Big Blue Huddle

Other teams retain their players while having big contracts.  Giants pass then players do well elsewhere.  You cant be good if you keep tearing down foundational pieces.

Because there is no culture in place and therefore no direction.

In large part because there is no autonomy below the ownership level to put a true plan in place and stick with it.

There are too many feelings involved. You cannot make solid business decisions when you allow feelings to get in the way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Quote from: Philosophers on November 26, 2024, 01:58:27 PMOther teams retain their players while having big contracts.  Giants pass then players do well elsewhere.  You cant be good if you keep tearing down foundational pieces.

Phil

I have been saying this until I am blue in the face. I mentioned this yesterday also, basically why, with a team with not much talent, we continue to let that talent just walk away. This is not just last year but a great example. I have never seen any other team just let their best players just walk out the door and many fans say they wanted too much money to be resigned. Where is the imagination and creativity that all the other teams do to retain their best players? It is truly head-scratching.

Quote from: LennG on November 26, 2024, 02:38:32 PMPhil

I have been saying this until I am blue in the face. I mentioned this yesterday also, basically why, with a team with not much talent, we continue to let that talent just walk away. This is not just last year but a great example. I have never seen any other team just let their best players just walk out the door and many fans say they wanted too much money to be resigned. Where is the imagination and creativity that all the other teams do to retain their best players? It is truly head-scratching.

I agree 100%. Some of the "let them all go" fans seem to think it's their own money that's being saved. I'm just glad that after years of screaming to the moon about all of our drafted starters leaving a lot of Giants fans are finally waking up and seeing what I have been seeing. We are getting embarrassed weekly by not only what the Giants do but by what Barkley does and now McKinney.

Apparently Schoen's belief is that you don't spend a lot of money on safeties and running backs. See .. we got a chance to grab Chris Hubbard!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote from: todge on November 26, 2024, 04:25:49 PMApparently Schoen's belief is that you don't spend a lot of money on safeties and running backs. See .. we got a chance to grab Chris Hubbard!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 Ted, we can agree on this one. I can understand about Barkley. I may not agree, but from what we saw on Hard Knocks, Barkley was really never even in the plans. Why, I have no idea but I would assume that knowing they have to start Jones, and with Jones's ability not to throw the ball more than 5-6 yards, Barkley still would have absolutely no chance on this team. As I said in another thread, a good RB needs a QB who can make throws to get the defense out of the box to stop the run. Schoen was saddled with Jones, so he felt losing Barkley made some sense.
Why he didn't pay McKinney is, to me, a bad decision. yes, he wanted top dollar and we really didn't have it, but for a player like McKinney, you simply cannot just let them walk away. You have to be creative and keep your best players regardless if it breaks the bank.

There is no answer in the world that will convince me we should not have retained Barkley, a top 4 player at his position.  DJ simply did not show enough to gamble on him.  Barkley had.

Eagles have how many vets signed at big dollars across both O and D.

Frequent repeated regime changes. 

McKinney was getting crabby and I don't think he wanted to stay here.

Quote from: Trench on November 26, 2024, 08:48:08 PMMcKinney was getting crabby and I don't think he wanted to stay here.

That's fine and very well might be true...but here's what bothers me about this reasoning- as I've seen it applied to numerous players over the years (including Saquon)- Why aren't we asking the obvious question:  Why don't our top tier players want to play here anymore?  What is it the organization has done (or not done) to turn these players away?  And....how do we fix that?

My main worry for improvement is that the word has gotten out among the players about how terrible the organization has treated them.  There are many examples- and just as recently as the decision to sign Drew Lock to a significant contract to be the #2, list him as the #2 all year, then when the starter is gone/out he gets skipped over.  Like it or not, that's the kind of stuff that players REALLY pay attention to (like how they REALLY pay attention to how their star player and captain who worked his ass off to get onto the field after injury was essentially turned away, only to be killing it elsewhere). 

Quote from: Philosophers on November 26, 2024, 08:28:54 PMThere is no answer in the world that will convince me we should not have retained Barkley, a top 4 player at his position.  DJ simply did not show enough to gamble on him.  Barkley had.

Eagles have how many vets signed at big dollars across both O and D.

You're talking about Barkley on the currently 9-2 Eagles who has already rushed for an average of 127 Y/G in 11 games which is more than half again greater than he averaged in his 6 seasons with the 34-64 Giants? If he was still playing for current 2-9 Giants team, or anything like it, we wouldn't be talking about him except perhaps as to wonder why Gettleman didn't take Sam Darnold instead? No, it really wouldn't have made much difference although now after 7 years they might yet look to give Darnold a chance to find out. 

Cheers!

Quote from: Painter on November 26, 2024, 10:24:05 PMYou're talking about Barkley on the currently 9-2 Eagles who has already rushed for an average of 127 Y/G in 11 games which is more than half again greater than he averaged in his 6 seasons with the 34-64 Giants? If he was still playing for current 2-9 Giants team, or anything like it, we wouldn't be talking about him except perhaps as to wonder why Gettleman didn't take Sam Darnold instead? No, it really wouldn't have made much difference although now after 7 years they might yet look to give Darnold a chance to find out. 

Cheers!

No because Imd be passing the ball to him at least 5 times per game moving him around everywhere and giving him 12-15 carries and committing one 1-3 round pick every year on an OL until it was fixed.

Quote from: Philosophers on November 26, 2024, 10:32:05 PMNo because Imd be passing the ball to him at least 5 times per game moving him around everywhere and giving him 12-15 carries and committing one 1-3 round pick every year on an OL until it was fixed.

Who are you talking about? It can't be Barkley. I'll be polite and simply say, I don't follow you, get what you're saying, Joseph.

Cheers!

Quote from: Painter on November 26, 2024, 11:21:05 PMWho are you talking about? It can't be Barkley. I'll be polite and simply say, I don't follow you, get what you're saying, Joseph.

Cheers!

Larry - I am saying if I have Barkley, I'd build my offense around him.

Quote from: Philosophers on November 26, 2024, 01:58:27 PMOther teams retain their players while having big contracts.  Giants pass then players do well elsewhere.  You cant be good if you keep tearing down foundational pieces.

The bigger problem is that players leaving the Giants play better than they play with the Giants.  As a result, it looks like the team struck out when it comes to player movement