Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: EDjohnst1981 on November 13, 2024, 09:10:40 AMI'm not denying it's might play a part in the decision-making process of the Giants brass.

It's just not the only factor. His play, regardless of the reasons why, deserves a benching. In my opinion, the concern that the NFLPA will successfully take action against the Giants isn't grounded in reality.

The benching is justified and will, again in my opinion, be easy for the Giants and their legal team to dismiss.

Daniel Jones play has been bad for 4 of his 5 seasons; yet, we're supposed to buy into a false narrative that he's 'broken.'  It was crystal clear 4 years ago that he was never going to become what some predicted.  It's time to move on, and the reasons for doing so are irrelevant. 

Quote from: kingm56 on November 13, 2024, 09:56:18 AMDaniel Jones play has been bad for 4 of his 5 seasons; yet, we're supposed to buy into a false narrative that he's 'broken.'  It was crystal clear 4 years ago that he was never going to become what some predicted.  It's time to move on, and the reasons for doing so are irrelevant.

He isn't broken, never was.

He makes the same mistakes and plays just as poorly as he ever had.

Quote from: MrGap92 on November 13, 2024, 10:05:15 AMHe isn't broken, never was.

He makes the same mistakes and plays just as poorly as he ever had.

I believe many held onto his first handful of games before defenses got the full book on him.  Then it was a several season decline that gets worse and worse.  Unfortunately, those who held out hope and overreacted to any little thing he did or went overboard when he turned in a decent performance. 

Quote from: Messiah717 on November 13, 2024, 10:09:21 AMI believe many held onto his first handful of games before defenses got the full book on him.  Then it was a several season decline that gets worse and worse.  Unfortunately, those who held out hope and overreacted to any little thing he did or went overboard when he turned in a decent performance. 

This.

As good as Jayden Daniels has looked this season, I expect him to take a step back next year once there is a full season of film on him.

Quote from: MrGap92 on November 13, 2024, 10:05:15 AMHe isn't broken, never was.

He makes the same mistakes and plays just as poorly as he ever had.

Some people knew this was coming at the draft!

https://x.com/realmaceblack/status/1856208605537570821?s=46&t=ztHQkdrs2C-vkXmhNZla-g

Quote from: Gmo11 on November 13, 2024, 10:27:20 AMSome people knew this was coming at the draft!

https://x.com/realmaceblack/status/1856208605537570821?s=46&t=ztHQkdrs2C-vkXmhNZla-g

Just a hater, I'm sure.

"Doing so is something the NFLPA frowns on."

However one of their "clients" Jones, a backup QB at best is making $40MM this year. Can't have it both ways. 

Quote from: T200 on November 13, 2024, 10:15:06 AMThis.

As good as Jayden Daniels has looked this season, I expect him to take a step back next year once there is a full season of film on him.

If he survives that long.  I get an RG3 vibe with him.  And a Redskins team that learned nothing from that.

Quote from: T200 on November 13, 2024, 09:25:08 AMDid the NFLPA take action against Payton for doing it to Wilson?

They got involved

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/12/31/nflpa-broncos-russell-wilson-illegal/

The NFLPA told the Broncos in an early November letter that the team's threat to bench QB Russell Wilson "if he did not agree to adjust his contract was illegal and violated the collective bargaining agreement, ... creating the possibility that the union would initiate an arbitration proceeding or litigation against the team and the league," according to Mark Maske of the WASHINGTON POST. The letter by NFLPA attorney Jeffrey Kessler was dated Nov. 4 and was "sent to the Broncos and the NFL's management council." Wilson told reporters Friday that the Broncos had "threatened in late October to bench him for the rest of the season if he did not agree to adjust his contract and address an injury guarantee" tied to a $37M offseason payment. Broncos head coach Sean Payton said last week that he had made the starting-quarterback switch for "football-related reasons, tied to attempting to win Sunday's game." Payton said that he was "not involved in any deliberations with Wilson about his contract." Under Wilson's contract, the $37M payment "becomes fully guaranteed in March" and it currently is "guaranteed against injury only." By sitting Wilson now, the Broncos "may avoid the possibility of him suffering an injury that would guarantee the payment" and make it "more difficult to trade or release him in the offseason" (WASHINGTON POST, 12/31). THE ATHLETIC's Howe & Kosmider noted if the Broncos cut Wilson in the offseason, they will "incur" an $85M dead cap hit, which would be "an NFL record for a single player" (THE ATHLETIC, 12/31).

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/01/02/denver-broncos-nflpa-russell-wilson-contract-bench

Quote from: MightyGiants on November 13, 2024, 08:07:02 AMI hope this is the case. This will allow the final 7 games to identify the other problems

Rich: IMO yours is the only reason to do it. Bob

Quote from: madbadger on November 13, 2024, 09:43:15 AM"Franchise" in name only. In reality a career backup.

Sadly, it's sometimes more than in name only as the term, Franchise QB is often attached to a guy who is signed to a new multiyear deal by the team which drafted him even if we later know better. Leave it to Our Heroes to have gotten fickle fingered.

Cheers!
 

Quote from: MightyGiants on November 13, 2024, 12:32:42 PMThey got involved

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/12/31/nflpa-broncos-russell-wilson-illegal/

The NFLPA told the Broncos in an early November letter that the team's threat to bench QB Russell Wilson "if he did not agree to adjust his contract was illegal and violated the collective bargaining agreement, ... creating the possibility that the union would initiate an arbitration proceeding or litigation against the team and the league," according to Mark Maske of the WASHINGTON POST. The letter by NFLPA attorney Jeffrey Kessler was dated Nov. 4 and was "sent to the Broncos and the NFL's management council." Wilson told reporters Friday that the Broncos had "threatened in late October to bench him for the rest of the season if he did not agree to adjust his contract and address an injury guarantee" tied to a $37M offseason payment. Broncos head coach Sean Payton said last week that he had made the starting-quarterback switch for "football-related reasons, tied to attempting to win Sunday's game." Payton said that he was "not involved in any deliberations with Wilson about his contract." Under Wilson's contract, the $37M payment "becomes fully guaranteed in March" and it currently is "guaranteed against injury only." By sitting Wilson now, the Broncos "may avoid the possibility of him suffering an injury that would guarantee the payment" and make it "more difficult to trade or release him in the offseason" (WASHINGTON POST, 12/31). THE ATHLETIC's Howe & Kosmider noted if the Broncos cut Wilson in the offseason, they will "incur" an $85M dead cap hit, which would be "an NFL record for a single player" (THE ATHLETIC, 12/31).

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/01/02/denver-broncos-nflpa-russell-wilson-contract-bench

Not relevant at all.

The Giants aren't asking him to adjust terms (thank the lord).

He's just not performing.

Quote from: EDjohnst1981 on November 13, 2024, 02:02:02 PMNot relevant at all.

The Giants aren't asking him to adjust terms (thank the lord).

He's just not performing.

Agreed. The Broncos were idiots for asking him to take a paycut coupled with a threat, especially when he was having an average to above-average season by most metrics. The Giants situation doesn't involve any such self-inflicted wound or positive play from the player being asked to take a paycut.

Quote from: Bob In PA on November 13, 2024, 01:55:38 PMRich: IMO yours is the only reason to do it. Bob

Do we really need to bench DJ to know we need to upgrade the right side of the oline and neee a complimentary back to Tracy?

Quote from: kingm56 on November 13, 2024, 02:25:55 PMDo we really need to bench DJ to know we need to upgrade the right side of the oline and neee a complimentary back to Tracy?

Benching DJ allows us to test the assumption that DJ "is the main culprit" or the main cause of their 2-8 record.  We have removed the problem, so surely there should be some expectations for victories against a pretty weak schedule in the remaining 7 games.  We get a chance to see what Schoen and Daboll have built after 3 years and a slew of high draft picks (and spotted McKinney, Barkley, Dex, A. Thomas, and Julian Love)