Jones hate among sports pundits

[MightyGiants]

Imagine finding a way to take a shot at Daniel Jones when you are writing an article entitled:

Ten traded players who will have biggest impact on 2024 NFL season



Rank 4
Brian Burns

New York Giants · DE
TRADED BY: Carolina Panthers
TRADED FOR: 2024 second- and fifth-round picks, 2025 conditional fifth-round pick (with Carolina receiving a 2024 fifth-round pick)


I thought about slotting Burns at the top of this list, and maybe I should have. Of everyone in my top 10, he seems like the safest lock to play like a star for his new team in 2024. Unlike Allen and Diggs, the 26-year-old is still squarely in his prime, and unlike Jeudy, he's a proven entity with a high floor. Burns has had a double-digit pressure rate every year of his career, per Next Gen Stats, and he should team with Kayvon Thibodeaux to boost a defense that finished 30th in pressure rate last season. The problem is, I could see Burns wrecking opponents this season and the Giants still stumbling because of offensive limitations. So, perhaps unfairly, he lands here, capped, in a way, by the lingering uncertainty around what Daniel Jones will bring to the table.

https://www.nfl.com/news/ten-traded-players-who-will-have-biggest-impact-on-2024-nfl-season



There are legitimate criticisms and concerns about Daniel Jones, and then there is an unhealthy obsession with seeking ways to put the man down.   The remarkable part is from everything we have seen of the man, he doesn't deserve the hate.  The man is among the hardest working (hardest luck) players in the NFL.  Yet there is this obsession with crapping all over him

[DaveBrown74]

Is it not fair to say that there is uncertainty around Jones this year due to his health? Look at how Barkley played one year removed from his ACL injury, and Barkley got hurt much earlier in the 2020 season than Jones did last year. When I read the bold, I took it more as being focused on that point than I did overt "hate."

Jones played poorly last year, and then he got hurt in a way that can often impact a player noticeably a year later. Both of those are facts. I don't see why saying there is uncertainty around him is deliberately hateful or even a little bit unfair, personally.

[MightyGiants]

Is it not fair to say that there is uncertainty around Jones this year due to his health?

If this was an article about Daniel Jones or the Giants, offense, then yes.  Otherwise, this question seems to create a false framing as it ignores the point that this was an article about Burns and his impact on the Giants.

[uconnjack8]

I don't think its wrong to state that if the offense performs on the same level then Burns opportunities for sacks will be limited.

Whether or not Jones should be mentioned rather than the offense as a whole is debatable.

[DaveBrown74]

If this was an article about Daniel Jones or the Giants, offense, then yes.  Otherwise, this question seems to create a false framing as it ignores the point that this was an article about Burns and his impact on the Giants.

I guess the point is that if the title of the article is "who will have the biggest impact." "Biggest impact" in this context presumably means biggest impact on wins and losses. The author seems to be saying that Burns could end up playing really well, but his ultimate impact on the Giants' record could be capped by the uncertainty around the offense, led by Daniel Jones who is coming off a bad season that ended early with a serious injury that could affect his performance in 2024.

I think if this article were written about a QB coming to a team with a bad defense, it wouldn't be unreasonable to write something like "this QB, while very good, may have a tough time leading his team to more wins this year given the uncertainty around the team's defense, which struggled materially in 2023."

"Hate" just seems like a strong word in this context.

[MightyGiants]

I think if this article were written about a QB coming to a team with a bad defense, it wouldn't be unreasonable to write something like "this QB, while very good, may have a tough time leading his team to more wins this year given the uncertainty around the team's defense, which struggled materially in 2023."

Jeff,

It's not like the 2023 disaster of an offense was all on Daniel Jones.  Hell, Jones didn't even play in the majority of games.  So your quote about "the defense" only highlights this author's obsession with Daniel Jones, as there is plenty to be concerned about on the offensive side of the ball, namely the offensive line.

Edit to add-  The Giants got to round 2 of the playoffs with Daniel Jones, so the whole commentary seems disingenuous and only an indication of the Jones hatred that is so pervasive

[Jclayton92]

Hate? The guy basically said the Giants will only go as far as Jones takes them. I think most would agree with the statement, as he is the Qb for the team currently. If it was any other nfl team that had a qb coming off an injury they'd likely say the exact same thing.

[MightyGiants]

Hate? The guy basically said the Giants will only go as far as Jones takes them. I think most would agree with the statement, as he is the Qb for the team currently. If it was any other nfl team that had a qb coming off an injury they'd likely say the exact same thing.

Did I misread the title?  Was this an article about quarterbacks?

[DaveBrown74]

Jeff,

It's not like the 2023 disaster of an offense was all on Daniel Jones.  Hell, Jones didn't even play in the majority of games.  So your quote about "the defense" only highlights this author's obsession with Daniel Jones, as there is plenty to be concerned about on the offensive side of the ball, namely the offensive line.

Edit to add-  The Giants got to round 2 of the playoffs with Daniel Jones, so the whole commentary seems disingenuous and only an indication of the Jones hatred that is so pervasive

Fair enough. He could have just highlighted the offense instead of naming a player. I suspect the reason he named Jones is that the QB is the single most important player in the offense, and Jones is coming off an injury that has been known to take two seasons to fully recover from. To me, that is not necessarily indicative of "hate", but I understand your point.

[Jclayton92]

Did I misread the title?  Was this an article about quarterbacks?

Rich You titled the thread Jones hate among sports pundits and proceeded to list one guy who was talking about Brian burns. Yes he mentioned the qb in a throwaway line but it wasn't hate.

Especially when you consider that the guy in the article talks about the team that the player is going to. Each trade the guy brings up qbs, wrs, tes, and so on for the team the player is going to so Jones wasn't singled out and wasn't the only qb discussed so you're making it into something it absolutely isn't.

[MightyGiants]

Rich You titled the thread Jones hate among sports pundits and proceeded to list one guy who was talking about Brian burns. Yes he mentioned the qb in a throwaway line but it wasn't hate.

Especially when you consider that the guy in the article talks about the team that the player is going to. Each trade the guy brings up qbs, wrs, tes, and so on for the team the player is going to so Jones wasn't singled out and wasn't the only qb discussed so you're making it into something it absolutely isn't.

Jess,

That wasn't a throwaway line, as you called it; that was an indication of the obsession and hatred some have for Daniel Jones, as there was no reasonable explanation for why the author felt the need to take that potshot.  It's not like Burns is even an offensive player

[AZGiantFan]

There are legitimate criticisms and concerns about Daniel Jones, and then there is an unhealthy obsession with seeking ways to put the man down.   The remarkable part is from everything we have seen of the man, he doesn't deserve the hate.  The man is among the hardest working (hardest luck) players in the NFL.  Yet there is this obsession with crapping all over him

And it's not just the media.  The calls are coming from within (this) house.

[AZGiantFan]

Did I misread the title?  Was this an article about quarterbacks?

And if the author is going to talk about the offense wouldn't make more sense to talk about the historically bad OL that played all 17 games than the QB who played 5 games?

[Jclayton92]

Jess,

That wasn't a throwaway line, as you called it; that was an indication of the obsession and hatred some have for Daniel Jones, as there was no reasonable explanation for why the author felt the need to take that potshot.  It's not like Burns is even an offensive player

"So, perhaps unfairly, he lands here, capped, in a way, by the lingering uncertainty around what Daniel Jones will bring to the table."

Where in that is there hate? You automatically assume he is speaking to Jones play when he could simply be speaking about his health. So without knowing the context it is beyond ridiculous to assume the guy is slamming Jones.

The author brings up major players for every team that the player is going to. They bring up A Rodgers on the Hassan Reddick trade, all the Titans offensive weapons when discussing the Sneed trade, and so on. Jones was not singled out or treated any different than anyone else in the article.

Lingering uncertainty to what Jones brings to the table is more than likely referring to his health.

[MightyGiants]

"So, perhaps unfairly, he lands here, capped, in a way, by the lingering uncertainty around what Daniel Jones will bring to the table."

Where in that is there hate? You automatically assume he is speaking to Jones play when he could simply be speaking about his health. So without knowing the context it is beyond ridiculous to assume the guy is slamming Jones.

The author brings up major players for every team that the player is going to. They bring up A Rodgers on the Hassan Reddick trade, all the Titans offensive weapons when discussing the Sneed trade, and so on. Jones was not singled out or treated any different than anyone else in the article.

Lingering uncertainty to what Jones brings to the table is more than likely referring to his health.

I saw both you and @DaveBrown74 bring up injuries.  That seems to be an invention to let the author off the hook, though, as the author never suggested he had injury concerns.  He said "limitations," which implies talent, rather than "uncertainty," which one might claim is an injury issue (even if the author never mentioned injury concerns