Eli is good, but he will never be good enough

by Ed Valentine on Nov 13, 2007 7:16 AM EST in News Comment 32 comments

Let's address this topic and then move on to what, hopefully, will be a good final seven games.

I have come to believe, firmly, that the New York Giants never should have traded for Eli Manning.

That is not to say Eli is a bad player. He's not. He's an average to above-average NFL quarterback. With the right players around him a team can win.

After four years, though, I have seen enough with Eli to believe he will never justify being the No. 1 pick in the 2004 draft.

By extension, he will never justify the king's ransom then-Giants General Manager Ernie Accorsi paid to get him from the San Diego Chargers.

When Accorsi looked at Eli he had visions of Johnny Unitas, visions that Eli would be the next unforgettable NFL quarterback. So, he gave up the Giants No. 1 pick (4th overall), which was quarterback Philip Rivers, a 2005 first-round pick the Chargers used to select all-world linebacker Shawne Merriman, a 2004 third-round pick (San diego selected kicker Nate Kaeding) and a 2005 fifth-round pick.

The Giants would have been better off to simply draft Roethlisberger with that No. 4 pick, and keep the other draft choices. No guarantee the Giants would have picked them, but how good would Merriman and Kaeding (85% on field goals for his career) look in blue?

A straight up comparison of Roethlisberger and Manning tells you Big Ben is a better player. He has a Super Bowl title, a 63% career completion percentage and a QB rating of 110. Eli has a couple of playoff losses, has never completed 60% and has a career rating of 78.6.

Add to that Roethlisberger's toughness, blue-collar personality and ability to make plays on the move (like that guy the Giants faced Sunday) would suit the Giants well.

None of this is to say that Eli is a bad player. He isn't. I've been in his corner, waiting for the day he turned the corner and became a star. Now, I don't think that day is going to come.

Eli made some marvelous throws Sunday against Dallas, and has had moments in his 3½ seasons where he has looked tremendous.

That's just it, though. They are moments. Many average quarterbacks have 'moments' or streaks if they are around long enough.

If Eli had been a mid- first-round pick, or if Roethlisberger had gone first and Eli was left at No. 4 in 2004 I don't think he would be judged so harshly.

Yet, he lives in the shadow of his brother Peyton, one of the best to ever play. He lives in the shadow of Roethlisberger, who already has what Eli is trying to get.

Thanks to Accorsi, he lives in the shadow of Unitas and a trade he can never justify.

Simply, he's a good quarterback burdened by unrealistic expectations.

0 recs | Comment 32 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I agree, but

hindsight is 20/20. I mean, the Giants actually drafted Philip Rivers, and I have a feeling that even if they didn't trade for Eli, Rivers was gonna be the pick, not Roethlisberger. And I'd take Eli over Rivers any day (Rivers had like 5 good games last year, and was awful down the stretch...LDT made him look a lot better than he actually is). And, as much as I wish the Giants had taken Big Ben instead of Eli, at the time, I was a HUGE proponent of Eli, and I really didn't expect Roethlisberger to be that good, and certainly not this soon. It's not like the Giants were the only ones who thought Eli was the best player in that draft. I still think the Giants can win with Eli, as long as he is surrounded with the right talent, I don't think he's gonna carry a team for more than a few quarters. I mean, we were expecting a Dan Marino or a John Elway, and we got a Phil Simms instead...I can live with that. If Eli wins just 1 Super Bowl as a Giants QB, he'll be worth that pick, and I think if the team makes some good moves this offseason, they can be legitimate SB contenders next year (not that I'm giving up on this season already, b/c anything can happen, but right now the Cowboys are clearly better than the Giants, and the Patriots are clearly better than the 'Boys)

by cjmulrain on Nov 13, 2007 9:33 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Rivers

I agree that I would rather have Eli, but at least we wouldn't have given up all those picks for Rivers. Then we might have a better all round team. Tough call though because we don't know who the Giants would have picked with those picks.

Now that I've excepted that Eli will never be an elite QB as well, I'm ok with it too. The Giants have a good team and I think they're going in the right direction. We can win with Eli, although I still think that your idea of getting another QB to push him is a good one.

If I'm going to break them, I'm going to break them both. - LT

by potroast on Nov 13, 2007 9:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Picks

Like I've said, the Giants CAN win w/Eli. They would be better, though, with Rivers or Roethlisberger AND Merriman. Hindsight is 20/20, yes. My only other real point is that Eli is a fine QB, just not the QB Accorsi thought he was trading for.

by Ed Valentine on Nov 13, 2007 10:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I could be wrong, but I think the Giants drafted

Rivers because that was the Guy SD wanted. If they hadn't traded for Eli, I don't know who they would have chosen. As for Eli, I said at the time it was a mistake. What I was thinking was that if they gave Collins the offensive line support he needed, they'd be able to go to the SB. Well, they solved the offensive line problems (although Dallas got good pressure on Eli w/o choosing high OL draft picks), but still.... I've gone back and forth on Eli but come to the same conclusion as EtVal. The mistake was Accorsi's and was prompted by his early exposure to and worship of Johnny U combined with his burning desire to find a QB who could be mentioned in the same breath as the man who many consider to be the best ever. I believe the wasted pick for Dave Brown was similarly motivated.

by george cronin on Nov 13, 2007 2:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

I remember reading comments by Accorsi, though I can't find them, that he would have taken Roethlisberger if he had not been able to get Eli. That is why I think Big Ben is always the main guy Eli should be compared to.

by Ed Valentine on Nov 13, 2007 2:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

this is a fair assesment

i am in admited eli waffeler. at the end of last year, i wanted to eject him into outer space with most of the rest of the team. this year i feel like there is still hope. but realistically eli is not going be what we had hoped for.

by DieEaglesDie on Nov 13, 2007 11:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

oh please enough...

with the Merriman and stupid kicker scenarios, it's very unrealistic. So you deemed last Sunday the day that Eli had to turn the corner and now there is no looking back? Wow, I know it was a big game but didn't know it was career threatening. He played just okay, and I was most dissapointed that he didn't make more plays while under duress. It happens. Will happen again, just like it does to almost every single QB.

www.billkohut.com

by bk0831 on Nov 13, 2007 12:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

All I'm saying

is that it's time to realize that good is the best we are likely to get from Eli. I doubt we are never going to get elite, Hall of Fame, unforgettable, top 10 of all-time play from him. That's OK, it's just that those were the expectations Accorsi set when he made the trade.

by Ed Valentine on Nov 13, 2007 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely, ETVAL

Accorsi's on the record for saying as much. He was just as delusional about Dave Brown. Aside from his QB obssession, Accorsi was a damn good GM.

by george cronin on Nov 13, 2007 2:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

good enough

I don't think anyone is saying that the game was career threatening or that Eli has to turn the corner in one game. It's just becoming more apparent that he'll never be an elite QB.

If I'm going to break them, I'm going to break them both. - LT

by potroast on Nov 13, 2007 4:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dave Brown..........

Was picked by George Young.

www.billkohut.com

by bk0831 on Nov 13, 2007 4:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

George Young

was the GM, but Ernie had great influnce over his mentor at this point in their carrers. I think that Ernie talked George into it, just like Reese talked Ernie in taking Osi (thank god)

by george cronin on Nov 13, 2007 5:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Good vs. Above Average

Either way, the G-men ended up with a guy that was an upgrade over Kerry Collins. I loved Kerry in his hey-day, but the fact was he was getting old, he was completely immobile and he was never going to be anything more than above average.

Sure, they could have taken Rivers or R-berger, but it's not like either one of them is Unitas: redux either. Rivers has terrible footwork and an awful release point and R-berger has always been and always will be a caretaker. He's not asked to lift the team on his back. Just to get the first down when Parker and Davenport can't. Who knows how he would be faring in a system that's still run-first, but not nearly to the same extent.

I also think we need to see what happens when he has a completely healthy WR corps, especially when either Steve Smith or Sinorice is healthy enough to show if they can be the speed threat the Giants need.

by GiantTarHeel on Nov 13, 2007 4:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Fair points

I only brought this up because Ernie Accorsi told us Eli was Unitas. It's clear he's not. He's a good QB, just not one who will ever be immortal.

by Ed Valentine on Nov 13, 2007 5:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

in time

He will be comfortable and decisive in the scheme of what the Giants are trying to do. I hope they keep the same staff all around and build on what they have. Point is,i see it that Eli is going to hit his stride as the team does, a balanced offense/defense.

by johnd134 on Nov 13, 2007 4:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

hmmm

how long am i going to have to wait for Eli to "hit his stride"? another four years? im getting old...

by SBakerTheTouchdownMaker on Nov 13, 2007 6:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Eli: Consolation and Dilemma

Consolation.
There have been quite a few #1 pick QBs and a load of first rounders that never made in in the NFL. Eli doesn't belong to this group.
Dilemma
His salary. Someone suggested bringing in another QB for competition. Fine, but to be viable, the candidate should be worthy of a fairly hefty salary. How much money can you earmark to the QB position? (BTW, haven't the Giants extended Eli's contract?) His salary also seems to preclude unloading him in a trade. Eli seems to be the kind of QB who could go to the SB if surrounded by a bevy of all-pros. But given what he makes, how do you come up with the scratch to sign and keep such guys? Moreover, you have to wonder also how superior players feel about a team mate who isn't himself superior earn so much more than they do. Any solutions?

by george cronin on Nov 13, 2007 4:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Justifying the trade

The hoops the Giants had to go thru to get Eli is always over blown. The fact of the matter is what they gave up in NO WAY set the franchise back. As I have said before, the next year the Giants had their best FA offseason ever, partly allowable because they did not have a first round pick (and others) to sign. Whose to say had they picked Big Ben whether the Giants would have signed Pierce, Plax, and McKenzie (all huge contributors)to the current squad? They may have replaced those signings with draft picks that may have been non contributors. It's all speculation, really. If you want to compare Ben to Eli, do it straight up, not with all the so called mortgaging the Giants did.

www.billkohut.com

by bk0831 on Nov 13, 2007 4:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

It wasn't just the draft picks

that hurt. It was the big bucks they paid.

by george cronin on Nov 13, 2007 5:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Eli is above replacement, below average

i was just looking up his defensive adjusted stats and Eli is better than your typical replacement QB but a little worse than your average QB. this sounds right.

i like to think he can improve still. i'd like to know how long the organization is planning to stick with him. at what point do you use a high draft on a potential successor? next year? 2-3 years?

by DieEaglesDie on Nov 13, 2007 5:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

It's a shame

that we as fans have to take the salary cap in to consideration when evaluating players. this is ceratinly the GM's job and actually I used to get a big kick out of second guessing George Young and for a while EA. This was first draft day tradition for me for a long while with all the pre draft guides in hand along with copius amounts of all sorts of food and several of my favorite beverages at hand. Speaking of at hand , ELI IS OUR CURRENT QUARTERBACK. Get over it. He's still better than more than twenty other starters in the league and on any given day in the top five. Yeah hindsight being 20/20 there were possibly better alternatives, are you all so sure we'd have drafted Merriman(yeah I wish he were here). It's likely there will be a high QB pick within the next few years but if you're holding you're breath I'd wonder what shade of blue you're face is.We won with Simms and a worse supporting cast. I bet we could do the same with our current offense. Our biggest needs are definately at DB, and special teams even though I truly would like to see a bunch of REAL linebackers such as we had in the 80's. No one on the current roster would be more than a backup to that bunch. As a matter of fact we had better backups back then than most of opr starters today(Kiwanukas biggest contributions have been on the line). I would't mind Andy Headen, Gary Reasonsor those types starting today. On to Detroit!

by big blue wrecking crew on Nov 13, 2007 6:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Clearly

Clearly I wish Eli was a better QB, but at this point in time, I'm just glad he's not any number of other QB's we see starting for the other teams. As for the whole debate about Eli vs. Big Ben or even Rivers, I think perhaps Eli wasn't worth it, but he's what we've got now, so that's that.

And it certainly isn't his fault that he shares a last name with one of the best to ever play the game--and it's not his fault either that GM's and the like expected him to be just as good or even better simply because of it.

Go Giants, let's drill the Lions.

by NYinCalifornia on Nov 13, 2007 7:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

About Accorsi

It should be mentioned that it wasn't just his love of Johnny Unitas that prompted this move, but also the fact that he worked in the Baltimore Colts front office during the John Elway situation, which was very similar to the Eli situation, and Accorsi saw the Colts trade one of the greatest QBs of all-time for 2 players and a first round pick the next year that didn't pan out, so he partially wanted to atone for that mistake by turning the tables and being on the Broncos side of the coin this time around. Unfortunately, it's become pretty clear that Eli Manning is no John Elway.

While looking up that Elway trade (to make sure my facts were straight), I stumbled on the Wikipedia entry for the Rivers-Manning trade, and saw this little gem (gotta love Wikipedia): "Smith submitted his desire for Philip Rivers, the Giants' 2005 1st round pick, and both the Giants' 2004 3rd round pick and 2005 5th round pick. Accorsi initially refused, but after Smith closed talks, Accorsi accepted the offer and the NFL finalized it. However, both teams probably wish they had chosen Ben Roethlisberger. Nice pick Cowher!"

...I thought that was pretty funny.

by cjmulrain on Nov 14, 2007 12:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Good point

on further motivation by Accorsi for making the trade.

by george cronin on Nov 14, 2007 4:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The draft is always a gamble

There is no real way of telling if college success is going to translate into pro success. Ryan Leaf, Ron Dayne, and dozens of other players have proven that point over and over again.

My preference, given a high draft pick, would usually be to trade down and get more players, on the basic assumption that one of them will be a star. (throw enough crap against the wall, something will stick)

That said, every so often, you may feel that you have to gamble. Take a big chance for a potential big win. That's what Accorsi did with Eli.

Eli will probably never be an elite QB (although I think many people said the same thing about Phil Simms 4 years into his career) but he can (and probably will) get better.

Earth Friendly Shopping
Voting with our dollars for a cleaner, greener, better world

by NYERinSF on Nov 14, 2007 1:04 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Great point...

Sometimes you have to take a chance. If Eli turns out to be just good and not great, the Giants are no worse off. They are currently a pretty decent team that appears to be on the upswing. They aren't a team with major holes at multiple positions due to the trade.

www.billkohut.com

by bk0831 on Nov 14, 2007 10:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If it helps you to feel comfortable

rooting for the Giants to consider Eli "good" as opposed to "great" then have at it. Those are subjective terms which make for great conversations but have little meaning when it comes to the actual play on the field.

I agree with those who say they hope Eli can continue to improve, and that one day he'll be "good enough" to get us over the top, even if he's only good enough in a Trent Dilfer kind of way.

The fact is, he's our guy, he's going to be a guy for a while yet, and as such, I have no choice but to root for him.

by Mr Met on Nov 14, 2007 2:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Simms....

Don't forget, Phil was an erratic quarterback for more games than he was great. He got sacked a ton, was a statue in the pocket, and was criticised for holding the ball too long. I watched every game he played and consider Eli to be further along in his progress right now except for his accuracy, which is troubling.

Eli is definitely good enough to win a Super Bowl. Remember, Phil only won one, he was injured much of the year in 1990. If Jeff Hostedler, who was only a decent backup was good enough to win one, so is Eli.

Just my opinion, but if Eli had started with the Steelers, and averaged about 7-12 passes a game, and Ben came to NY and had to air it up 30-40 times a game he would have never made it.

by giant fan since 57 on Nov 14, 2007 6:35 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Interesting comment

as usual 57. Simms had a tougher beginning than Eli. Lots of fans wanted to go with a couple of # 2s. Phil became a damn good game manager. I just hope Eli can reach Simms's level. He certainly doesn't have one thing that helped Phil a lot: a fiery personality that sparks a team in critical situations.
The years the Giants won the SBs, the personnel surrounding the QBs was better than what we have now and the QB position didn't eat up as big a percent of payroll as it does now. A big problem for mgmt is how to pay for the type of superior overall team required to win an SB w/o a superior QB. It's been done. More than once. So, the possibility of an SB win with Eli isn't a pipe dream

by george cronin on Nov 14, 2007 7:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

Eli is good enough, and will still get better. I opened this debate to simply make the point that Eli will never be Unitas, which he doesn't have to be. He just needs to play clean football and make the throws that are there to be made.

by Ed Valentine on Nov 14, 2007 8:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

George...

You're right. It looks like Eli is lacking the fire that Simms used to his advantage. For example, he is responsible for the team's slouth-like advance to the line of scrimmage. He should have pitched a fit instead of just holding up his hands in bewilderment. It's up to him to bitch at the coach, and or gode the players into hustling if things aren't going fast enough. It makes him look like a participant in the game and not the guy in charge on the field.

By the way, I'm not impuning Simms, whom I loved, but rather pointing out that we had plenty of complaints about his consistancy in his first four years.

by giant fan since 57 on Nov 15, 2007 6:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

One of the things

I admire about Eli is how (apparently) detached he remains about all the crticism he receives. It's a rare trait to be so unfazed and an admirable one for a human being to possess. On the other hand, it might not be that desirable from the POV of fans or management who want to see improvement. Crticism brought out Simms's competitiveness and spurred him to improve. Not so Eli it seems. This isn't necessarily bad. The source of his motivation to improve (which I believe he has)comes more from an inner than an exterior source. Different strokes for different folks.

by george cronin on Nov 15, 2007 6:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs