Big Blue Huddle

Does anybody else think that Lombardi was auditioning for the GM here?

Quote from: nb587 on July 08, 2024, 07:25:19 PMDoes anybody else think that Lombardi was auditioning for the GM here?

To become Giants GM?

If that is what you meant, no, not for a second.

Quote from: nb587 on July 08, 2024, 07:25:19 PMDoes anybody else think that Lombardi was auditioning for the GM here?

It's possible that Lombardi expressed interest (via his agent) in the Giants GM opening at some point (pure speculation).  Mike is a Jersey guy (born and raised down the Jersey shore), so it seems like a job that would be a good choice for him.  To my knowledge, Mike has never been interviewed or has he expressed interest in the job.   Still, it truly amazes me how some people just don't take advantaged of what they have.  You have a long-time former NFL front office guy who worked with some of the greatest football minds in NFL history.  He is willing to share his thoughts, experiences, and what he has learned.  He is willing to devote much time talking about our favorite team. 

Mike does have connections with the team.  Mike is friends with Wink and Daboll.  Daboll actually called Mike for his advice when he was trying to decide between the Dolphins and the Giants.  Mike told Daboll to take the Giants' job.

Why would we just spend time bashing the guy instead of listening to what he has to say?   You don't have to take his word as gospel, but his opinions are worth more than most of those in the media who fans listen to.

My initial response on this thread was to defend him in part because he's always accused of having an anti Giants bias plus I think he's usually right.  I also find him pompous and condescending. Yesterday I listened to his podcast where I thought his criticism of Schoen and company was nonsensical. But,what  made me think about his motivations was his constant praise throughout the podcast of the Mara's including Chris and McConnel.  Thats what made me think he was trying to stay on their good side and maybe replace Schoen if things go bad.  Thus, the question.

Quote from: nb587 on July 09, 2024, 07:28:21 AMMy initial response on this thread was to defend him in part because he's always accused of having an anti Giants bias plus I think he's usually right.  I also find him pompous and condescending. Yesterday I listened to his podcast where I thought his criticism of Schoen and company was nonsensical. But,what  made me think about his motivations was his constant praise throughout the podcast of the Mara's including Chris and McConnel.  Thats what made me think he was trying to stay on their good side and maybe replace Schoen if things go bad.  Thus, the question.

I wouldn't call his critique "nonsense".  Mike has a clear vision of how he believes successful teams are built.   That vision involves the GM having an overall team-building philosophy.   What he was faulting the Giants for appearing not to have that overarching philosophy.  Rather, he saw the team making decisions on a player/case-by-case basis.   Mike doesn't feel that this approach is good for team building.  He also questioned why the Giants wanted to sign Barkley long-term a year ago, but now they couldn't afford him.  That seemed inconsistent to him. 

Where I fault Mike is his dishonest use of DJ's cap hit as a percentage of the overall team's salary cap.  The fact of the matter is that Schoen used Jones as a vehicle to borrow from future cap years.   As a result, DJ's cap hit is $8 million more this season, even though his average per season is $40 million.  Mike didn't qualify for that, and it's an important qualification.   I feel he didn't qualify it because Mike was against DJ's contract from the get-go.  So, creating a worse but false impression helps make his case.  Of course, Mike is hardly alone in such behavior, but I still don't like it. 

Quote from: MightyGiants on July 09, 2024, 08:15:58 AMI wouldn't call his critique "nonsense".  Mike has a clear vision of how he believes successful teams are built.   That vision involves the GM having an overall team-building philosophy.   What he was faulting the Giants for appearing not to have that overarching philosophy.  Rather, he saw the team making decisions on a player/case-by-case basis.   Mike doesn't feel that this approach is good for team building.  He also questioned why the Giants wanted to sign Barkley long-term a year ago, but now they couldn't afford him.  That seemed inconsistent to him. 

Where I fault Mike is his dishonest use of DJ's cap hit as a percentage of the overall team's salary cap.  The fact of the matter is that Schoen used Jones as a vehicle to borrow from future cap years.   As a result, DJ's cap hit is $8 million this season, even though his average per season is $40 million.  Mike didn't qualify for that, and it's an important qualification.   I feel he didn't qualify it because Mike was against DJ's contract from the get-go.  So, creating a worse but false impression helps make his case.  Of course Mike is hardly alone in such behavior, but I still don't like it. 

One  part of the conversation that I found nonsensical is exactly what you described with respect to Barkley is the role that Mara played.  I think the same applied to the Jones contract.  He's complimenting John Mara for a vision but criticizing Schoen for lack of while Lombardi pretends that Mara just went along with GM decisions.  There's more where I think Lombardi was full of it with respect to Young & Parcells but I'll save that for another time.

Quote from: nb587 on July 09, 2024, 09:28:53 AMOne  part of the conversation that I found nonsensical is exactly what you described with respect to Barkley is the role that Mara played.  I think the same applied to the Jones contract.  He's complimenting John Mara for a vision but criticizing Schoen for lack of while Lombardi pretends that Mara just went along with GM decisions.  There's more where I think Lombardi was full of it with respect to Young & Parcells but I'll save that for another time.

Seeing how John Mara expressed the desire to keep Barkley and Barkley is now an Eagle, it seems reasonable to suggest that Mara did what Schoen wanted.  Overall, I don't think that Lombardi was supporting John Mara's and Tim McDonnel's desire to keep Barkley as much as he appreciated the idea of having a vision of what the team was.  Lombardi also faulted the Giants for keeping McDonnell and Kevin Abrahms in light of the Giant's poor record.

Quote from: MightyGiants on July 09, 2024, 09:33:01 AMSeeing how John Mara expressed the desire to keep Barkley and Barkley is now an Eagle, it seems reasonable to suggest that Mara did what Schoen wanted.  Overall, I don't think that Lombardi was supporting John Mara's and Tim McDonnel's desire to keep Barkley as much as he appreciated the idea of having a vision of what the team was.  Lombardi also faulted the Giants for keeping McDonnell and Kevin Abrahms in light of the Giant's poor record.

I'm not understanding where this makes (which is why I think it's nonsense.  Mara and McConnell are praised for having a vision using keeping Barkley as an example while criticizing Schoen for having none.  Yet, Schoen drafted Nabors who now replaces Barkley as our #1 playmaker.  The way the league is going, WRs are much more valuable than RBs. Whose vision makes more sense? 

Biggest failure of Wilderness 2.0 has been the total failure to build a functional, if not good-to-great OL unit, consistently over the past decade and a half.

The franchise can't get out of its own way until that changes.

Quote from: spiderblue43 on July 09, 2024, 11:35:12 AMBiggest failure of Wilderness 2.0 has been the total failure to build a functional, if not good-to-great OL unit, consistently over the past decade and a half.

The franchise can't get out of its own way until that changes.

I would be happy with functional or adequate at this point.  That's the best point of the podcast.  But, Schoen has thrown resources into fixing the problem and i would wait to see how it goes before criticizing him now

Quote from: spiderblue43 on July 09, 2024, 11:35:12 AMBiggest failure of Wilderness 2.0 has been the total failure to build a functional, if not good-to-great OL unit, consistently over the past decade and a half.

The franchise can't get out of its own way until that changes.

The depressing thing about all of this, is the O-line's issues are not from lack of trying.  With the exception of Thomas (and even he struggled his first couple of seasons), the Giants just can't seem to acquire O-line talent, regardless of how much money and draft capital they invest

I'm curious what you think of Schoen's draft strategy this year with respect to the OL.  There were highly or at least decently regarded interior OL available at round 3 when we drafted the CB.  On the other hand, with Bricillo and, as you mentioned investments in Neal and Ezudu (sp).  Do you overdraft your own picks?  Do you wait and see how they and your free agents do?  Not an easy question and we did/do need a  CB? 

What's your take?  I think if the OL is not decent and costs games,  it will be borderline devastating

Quote from: nb587 on July 09, 2024, 12:34:00 PMI'm curious what you think of Schoen's draft strategy this year with respect to the OL.  There were highly or at least decently regarded interior OL available at round 3 when we drafted the CB.  On the other hand, with Bricillo and, as you mentioned investments in Neal and Ezudu (sp).  Do you overdraft your own picks?  Do you wait and see how they and your free agents do?  Not an easy question and we did/do need a  CB? 

What's your take?  I think if the OL is not decent and costs games,  it will be borderline devastating

I think you raise a valid point. In the third round, in almost any draft you can expect to get a pretty good, starting quality IOL. On the other hand, but the third round, the corners are pretty well picked through, and it's hard to find a guy who is going to be a quality starter. In short, one is a premium position, and the other isn't.

At the end of the day however, it's hard , if not impossible, to be highly critical of all this without seeing (1) how Phillips develops in the NFL and (2) how the line plays this year with the additions Schoen did make through free agency as well as how young players already on the line develop. On its face, I agree that this decision can be questioned. But it's really impossible for me to be outright critical without seeing how things pan out both with Phillips and our current linemen. And if one wanted to be outright critical, then for one's argument to be credible, one would also have to signify which IOL Schoen should have taken over Phillips, and then that player's progress in the NFL would need to be tracked as well.

You raised a fair question IMO. However there are lots of moving parts, and one can really only give a speculative opinion on this subject at this point.