Interesting Poll Results from Talkin Giants

[H-Town G-Fan]

The nearly 80% support isn't an "inference"; it's literally the result of the poll.  As I said, in my 4 decades plus of watching football, I never saw such high levels of support after two terrible seasons, especially as they don't have a Super Bowl or deep playoff run to their name.

To the point in bold, in the NFL, there is only one way head coaches and GMs are "held accountable," and that is being fired when they perform badly.  There is no suspensions, pay cuts, or probation punishments in the NFL.

No, it's not literally the result of the poll. The results are bench Jones, don't fire Daboll/Schoen. Anything further about a "accountability" concept, which you say is binary (fire/not fire), is from you. You're the one defining accountability ("there is only one way head coaches and GMs are 'held accountable'), and I fundamentally disagree. Plenty of times we see coaches have to fire their coordinators as a proxy for their failures and a statement that they need to improve performance or they're next. Suffice it to say, there's at least reasonable disagreement there... which means you shouldn't apply your definition to the results of this poll. If you want to, I can't stop you, but I'm not required to agree that's what the poll reflects.

As for your comment about focusing on the last two seasons and ignoring 2022, I think the phrase used to describe the NFL is-  "What have you done for me lately?"

Do you think the poll-participants are unaware of recent performance? Of course they know how bad the Giants have been. And they still voted the way they did. If you're suggesting they should have voted differently based on this idiom, I'm not the one you should direct that complaint to.

On a related note, you have pointed to the unpopularity of Daniel Jones.  Which pair was in charge when they signed him to a veteran contract?  Seems like a bit of a disconnect there.

Again, the questions should not be for me, but for the poll-participants. Are you again suggesting that they were unaware of who signed him? I'm of the belief that they're probably acutely aware of the circumstances surrounding Jones re-signing and made their votes in light of that information. As to how it factors in, you can't really judge that from this limited poll.

I think you feel the participants shouldn't have voted the way they did, or more specifically should have voted to fire Schoen/Daboll to hold them accountable. As for me, I don't particularly care about it. If it said people want to fire Daboll/Schoen, I also wouldn't care since there's reasonable arguments on both sides. Just because I happen to fall on a side doesn't mean I think its outlandish the other side exists.

[T200]

Tim,

You seem to be ignoring the whole mischaracterization thing. 

Regardless of your intention to attack or not attack, I felt attacked. I am entitled to my feelings. I tried to make peace by using a weaker term, but you only jumped on that effort as proof that I am not entitled to feel attacked when you have mischaracterized what I have said and my positions (as the person holding the positions, I think I am the subject matter expert).

It's not uncommon for people to take offense to how they are characterized. That's why it's a good idea to avoid that approach.

Mischaracterization is not an attack. You can dance around and tiptoe all you want. Feeling attacked and claiming I attacked you are two different things. You told the BBH, Twitter and FB world who follow this page that I attacked you. That is libel. And you keep doubling down instead of doing the right thing and apologizing.

I did not attack you or your stance.

[Ed Vette]

Tim,

You seem to be ignoring the whole mischaracterization thing. 

Regardless of your intention to attack or not attack, I felt attacked. I am entitled to my feelings. I tried to make peace by using a weaker term, but you only jumped on that effort as proof that I am not entitled to feel attacked when you have mischaracterized what I have said and my positions (as the person holding the positions, I think I am the subject matter expert).

It's not uncommon for people to take offense to how they are characterized. That's why it's a good idea to avoid that approach.

 

Whether you feel that way or not, Tim did not attack you, and he certainly did not intent to offend you. This is what happens when people dig their heels in over a stupid point of discussion. What was accomplished is yet another thread is derailed. Arguing over how to interpret a Poll? Really? Come on guys, let's move on to more productive discussions and leave the debates to the knuckleheads who think they are running the country.

[T200]

I think you feel the participants shouldn't have voted the way they did, or more specifically should have voted to fire Schoen/Daboll to hold them accountable. As for me, I don't particularly care about it. If it said people want to fire Daboll/Schoen, I also wouldn't care since there's reasonable arguments on both sides. Just because I happen to fall on a side doesn't mean I think its outlandish the other side exists.

Careful... that may be taken as an attack.

[MightyGiants]

@T200 and @Ed Vette

To respect Ed's wishes, this will be my last comment on the matter.  I went to AI to ask their opinion on the matter

Is mischaracterization of a person's comments a personal attack?

Mischaracterizing a person's comments can be problematic, but whether it's considered a personal attack depends on context and intent.

If it's done unintentionally, it might simply be a misunderstanding or miscommunication rather than an attack. People often accidentally misinterpret or misrepresent others' words without intending harm.

If it's done intentionally to mislead others, paint the person in a negative light, or distort their views, it can be considered a personal attack. This form of mischaracterization can harm a person's reputation or credibility, making it an indirect way of attacking them personally.

So, while not all mischaracterizations are personal attacks, purposeful misrepresentation with negative intent can be seen as one.

To Tim's credit, he made an effort to say he wasn't attacking me.  To my credit, the mischaracterizations were so far from reality that it was hard to see them as unintentional, plus there was no acknowledgment of his mistake.

Either way, it is best to avoid this road.   I am in favor of moving past this.

[MightyGiants]

No, it's not literally the result of the poll. The results are bench Jones, don't fire Daboll/Schoen. Anything further about a "accountability" concept, which you say is binary (fire/not fire), is from you. You're the one defining accountability ("there is only one way head coaches and GMs are 'held accountable'), and I fundamentally disagree. Plenty of times we see coaches have to fire their coordinators as a proxy for their failures and a statement that they need to improve performance or they're next. Suffice it to say, there's at least reasonable disagreement there... which means you shouldn't apply your definition to the results of this poll. If you want to, I can't stop you, but I'm not required to agree that's what the poll reflects.

Do you think the poll-participants are unaware of recent performance? Of course they know how bad the Giants have been. And they still voted the way they did. If you're suggesting they should have voted differently based on this idiom, I'm not the one you should direct that complaint to.

Again, the questions should not be for me, but for the poll-participants. Are you again suggesting that they were unaware of who signed him? I'm of the belief that they're probably acutely aware of the circumstances surrounding Jones re-signing and made their votes in light of that information. As to how it factors in, you can't really judge that from this limited poll.

I think you feel the participants shouldn't have voted the way they did, or more specifically should have voted to fire Schoen/Daboll to hold them accountable. As for me, I don't particularly care about it. If it said people want to fire Daboll/Schoen, I also wouldn't care since there's reasonable arguments on both sides. Just because I happen to fall on a side doesn't mean I think its outlandish the other side exists.

First, I need to acknowledge a mistake I made. It's 70% support for Schoen and Daboll, not "80%" as I said earlier.

To the points you made, in light of the last two seasons and the duo's signing of Daniel Jones, one would normally expect fans to either be in favor of firing one or both, or the support level would be in the 50s, not 70%. 

That is the point I am making.   I attribute this strong support by fans to the strong focus/spotlight on Daniel Jones, which distracts fans from the other serious problems with the team and the organization.

I will add one thing that I just thought of, which might be skewing the data.  In terms of commentators and beat reporters,, I would say Bobby and Justin probably are among the most supportive of Schoen and Daboll.  Since the poll is likely mostly their listeners, the views they express may be skewing the results (compared to the fanbase at large).

[Ed Vette]

First, I need to acknowledge a mistake I made. It's 70% support for Schoen and Daboll, not "80%" as I said earlier.

To the points you made, in light of the last two seasons and the duo's signing of Daniel Jones, one would normally expect fans to either be in favor of firing one or both, or the support level would be in the 50s, not 70%. 

That is the point I am making.   I attribute this strong support by fans to the strong focus/spotlight on Daniel Jones, which distracts fans from the other serious problems with the team and the organization.

I will add one thing that I just thought of, which might be skewing the data.  In terms of commentators and beat reporters,, I would say Bobby and Justin probably are among the most supportive of Schoen and Daboll.  Since the poll is likely mostly their listeners, the views they express may be skewing the results (compared to the fanbase at large).

I agree, it depends on who you listen to, and X, FB and Instagram feed you more of what it perceives is your appetite. Do that survey here and you get a result, do it on Twitter from a member of the Daboll Basher Media and it may be a totally different result.

[uconnjack8]

Not sure I see these results as surprising and/or interesting.  It's a bunch of fans voting after a dreadful performance by the QB against the league's worst defense.

I see it as predictable.

[MightyGiants]

Not sure I see these results as surprising and/or interesting.  It's a bunch of fans voting after a dreadful performance by the QB against the league's worst defense.

I see it as predictable.

I think that is a fair point.  Although, it's funny how there is so little talk of the Panther's running back exceeding his season-high in rush yards by nearly 40 yards against the Giants or the missed 43-yard FG by Gano (these days, 43 yards is a gimmie).  I will concede that it takes second-level thinking to wonder why the team's backup quarterback was so bad that he didn't start the second half of the game after DJ's poor first half.   

[Ed Vette]

I think that is a fair point.  Although, it's funny how there is so little talk of the Panther's running back exceeding his season-high in rush yards by nearly 40 yards against the Giants or the missed 43-yard FG by Gano (these days, 43 yards is a gimmie).  I will concede that it takes second-level thinking to wonder why the team's backup quarterback was so bad that he didn't start the second half of the game after DJ's poor first half.   

Daboll pulled that card once and to do it again with the situation as it is, would be unfair to Lock who never prepared for the game. If Lock had a bad showing, it would be worse. I think he made the right decision to hold off and digest it over the bye. I'm sure he was prepared for that outcome and made a decision going into the game. 

[MightyGiants]

Daboll pulled that card once and to do it again with the situation as it is, would be unfair to Lock who never prepared for the game. If Lock had a bad showing, it would be worse. I think he made the right decision to hold off and digest it over the bye. I'm sure he was prepared for that outcome and made a decision going into the game. 

Ed,

You very well could be right. Although, I can't help but think, "What if DJ got hurt?"   Lock is a veteran QB.  Daboll should be preparing his backup to perform well if he is called upon to play.   Admittedly he won't get the amount of prep work a starter gets, but it should be enough that Lock could be at least 90% or better.  In light of the situation, I have to think that 90% of a competent backup QB would be better than what we saw from Daniel Jones in the first half of the game against the league's worst defense.

[EDjohnst1981]

Ed,

You very well could be right. Although, I can't help but think, "What if DJ got hurt?"   Lock is a veteran QB.  Daboll should be preparing his backup to perform well if he is called upon to play.   Admittedly he won't get the amount of prep work a starter gets, but it should be enough that Lock could be at least 90% or better.  In light of the situation, I have to think that 90% of a competent backup QB would be better than what we saw from Daniel Jones in the first half of the game against the league's worst defense.

I think that an Andy Dalton-type wins you that game.

Although as I explained earlier. I can absolutely see why the regime has such support.

[Ed Vette]

Ed,

You very well could be right. Although, I can't help but think, "What if DJ got hurt?"   Lock is a veteran QB.  Daboll should be preparing his backup to perform well if he is called upon to play.   Admittedly he won't get the amount of prep work a starter gets, but it should be enough that Lock could be at least 90% or better.  In light of the situation, I have to think that 90% of a competent backup QB would be better than what we saw from Daniel Jones in the first half of the game against the league's worst defense.

Of course, Lock is ready to the point of replacing Jones in an injury situation. That's emergency. Pulling him because of performance a second time, becomes a permanent decision in a meaningless game. Lock would be best prepared practicing with the team and working with the game plan for him to show his best. Having lock succeed or not succeed have an effect on the team as a whole, and I'm sure Daboll knows, his job. 

Also, would it be fair to Jones who they are paying big $$$, to not give him the chance to work his way out of the hole? Especially knowing his job is on the line. If that game had significant consequences, then perhaps his decision would be different.

[AZGiantFan]

I think that is a fair point.  Although, it's funny how there is so little talk of the Panther's running back exceeding his season-high in rush yards by nearly 40 yards against the Giants . . .

Probably because the Giants went from 31st in the league giving up 4.7 YPC last year to 32nd in the league giving up 5.3 YPC this year.  So there's little talk about the Panther's RB's performance because, given the Giants' pathetic run D, it wasn't really unexpected.

[y_so_blu]

Talkin' Giants

@TalkinGiants
Giants Bye Week Poll Results (Twitter/IG)

Should Joe Schoen be Fired?
Yes: 6,347 Votes 30.9%
No: 14,170 Votes 69.1%

Should Brian Daboll be Fired?
Yes: 6,368 Votes 28.7%
No: 15,816 Votes 71.3%

Should Daniel Jones be Benched?
Yes: 21,297 Votes 88.6%
No: 2,733 Votes 11.4%
8:30 AM · Nov 12, 2024
·
2,390
 Views

https://x.com/TalkinGiants/status/1856328741602934795


When I see results like this, I can't help but think of my speculation that Schoen and Daboll keep starting Daniel Jones because he becomes the focus of almost all the criticism and gives them cover.

Objectively, a head coach who won only 6 out of 17 games last season and is on pace to win only 3 or 4 out of 17 games this season wouldn't normally get the high level (at least, I think it's quite high) of support from the fanbase.  Even Schoen, in light of only 1 good draft out of three and 2 consecutive losing seasons, is enjoying a rather impressive level of fan support.

I agree. Jones does objectively stink, but Schoen and Daboll tethered themselves to him with that contract--when they didn't have to--and are now using his smell to cover their own.