Evan Neal was a beast of a run blocker

[MightyGiants]

https://x.com/FilmTalkFB/status/1879152090683265270

of course, that is balanced with an terrible 49.6 grade for pass-blocking


It seems like a no-brainer to move Neal to guard and see what he can do better with the easier pass-blocking assignments that guards tend to face.

[President Rick]

everyone on this board sees that's the thing to do.  why don't the coaches?

[MightyGiants]

everyone on this board sees that's the thing to do.  why don't the coaches?

We don't know how much this is on the coaches and how much this is on the GM.  I think it's worth remembering that moving Neal to guard in the hope that he can be functional is an admission of failure of the Giant's front office in terms of scouting Neal and drafting him 7th overall.   So has Schoen discouraged the move, or did two O-line coaches and Daboll believe that Neal could be a functional OT.

In fairness, this past season, the Giants had more resources and available resources for the interior O-line than they did for the tackle position.  So an alternative explanation is that they left Neal at OT because they didn't have proper depth behind the starting OTs

[Gmo11]

We don't know how much this is on the coaches and how much this is on the GM.  I think it's worth remembering that moving Neal to guard in the hope that he can be functional is an admission of failure of the Giant's front office in terms of scouting Neal and drafting him 7th overall.   So has Schoen discouraged the move, or did two O-line coaches and Daboll believe that Neal could be a functional OT.

In fairness, this past season, the Giants had more resources and available resources for the interior O-line than they did for the tackle position.  So an alternative explanation is that they left Neal at OT because they didn't have proper depth behind the starting OTs

I know that tackles are the premiere position and that you wouldn't draft a guard at 7 under most circumstances...so what you're saying as far as an admission of failure is correct.  However.  If they moved him to guard and he had a Becton-like resurgence...that pick wouldn't really be a bust to me any more. I think having a top level guard, even if he was picked at #7, makes that a solid pick and one less position the Giants have to worry about upgrading. 

I have no earthly idea why they haven't at least LOOKED at him there to see if there is something.  And it's entirely possible he's just as bad there too, but at least see it with your own eyes.

[Bob In PA]

It seems like a no-brainer to move Neal to guard and see what he can do better with the easier pass-blocking assignments that guards tend to face.

Rich: There IS a problem with moving him to guard other than what's been mentioned.

He stinks as a pass-blocker because of technique and apparently because he just doesn't "get it" with regard to stunts and blitzes and "thinking on his feet" while under the stress and speed of the pro game.

At tackle, you almost always know WHO to block. At guard, depending on what the defense does (and they will do a lot if the Giants move him to guard) it can get really complicated, although it's EASIER to block the guys on the inside, generally speaking. So in addition to having technical faults, Neal at guard would have the additional problem of determining who to block, which is not always the defender lined up directly in front of him. If I had inside information I'd be more certain, but my guess is that the Giants have no doubt that he would stink even worse at pass-protection on the inside of the offensive line.

Bob

[MightyGiants]

I know that tackles are the premiere position and that you wouldn't draft a guard at 7 under most circumstances...so what you're saying as far as an admission of failure is correct.  However.  If they moved him to guard and he had a Becton-like resurgence...that pick wouldn't really be a bust to me any more. I think having a top level guard, even if he was picked at #7, makes that a solid pick and one less position the Giants have to worry about upgrading. 

I have no earthly idea why they haven't at least LOOKED at him there to see if there is something.  And it's entirely possible he's just as bad there too, but at least see it with your own eyes.

Good points, and the fact that under Daboll, there has been a passion for crosstraining O-linemen makes it even more puzzling.

[uconnjack8]

I know that tackles are the premiere position and that you wouldn't draft a guard at 7 under most circumstances...so what you're saying as far as an admission of failure is correct.  However.  If they moved him to guard and he had a Becton-like resurgence...that pick wouldn't really be a bust to me any more. I think having a top level guard, even if he was picked at #7, makes that a solid pick and one less position the Giants have to worry about upgrading. 

I have no earthly idea why they haven't at least LOOKED at him there to see if there is something.  And it's entirely possible he's just as bad there too, but at least see it with your own eyes.

Even if he were just a competent guard that didn't hurt the team the pick wouldn't be awful. 

[Philosophers]

Even if he were just a competent guard that didn't hurt the team the pick wouldn't be awful. 

We need great OL play so if it comes from Guard from a failed OT, I dont care.  What sucks is keeping O'Neal at a position he clearly cannot play.

[nb587]

It would surprise me if Neal isnt moved to RG during the offseason unless they trade hom. At RT, he lost alot of time because of injuries and I'm of a mind that moving him in midseason would be difficult for him and his linemates.  Giving himma preseason at a different position makes sense

[Ed Vette]

How many times does the debate have to be rehashed? Let's start with what he's getting paid in 2025, again. Would you pay that to a Guard Prospect?

[Philosophers]

How many times does the debate have to be rehashed? Let's start with what he's getting paid in 2025, again. Would you pay that to a Guard Prospect?

Confused by your point Ed.  He's still on his rookie contract.  If he turns out to be a good Guard why does it matter?

[Ed Vette]

Confused by your point Ed.  He's still on his rookie contract.  If he turns out to be a good Guard why does it matter?

He's getting paid 7.8 million dollars this year as a failed RT and then a project at Guard.

[jgrangers2]

He's getting paid 7.8 million dollars this year as a failed RT and then a project at Guard.

But why does this matter? Unless he gets cut, he's getting paid that regardless of where he plays. I'd rather he be a good Guard than a failed RT regardless of cost.

[Ed Vette]

But why does this matter? Unless he gets cut, he's getting paid that regardless of where he plays. I'd rather he be a good Guard than a failed RT regardless of cost.

You're correct, his Roster Bonus is fully Guaranteed.

[DaveBrown74]

The $7.8mm is a sunk cost. That's gone no matter what. If he's any good at guard (which I do not know to be the case), go ahead and try him there.

But please, if he's going to play anywhere at all, put him on the shortest of short leashes. I've had enough of Evan Neal.