved personnel (Thomas and Pugh) he had a higher sack percent than DJ.  And no one said a word about any of those sacks being his fault.

The difference in Tommy DeVito and Daniel Jones is $40 million dollars a year, five years of NFL experience, and being Drafted #6 in the first round, vs OOGATZ and just do your best kid.

And the beat goes on...

When I started this thread it was about the OL and, as usual, it has ended up being a referendum on Daniel Jones, like most other threads.

If anyone cares, what about our 'new and impr oved' OL? Is PFF right and do we still have the worst OL in the league or have we made some significant improvements to make it, at least, average?

Quote from: H-Town G-Fan on May 15, 2024, 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.

It saddens me when you make a claim, then do absolutely no research on the point and then double down on your position like you actually know.

However, It actually works in my favor because it exposes your faulty line of reasoning.

Here are the quotes that back up exactly what I have said, are you ready?

"I think the term "we are not a QB away from being good" is a complete cop out and utter bull sht. So, you don't think the Giants make the playoffs this past season with CJ Stroud at Qb? The defense wasn't the problem, they kept us in games, Slayton was running wide open with Hyatt half the season. We also saw our oline play exceptionally better under Tyrod than with Jones/Devito, some of that to do with health and the rest because tyrod is an actual NFL quarterback."

Let me know when you're ready to apologize?

or do you want to keep it up?