Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Ellenberger vs. Sanchez Heats Up, Hughes Talks Retirement

Draft Countdown's Scott Wright analyzes Giants' draft

Draft Countdown expert Scott Wright appeared on 'New York Giants Talk' with Pat Traina (Inside Football) and myself Monday night. Wright had some intriguing things to say about the Giants' draft, including the fact that they waited until the fourth round to address the middle linebacker situation.

"I just don't know that the Giants adequately addressed that middle linebacker position, which I think most probably agreed was their No. 1 concern coming into this draft," Wright said. "If I were the Giants I would have tried to maneuver a little bit. ... I just think that if you could have traded a second- or a third-round pick to move up and make sure you got Rolando McClain, the top linebacker in the draft without question, I just think that's worth paying.

"I just would have been a lot more aggressive in pursuing one of these top inside linebackers."

Here are Wright's thoughts on some of the players the Giants did draft.

  • On Jason Pierre-Paul: "This is a great situation for Jason Pierre-Paul. He can come in and at least in Year 1 be brought along slowly. ... That pick was the ultimate 'swing hard in case you hit it pick.' Jason Pierre-Paul could end up being a 15 sack a year type of talent, and he could also go down in flames. I don't know that there's going to be anything in-between."
  • On Linval Joseph: "He's a very intriguing guy. ... very talented player, real good athlete, he moves well. ... I think you can make the case that he is the most talented defensive tackle on the Giants' roster right now."
  • On Chad Jones: "A phenomenal natural athlete. The biggest question with him was the dedication. Does he truly love football, or did he just have a great junior year and decide 'I'm gonna strike while the iron is hot.' ... If he hadn't had that baseball option out there I think he probably would have went a round higher. ... I think you can make the argument that he is as talented as any safety in this draft outside of Eric Berry."
  • On Phillip Dillard: "It's a good situation. He couldn't have landed any better, he's gonna have a chance to compete for major playing time."

Star-divide

Giants_notebook_200_medium
  • For those of you rooting for the Giants to sign just-released former Jacksonville Jaguar Pro Bowl defensive tackle John Henderson, don't count on it. It seems that Henderson is in Kansas City at the moment, and it does not sound like the Chiefs plan on letting him get out of town.

    Mike Garafolo reported last night that the Giants do not appear to be in serious pursuit of the 6-foot-7, 331-pound 31-year-old.

    MG also reported that when it comes to Barry Cofield, where there is smoke there is fire. That means MG confirmed the Giants did try to trade Cofield to New Orleans during the draft.

    Stay tuned on the defensive tackle front. Even after drafting Linval Joseph, the mammoth defensive tackle from East Carolina, the Giants might not be done shuffling the deck at that spot.
  • SB Nation had several bloggers covering the NFL Draft. The folks at Stampede Blue actually got an audience with Commissioner Roger Goodell, and the result was an excellent interview.
  • Here is a tremendous story on sixth-round pick Adrian Tracy that was written prior to the draft. I like this kid, even if I did give the choice a 'Wet Willie.'
  • Comment 247 comments  |  0 recs  | 

    Do you like this story?

    Comments

    Display:

    I'm glad they weren't "more aggressive" getting the MLB spot filled, Sorry Scott.

    I know its a need and I feel so do the Giants. But the price to move up and get McClain, most likely cost our 1st, 2nd and 4th rounder. You just do not do that.

    The fact they got a DE, DT and then the MLB…makes that non trade favor heavily in the Giants side of things.

    If JPP, Joseph and the rest who are here (whoever the hell it may be) return this line to pre end of 2008 levels, it doesn’t really matter which among our MLB candidates it is.

    You just don’t do that sort of trade. Maybe if it was just a 1st and 3rd..then OK. Cuz they they can get Joseph in the 2nd.

    A MLB just can’t play well without a DL in front of him to do good. And well…if you trade most of your draft for a MLB and then go with the same characters as last year…that’s setting yourself up for an epic disaster next year and encouraging your brand new MLB worth 3 draft picks to bust and become a failure.

    Giants made the right move. You just don’t trade up for McClain that far. Whether it turns out well..stay tuned.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 8:17 AM EDT reply actions  

    I hear you, Free

    I love the idea of beefing up the defensive tackle spot to help the linebackers. Time will tell if the Giants have enough in the middle. I love Scott’s knowledge, and love getting the different perspective. Doesn’t mean I agree with him on this one.

    by Ed Valentine on Apr 27, 2010 8:24 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Yes

    it was a good draft year for DT’s.. and a bad one for MLB’s.. so the giants made the smart, not glamorous move and played the draft well. As you guys stated above, a great DT can make a sub par LB look really good. And thats all that really matters.. mlb’s dont play against mlb’s, defense plays the offense as a UNIT.

    Toney does what the douglas do. And no one can do what he does b/c doing it without being Toney Douglas just doesnt make it do what it do

    by semsemma on Apr 27, 2010 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions  

    When the Giants took Joseph

    I knew that Reese feels the same way. Get pressure with your front four, makes the LBs and DBs look good. CWeb can cover Jackson, but give McNabb all day to throw and he’s eventually going to get open and get burned.

    by wangstu13 on Apr 27, 2010 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I don't think Jackson had to work to get open

    he just straight up ran past everyone. It wasn’t like McNabb was sitting there waiting for him to work back to him and get open.

    by bigblue777 on Apr 27, 2010 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Don't matter

    If Jackson can run a 4.3 40 with no bump and run and in a straight line for that matter, that’s just not happening. He does see some bump and run, maybe not every time, and I guarentee he isn’t running a straight line either, so likely to get 35-40 yards downfield is going to take him around 6 seconds. That my friend is waaaaay to long to expect coverage to contain.

    by wangstu13 on Apr 27, 2010 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

    it was because the idiot sheridan kept playing cover 2 zone and it put desean jackson 1 on 1 with the safety

    by mclaren_is_the_best on Apr 27, 2010 9:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I agree with Free

    How good would Ray Lewis have been behind our DL last year – I think he would have struggled.

    AP lasted so long because the DL kept him clean, as soon as the DL faltered AP looked old, slow and unable to keep clear of blockers.

    JPP is the investment for 2011 – Joseph, Jones, Dillard and Petrus represent the 2010 draft class who should contribute in 2010. Not saying JPP will not contribute – but if we have a low expectation for him this year we will not be disappointed and anything we do get is a bonus.

    by G Fan in England on Apr 27, 2010 8:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

    and who know around the league who's on the block?

    maybe they do deal Cofield and get their MLB?

    The Bucs only re-signed Barrett Ruud to his tender, 3.28 million not a long term deal like the Texans did with Demeco Ryans. Maybe they’re looking at offers? Osi may fit in well after they got some DT’s there. Dunno who the hell replaced Ruud..but who cares!

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 8:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I dont think they part with Rudd

    Nothing would suggest that not even there draft, he’s a Buc for a long time to come, Upper Management loves the kid.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 8:59 AM EDT up reply actions  

    that's OK.

    but I ain’t skimming over the fact they didn’t lock him up long term yet.

    If he’s loved so much and gonna be there a long time…why only re-sign him to a RFA tender?

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Because that gives them time to work out a deal

    I think they were waiting to gauge the market with Demeco’s deal also if they wanted to get rid of him, draft time wouldve been perfect for them to acquire pics and send him to an MLB needy team. Signing a Tender could mean they just need time, Tampa has alot to manage on the money end especially with rookies like McCoy coming in, a high priced QB and some other things, the Ruud deal should get done soon, his agent has the Demeco deal to base Ruud’s on now so we shall see, i would be surprised if he wasnt a Buc for the next 5yrs or so.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I've come around on this too

    I was upset that the Giants didn’t do what they had to for McClain, but we also don’t know if JR & Co looked into it & they thought the price was too high. Besides, the Giants of today are built around their D-line. I think collectively we need to get over the fact that the Giants aren’t built around their LBs like they were in the past. It’s not their identity anymore and in today’s game built around passing offenses, it makes sense.

    by potroast on Apr 27, 2010 8:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Good point, pot

    Thing is, with the pass-happy offenses which come off the field in many situations. The linebackers. Lots of times teams, including the Giants, will play with one linebacker and 6 DBs. The defensive linemen, corners and safeties are the every-down guys. So, in a way you can understand the emphasis.

    by Ed Valentine on Apr 27, 2010 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions  

    According to some stats I've seen

    50% of the plays are nickel/dime or 7 DBs

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Yep nickle package plays 1000+ snaps minimum every year

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Good logical thought process

    Today’s NFL de-emphasizes LBs to a point.

    Never thought of it that way (doh!) but it makes sense.

    So the Giants have four big safeties and three of the four CBs are big too. Assuming they all can cover and hit…….

    So it you have a couple of LBs that are playmakers (Sintim, Boley) the remainder can be “good enough” to keep the Giants in the game.

    by MSP Giant on Apr 27, 2010 9:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

    you guys are knowledge in regards to defesensive strategy and personnel management

    however, as a fellow Giant fan myself have what I consider to be a genuine concern. With the focus on the DL and S and CB dosent the leave the middle of the defense suspectable to the screen and dump pass. The Giants played the zone defense alot last year against passing offense and got fourth degree burns for it. With the new talent in areas that were pretty much solid except for a few spots; arent they setting themselves up for the samething to happen again?

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 10:16 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

    not really...

    this is where someone like Jones being as big and fast as he is, helps. He can be that 3rd safety on the field, and basically shadow the RB.

    Also, guys like JPP and Joseph….these are different breeds of athletes. We don’t have these sorts on the squad.

    They need to be coached up. But on pure athleticism…these are those bigguns you see running down the sideline to tackle the carrier before the LOS

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Spell Check

    Anyways…Perry Fewell>>>Bill Sheridan. There’s your answer in a nutshell.

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I disagree with the notion that LBs are not important

    Has the NFL gotten a little pass happy? Sure. That doesn’t mean you don’t need LBs that means you need more athletic LBs (something Goff and DIllard are not). In both zone and man coverages the LBs have significant coverage duties. While there are more teams playing more 4 and 5 wide sets, it’s not college where that is every down, so you still need to be able to line up in some more base formation defensively as well. Ideally in a 4-3 your Mike can play in every package (including 1 LB packages) to maintain his play calling responsibilities. I’d assume we will actually have Boley doing this because we don’t have a Mike that can play in all packages, especially not dime. I question even who will be in the nickel package with Boley. Wilk actually appears to have the most potential, but I expect him to be broken by season start.

    by bigblue777 on Apr 27, 2010 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Ok I_Formation27 I will work on my spelling

    I’m going to like you guys. You force a brother to stay on point im spelling and all. All three of you have made excellent points. I haven’t studied up on the NY Giants latest draft picks but I have read most of your comments (and others) in previous Big Blue Review postings and I will take your word for it in regards to thier skiill sets; until I can see them play and research them on my own. I must say though, that i agree bigblue777 in regards to his assertion that the MLBs are extremely important. Now, the DLs,Ss,CBs & even the OLBs may be able to hold thier ground considering that the offense that they face are average and can’t find a way to manipulate Fewell’s defensive strategy. But what about the good offenses who can. If the ouside perimetera are shut down and the deep pass is taken away there is only one other place to go. All you need is ten yards to keep a derive alive and based in Boley’s play last year i am not convinced that he can get the job done. The Giants need an answer for this dynamic and a good MLB or MLBs is the only answer. This shouldn’t be taken lightly.

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

    ignore the snide criticisms, London Jay

    Some people don’t remember that we put a premium on thought over great writing with a lot of fan posts — and that picking on others for not being the best at spelling isn’t the nicest way to build a community.
    I’m a professional editor. I screw up when I post quickly. Ed is a pro. He makes mistakes. Just keep coming, ignore the superficial stuff, and keep sharing your valid, appreciated thoughts.

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

    LOL

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

    <^>

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

    What, Simms?

    I mk mishsteaks! U must bee keedin’ mee!

    by Ed Valentine on Apr 27, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Offenses attack your weak spot for sure

    A great pass rush can be negated by quick passing schemes or running the ball down the defense’s throat. Great safeties might roam the deep and scare teams out of the bomb pass, but you just throw underneath that. If we are weak in coverage at the MLB spot the easy way to kill us is short drop by the QB and dump it to the TE. Take a look around at the TEs in our division (Jason Witten, Chris Cooley, and Brent Celek) and that should worry you. Option #2 to exploit lack of talent at the LB position is the screen pass. The point is you can have the strongest pass rush in the world, but that amounts to squat if you have a significant weakness elsewhere that can be exploited to nullify that pass rush. Some might argue bringing the good safeties we have now down to help the LBs. Well, now you’ve weakend your coverage of the deep allowing that bomb pass again.

    by bigblue777 on Apr 27, 2010 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

    See above

    where I already discussed the innevitable reccomendation from you to use the safety…

    by bigblue777 on Apr 27, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

    The safety would be tailling the TE in this case

    not playing centerfield.

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Leaving the secondary wide open for whatever.

    Definitely not a good idea unless you are playing goal line defense.

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Antrelle Rolle and Kenny Phillips

    are still on the field.

    Hopefulyl Ross is healthy….imagine, secondary depth. Who knew?

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Wouldn't the be covering the wide receivers?

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Even if we were playing two Safeties

    One would still be back.

    It’s not like the two safeties are always back there all the time.

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Now we have something to work with.

    Explain

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

    No, I think I see the logic in your argument Free.

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

    We good now?

    The thing Free would be using would be some type of nickel formation (probably) with a linebacker coming out for Jones.

    You could still stay in a base 4-3 and just have the FS cover the TE (assuming he’s on the other side).
    Considering our slow linebackers, that would probably be the best idea if we’re playing man to man.

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

    yes. this.

    Basically have a 4-1-6. But since guys like KP and Jones..even TT and Webster (not sure on Rolle yes) are good tackles we wouldn’t get killed on stuff like that.

    Jones is basically a LB. The guy is huge. I don’t think he’s any smaller then Boley

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I'm going to tag on

    That on 1st and 2nd down they drafted Linnie-van to push the pocket and make short drops less appealing

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Yeah

    Although I never hope we call a dime vs an I-Form…

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

    HA!

    That’d be even worst, since they use a 3-4.

    3-2-6…

    But Nolan is actually a good DC, so sadly that won’t happen.

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

    If you go 4-1-6 you are going to get the ball stuffed down your throat

    unless it’s third and long. Now, if we want to talk a 4-2-5 we might be getting closer to a possibility. I love that formation in college ball. I know Rob Ryan used it in Oakland when he didn’t have enough talent at LB, so maybe we copy that. Phillips had the range to be that single high centefielder in the 4-2-5 when healthy. I’d hope Rolle might be able to do it as well. This Jones kid does sound like he could be a rover. You could probably actually play Ross a the other rover because he has good size and is an excellent blitzer. Here is the question though, who is the LB next to Boley?

    by bigblue777 on Apr 27, 2010 8:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

    It's never a base formation

    But for 4 wide sets, you use it.

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

    4-1-6 is basically a dime package

    by mclaren_is_the_best on Apr 27, 2010 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Teams in NFL have 5 or 6 DBs on field

    For 50% or more of the plays, nickel and dime are as base as 4-3 and 3-4.

    Its just a fact now

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Ok

    you have a base 4-3 vs an I form with a left strongside.

    It’s not like the safeties are waiting back there the whole time. If the other team is running the ball well, the strong safety can sneak up and “be the eighth man in the box”.

    Or they could play two deep. Or one or both of them could blitz. Or one could shade to one side and double cover one guy. Or they could be in some weird zone formation. It’s not like they’re staying ten yards back all the time during the play which I is what I said and I think you’re missing.

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Indeed!

    I peeped that after looking at it. Even if you send the two perimeter MLBs in for a blizz, you can still leave one MLB in the middle, send a safety in and let the other roam and assist the CBs as necessary.

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 5:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Yeah

    except MLB stands for the linebacker in the middle (middle linebacker). The other guys are the outside linebackers (OLB), which you could name a variety of things.

    Usually the linebacker that lines up on the TE’s side is the Strongside Linebacker, or SAM backer. The linebacker on the other side is the weakside linebacker, or the WILL.
    In a 3-4 it gets more confusing, and I’ll explain if you’d like.

    Don’t worry, eventually you’ll get all of this stuff down.

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Thanks for the clarification Willgfass, It greatly appreciated

    I will. I have following the game for some time. I know the positions, have placed much emphasis on the names though but if, I am going to Politic with you guys, I better start.

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

    No problem

    Honestly, the best way to learn (besides actually playing on a team with a coach) is to read wikipedia (and I mean every link), play lots of Madden with this in mind, and be on a great board like this.

    That’s how I did it, and I’m still learning too.

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Yeah.

    This board is the truth.

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I say let Jones play like a rover spot

    Still keep 2 deep Rolle and KP, but Jones could be like a Polamalu of sorts and be used all over. In the box, in the middle. I think he will be able to cover alot of tight ends. And don’t forget Witten gets open on everyone so it’s not like we can expect him to be covered well. Do you really think that RoMac, Lee or Spikes would have effectively covered the middle? I highly doubt it. MLB was not a deep position in this draft and I’m glad we didn’t reach for them. We went for the more important positions.

    by wangstu13 on Apr 27, 2010 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I think a main reason was the lack of safety talent

    We obviously fixed that situation, i am curious to see what JR and coughlin see in goff and kiel! Maybe they turn heads?

    by Phillip P on Apr 27, 2010 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Well we still have time to address this potential problem

    I am sure that the Coughlin and his staff have peeped this. We will find out soon enough if the off season adjustments are sufficient enough.

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

    The defense

    We ran last year under Sheridan was atrocious. I’m actually very confident we will have a good defense this year due to the signing of a legitimate DC. Fewell didn’t have too much talent in Buffalo and they were respectable on that side of the ball. The Giants have more depth and talent for him to take advantage of. Third down passing situation could be,
    Osi-Tuck-Alford-JPP and rush Sintim because we can. Thats just nasty man. Tony Chokmo will be seeing stars that’s for sure.
    I just don’t see with our talent and competent coaching that we’d be anywhere near that bad in 2010.

    by wangstu13 on Apr 27, 2010 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I'm with FB. In this draft, the Giants were much better off in staying put.

    I had the Giants taking Morgan at # 15, which I still think is a better fit, but the Giants FO know a hell of a lot more about these players than me. I think you can get by with a mediocre MLB if he has a good D Line in fornt of him better than a very good MLB with a mediocre line.

    As Scott said though, don’t expect much [anything] out of JPP until 2011.

    by NorthLeft12 on Apr 27, 2010 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Agreed

    I was not a fan of McClain to begin with. We hear a lot about opinions being divided on JPP and his “boom or bust” potential, well, how about McClain? Many scouts reportedly have doubts about how well he projects into a 4-3 system, as well as whether he is a 3 down linebacker in any system. At least with JPP, it isn’t his athletic ability that is being questioned. To give up a king’s ransom to move up and get McClain would have been a very risky move. If he turns out to be nothing more than a run stuffer on 1st and 2nd down and a liability in coverage it is something that would set back the franchise. Reminder to Scott, they throw the ball now in the NFC East.

    I love the pick of Joseph. The more I think about it, the bodies we had at DT may have been weaker coming into the draft than our LB corps. Our NT’s were Cofield and Bernard, and Cofield will be a FA as soon as there is a CBA. We needed an upgrade there, not just an extra body in the mix. Whether Joseph becomes a stud, who knows, but the rationale is correct.

    by Be Driven on Apr 27, 2010 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Me 2

    I wasn’t very high on mcclain either and wanted either weatherspoon or burlar, ot, i forget how to spell his last name, i thought mcclain was overrated. I perfer weatherspoon over mcclain because he was better in coverage and burlar is a need because the giants right tackle is starting to break down. Once again, i will say that i believe that joseph was the giants real 1pick in this draft and jpp is a ????…….who knows

    by Jermal on Apr 27, 2010 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

    According to Wrights Draft value chart

    It would have taken 1st, 2nd and a late rounder 6th or 7th to move up to #7.

    But here is the rub, to move up to #10 would have taken the 1st, 3rd, 5th and 7th. One way you end up with McClain and your DT, the other leaves you grasping at DT’s that don’t really do as much as Joseph can. I love Chad Jones, but the draft was deep in safeties and they could have moved up into round 3 or earlier in round 4 pretty easily.

    MY guess. The Giants did think about moving up in the draft. But strategically, hoping that McClain would fall to pick 10 or 11, where they could keep their 2nd round pick, and address both issues.

    I was surprised the Raiders took McClain, they typically don’t draft LBs early.

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 8:42 AM EDT reply actions  

    Supposedly this year

    Al Davis was no longer in control of the 1st two days of the draft. Explains a lot. And why on Saturday they went balls up and drafted all height-speed guys.

    by Charles L on Apr 27, 2010 8:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

    My guess

    is that nobody told Davis of the new format, so he showed up on Saturday thinking it was the first round. Lo and behold, they drafted Bruce Campbell with their first pick of the 4th round, when many people thought they would take him with their first overall pick!

    Homer: Aw, twenty dollars! I wanted a peanut!
    Homer's Brain: Twenty dollars can buy many peanuts!
    Homer: Explain how!
    Homer's Brain: Money can be exchanged for goods and services!
    Homer: Woo-hoo!

    by bigbluethruandthru on Apr 27, 2010 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

    More aggressive

    I’d imagine the Giants did try to shop for McClain, but the price was just too high. I’m not under the impression that Goff isn’t some bumbling fool tripping over his own feet and whiffing every tackle. He’s service-able, and worst comes to worst if Dillard, Goff, and Wilkinson don’t work out, then we look to next year to fix that spot.

    I absolutely hate the idea of trading away the entire draft just to grab one player, especially when grabbing that one player means adding no youth to our line.

    by RolloT on Apr 27, 2010 8:45 AM EDT reply actions  

    and we can't really count out Chad Jones either

    he ain’t gonna be a LB…but I’d think that Rolle, KP and Chad Jones see the field a lot.

    I’d think Webster, Ross and TT are on the field too. So why not have one of them who’s basically the size of a LB?

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

    even better

    is having a 6"2 221 one that looks and hits like LB :)

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions  

    thats the idea

    Avg safety is bigger and better tackler, problem is most are more like CC Brown they struggle in covg.

    BUT if you can put 3 safeties out there that can all cover, you get the best of both worlds

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

    oy...CC...

    I know he’s a rook and hasn’t done much…but Chad Jones for a dude that size, is actually praised for his coverage ability.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Thats why its a good idea (using the 3 safeties)

    MY prediction:

    Jones ends up a playmaker. Usually baseball players have a very good sense of how far and how fast to go to catch up to a fly ball.

    Aside: Even if Phillips comes back 100% I like drafting Jones. I like having 4 safeties and 4 CBs.

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions  

    what position did he play?

    I was a pretty good 3rd baseman, but I can’t guage a flyball to save my life. With me it’s ALWAYS a diving catch cuz I miscalculated by 7 steps!

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions  

    well Jones was an OF

    he was a corner OF (and got drafted in the 13th round by Houston) so while that aint the “CF” you want in your Safety..he knows how to judge a ball.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:45 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Wasn't he a relief pitcher

    92mph fast ball and all that?

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

    nvm it says it on there

    .343 12 for 36 with one HR and 6RBI.

    Mostly cuz he started the season on April 26 since he’s a 2-sport dude more focused on football

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

    12 for 36

    is .333 … apparently it’s not a good math school

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

    speaking of which,

    how TF do you pass classes and yet dedicate hours a day to NFL football?

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I'm at my desk right now

    reading over notes.

    Got a final at 1 too.

    Shit.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Yea me too

    Grad school is a beast, this is my only real Blog though, i dnt know how you do it with all of those Blogs you participate in SMH

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Both

    He was a starting outfielder. He lost his starting spot when he left a few weeks for spring football practice. When he got back, he was a back-up player and the new set-up guy.

    by Matt V on Apr 27, 2010 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Honestly

    Why do we even need to call them starters? Couldn’t we just use a nice blend of rotational situations throughout the game so when the 4th quarter aka crunchtime rolls around we have fresher players. The defensive depth now is excellent especially for the future! Coach and JR should make it known that if you get a bit gassed on a drive, sub out so we can get an advantage.

    by wangstu13 on Apr 27, 2010 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

    and who knows how good all these guys may be.

    but maybe they got Chad Jones and someone like Dillard (assuming they don’t get him if they get McClain), we may have a better scheme match in terms of players then McClain.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:03 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I think that the Giants are more concerned about DT/S and Pass Rush

    What if the MLBs were in the right place at the right time, but because the DT/DE didn’t do their job(s), instead of a chance for a clean tackle, the MLB is now getting blocked by a G/TE or both. No way for us to know.

    Also, like the Jets cutting Faneca and Raiders dumping Morrison, other teams may cut some very talented players. I’ve heard several times that the Bears may cut Urlacher if they go into full rebuild mode (perhaps they’ll deal him for a 4th rounder). The impact of the no-cap year is that vets will continue to get moved.

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 8:51 AM EDT reply actions  

    Im Glad they approached it the way they did!

    The Giants didnt feel Ro Mac was worth jumping up for, this MLB class was not that good and Rolando who is good beneftted off of that, he is a late first any other year so thats why they didnt reach for him. As for coefield I said yesterday that he would be the odd man out logically, I said it was clear to me because they signed Canty and Bernard at a time that BC was playing his best, even though he got injured it showed they were willing to part with him and then the drafting of Linval just made it clear that BC is on his way out, I think tampa wouldve been very interested had they not been able to get Price.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 8:57 AM EDT reply actions  

    I won't take away from RoMacs talents and abilities

    But he had a massive man in Terrence Cody in front of him. We have discussed how much better Ray Lewis was when Ngata was drafted. Dline>> LBs.

    by wangstu13 on Apr 27, 2010 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

    MLB Option

    Did anyone notice that Kirk Morrison got traded to the Jags for a 4th rounder during the draft. The Jags received Morrison and a 5th rounder for a fourth. That would have been worth it. The Giants should have jumped all over that.

    by tmony44 on Apr 27, 2010 8:59 AM EDT reply actions  

    Not to me

    Morrison is a very productive player but not a Giant IMO

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Think value!

    Giving up a 4th for a 5th and Morrison is huge. I’m sure Morrison would have had a greater impact than Dillard this year.

    by tmony44 on Apr 27, 2010 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

    maybe..

    tho when I heard the question asked to Reese on the Morrison trade, he sounded a bit pissed. Maybe something went wrong there, who knows?

    Tho I’ll say the value of competition at MLB and possibly our starting LG…outweighs Morrison potentially by a ton.

    All we need is a capable starter

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

    He did seem pissed

    but he hates to be asked about players that are another teams property, you cant do that when you are a GM so i think he was pissed at the question but you never know

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Right now it seems like Morrison was a cheap solidifying move

    But the year Patriots got Moss, was because other teams that needed a WR made their moves early.

    When Mad AL decided he had no choice, it was Pats or in his own division. Lets wait till camp starts before we decide the Giants haven’t addressed the MLB position.

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Agreed

    A 2nd or 3rd round pick to move up to draft McClain would have been a bad move. We had multiple discussions prior to the draft about that being too high of a price to pay. I think our consensus was something regarding a fourth rounder to move up which would have been perfect for us, but probably not worth it to others. Seeing as he went 8th overall, I don’t think we could have put together a good enough package to move up 7 spots. Hopefully Phillip Dillard doesn’t end up playing like Phyllis Diller and he is our diamond in the rough.

    by DavidE on Apr 27, 2010 9:01 AM EDT reply actions  

    Gotta be the A-hole on this one

    Disclaimers:
    1. Yes, I know that I don’t know sh@! about college talent, and that JR & Co. have 50 experts doing thousands of hours of work.
    2. Who knows, maybe RoMac is a bust and JPP is the next Bruce Smith.

    However, with my fan mentality, you know, kid in a candy store… I really wish the Giants had moved into RoMac, if possible, for their 1st & 3rd. I see Dillard as Blackburn 2.0 … and honestly, had the Giants moved picks or players to make that 1st round switch… especially at the 10 pick or so … I think you guys would be rejoicing in the streets, rather than gradually convincing ourselves & accepting that the one player 75% of us did NOT want is our #1 pick!

    Okay, I’ll bend over now.

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 9:15 AM EDT reply actions  

    you're right Simms...

    but it never got to that. If McClain’s there at #10 and we pass on him..then yea, its a question on why Reese wasn’t aggressive to move up there.

    But it was never an option.

    Ro Mac would never turn into Ray Lewis or Urlacher or whoever the hell…without guys like Joseph and hopefully JPP in front of him..and also dudes like Chad Jones cleaning up his mess behind him.

    Its just not that important a position.

    Pierce probably would still be OK as our MLB if the DL was still up to par. But he sucked last year…mainly cuz the DL didn’t do its job.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Pierce would not have been OK

    I like Pierce, but his body quit on him. Its time for him to move on. I wish him well and hope he gets a media gig around town.

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 9:22 AM EDT up reply actions  

    the problem is

    we had to go 4-12 last year and trade drafts with the Raidahs this year

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I agree

    Ray Lewis even maaaade ozzie draft Haloti ngata by name because he needed a body infront od him!!! I honestly think Suh made Dillard look better than he really was as well

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions  

    that's a good thing for Dillard then

    He knows how to clean up when that front 4 is beasting.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Yep real good for Dillard

    but I think me and you know how to clean up when a front 4 is beasting LOL but he is a good player dnt get me wrong, I still think Goff wins the position though.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Goff winning the spot

    was probably the best non-McClain option anyway.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I agree

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Without a doubt

    Goff has at least had time to learn a bit. I’m sure Fewell will bring some new dimensions to the D. Spikes, Lee, Angerer would need to learn a whole lot more than Goff. And if I may add I remember some comments made about Goff(wasn’t you Free) about him not playing well in the time he saw last year. There is a huge difference in game speed and practice. Start drinking the Goff coolaid fellas cause he’s most likely our starting MLB.

    by wangstu13 on Apr 27, 2010 6:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

    and he's really an excellent athlete as well

    looking at his combine numbers (may have to scroll down, or click on the LB thing) a lot of his numbers would’ve matched up with a lot of the LB’s this year, and bettered them.

    If this guy was healthy as a rook and got some real playing time, I think he’d just be our starter, no question.

    He’s a smart dude too.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Yep

    Goff played very very well in his limited action, he showed impact plays with a pick and a sack, something we just dnt get from our LB’s but I think he was thinking too much because of how he was thrusted into the lineup but now that he has had time to let his instincts take over, now the engineering major can try NOT to think so much……… maybe the other engineering major at LB can come on for us as well too.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 28, 2010 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I think Dillard will be good

    I think he will push Goff and Wilkinsen for the starting spot and maybe even win. He is aggressive, smart, great tackler, and even has a mean streak. I think he is a bit more passionate on the field than Goff, and he has leadership abilities IMO.

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

    You have to give up the 2nd rounder to get him

    Moving up to #10 would not have done it

    If they made that move prior to the draft they would have been out picks and not gotten McClain.

    I think all of us would have preferred McClain over JPP, but sometimes you don’t get what you want.

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I could imagin the backlash that if McClain was still on the board and they drafted JPP

    or they traded up for JPP.

    I believe em when they said JPP was the #6 overall player in the entire draft…..I wonder where they had McClain?

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:24 AM EDT reply actions  

    Probably 8 or so

    If Ro Mac and JPP wouldve been on the board together, I think and hope we wouldve still drafted JPP

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:36 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Yea sorry simms!!

    But i have always said Ro Mac is very good but he is not at all a rear LB, in last years draft he goes in round 2, I dnt think he is better than Cushing, Laurinitis or some of the LB’s last year, he might be just as good but this draft made him seem like a once and a lifetime LB which is not true. I do however view JPP as a once and a lifetime talent at DE if and when he works, I know you dnt want to hear it but thats my reasoning for still going JPP and it would seem as if the Gmen agree.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

    RARE** LOL

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

    yea I dunno about that...

    If McClain’s #8 but JPP’s #6 (hypothetical…) JR said it himself he drafts Need and value.

    The Need of a MLB is greater then a DE. And “reaching” by 2 spots, especially when were getting great value at #15 anyway…doesn’t make sense to take JPP over McClain there.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

    No it makes no sense

    to take Morgan over McClain because they value out the same but JPP’s upside is the thing here, that puts him above McClain and makes him a “no brainer”

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

    yea....that doesnt make any sense.

    JPP’s 6. McClain’s 8.

    Need is MLB. McClain wins.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

    If that MLB was Cushing sure

    I think he wins, and appearantly the way Reese thinks we always “NEED” a DE so once the DL has a beast like JPP’s potential left on the draft board that’s where we are gonna go. JPP was ranked over RoMac, I think they were shocked that they got JPP, i dnt think they wouldve been shocked if McClain fell to them.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I see your point BG

    it makes some sense but I think FB is closer to the truth… had Bradford fallen to them along with JPP, are you telling me they take Sam?

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I wish that some team was in love with Clausen

    I bet that Reese expected to trade down when Clausen fell and get a nice deal.

    Sometimes things just don’t work out as planned.

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Gooood lord Noooo!!! LOL

    See i am different, all you guys assume Sam Bradord was part of there top players, I dont at all, I also think JPP wasnt # 6 i think he was more like 5 on the board but whatever. I think it was Suh, Berry, McCoy, Earl Thomas, JPP, Spiller, McClain and maybe Okung in that first tier.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Well Marc Ross

    said they had JPP very very high on thier board and that he has more upside than any other player in the draft so if he and Ro Mac were there it sure sounds like he’s saying that he would have to consider need and see if it matched up but I dnt think they pass up on JPP for anyone besides Suh or Berry but I think McClain wouldve stirred some arguments definetly……………………….by the way for all you guys who were saying JPP did that good because of Selvie, watch Marc Ross’ interview when asked about that, he basically had to hold himself back from laughing at that statement, he said “this kid helped selvie” and that Selvie wasnt much of a player at all. WOW

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 28, 2010 9:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

    on Selvie..yea, he's right

    Selvie had basically one year, that’s it. Other then that…not much.

    And the double teams were basically thrown JPP’s way.

    The fact he’s raw..and was so dominant entirely too much of the time you’d expect last year…makes him all that more intriguing.

    The only way, however, that if he passes on McClain for JPP (since they would’ve traded up for McClain most likely) is if McClain was ranked well down their board.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 28, 2010 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Agree

    Too much to trade up for MLB without addressing the DT position.Like everyone is saying lets see who is out there for us to pick up in the next couple of weeks.The draft is a piece of the puzzle not the end all.The Patriots for years have signed no name free agents that have helped them win.Hate the JPP pick but McClain was long gone.I liked Morgan, Williams, or Pouncey at that spot.JPP will not help us this year and we are built to win now.

    by GENEA on Apr 27, 2010 9:30 AM EDT reply actions  

    Giants are built to win now

    and the future.

    Their franchise QB is 29 years old and not going anwhere anytime soon.

    LOL!….and you don’t draft a player with intentions of winning now. That’s an oxymoron. A rookie is for the future always.

    ..and JPP’s gonna help us now. He ain’t gonna start..but really no rook’s gonna start for us. JPP will probably be used as best as he can as a rookie.

    The Giants are the best situation this kid can possibly go to.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

    And starting in this front 4 is overrated

    Osi is begging to start but Tuck is always trying to give up his “starter” spot to Kiwi and Osi as he has said before because he knows he had his best season, and best season for a Giant DE in a while when he wasnt starting, i also think he is tired of hearing the BS. I honestly wouldnt mind Tuck returning to that old role ( not gonna happen) but I think that now becomes JPP’s. I think JPP will be the second LE on the depth chart and every time Tuck slides somewhere else thats when JPP will hit the field…… Osi and Kiwi will be in a real battle at RE…………………. by the way Osi’s agent told him to expect a push for a trade because of JPP and less playing time but Reese said hell no not right now.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 9:45 AM EDT up reply actions  

    In essence but on 3rd and long which is the goal for any defense

    both sides now become rush DE and when Tuck slides inside, JPP will slide to LE because remember Osi can only play one side and thats RE so thats his, KIWI can stand up n rush if needs be. Kiwi also said he wants the chance to just play RE so i think the depth chart is Osi n Kiwi @ RE and Tuck and JPP (6’4 270 dnt forget) @ LE

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Therefore Tuck is the starter, period. That was kind of the point.

    I think it would be very hard to imagine Osi being the guy again on 1st and 2nd downs. My bet is that Tuck and Kiwi are the bookends on run downs and we eventually get JPP in on 3rd and longs opposite Osi, like you said.

    Bleeding Blue since 1962

    by sunlion333 on Apr 27, 2010 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Whaaat??

    Tuck is the LE dude, LE plays RT, RE plays LT……. they are based on the POV of someone facing the offense like the MLB.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions  

    K

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I'm like 99% sure you are incorrect

    It’s the side of the field you are on, like Blue said it’s POV. Tuck is LDE Osi is RDE.

    by Giants56 on Apr 27, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Tuck plays many places, but if you remember the Dallas game

    He was tripped by Flozell Adams the Cowboys LT, making him the RDE by your analysis

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

    As you said

    Tuck plays different places. If I’m not mistaken he was lined up in the middle and ran a stunt which led to Flozell tripping him. But no, that does not make him a RDE.

    by Giants56 on Apr 27, 2010 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Yeah I dont know what they are talking about 56

    ive never heard of Tuck being a RE, maybe he slides over from time to time but when you look at their depth chart he is listed at LE but sunlion thinks he is a RE and Osi is a LE appearently…………… I dnt know whats going on today

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

    i guess they look at it

    according to which OT you line up over. One thing for sure, when healthy Tuck is a BEAST no matter where he lines up. He is the one DE we have where there is never any debate.

    by Giants56 on Apr 27, 2010 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Osi plays LE

    Like most pass rushers that attack the QB’s blind side ( most QB’s are right handed ) Osi is a LE. Just like Peppers, J. Allen, etc are LE’s. Tuck is the RE. Sunlion is right

    by KumaBlue42 on Apr 27, 2010 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Wrong

    Tuck =LE
    Osi=RE

    No beer and no girls make Big Ben a dull boy

    by Mother Tucker on Apr 27, 2010 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I'm very sure you're wrong

    Under these parameters: All positions are based off of the way the defense is initially facing. A person on the MLB’s left side would be on the QB’s right side

    Using this, Tuck normally lines up on the right side of the MLB. Osi normally lines up on the left side of the MLB.

    This is before any rotations are put into place.

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

    This is how I see it in my head

    ……………QB………….
    TE RT RG C LG LT
    Tuck.DT…..DT……Osi
    Sintim…Dillard….Boley

    by mclaren_is_the_best on Apr 27, 2010 9:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Yeah

    From the defender’s own place they are facing, Tuck is the RDE.

    Tuck faces Left Tackles, Osi has never been anything but a LDE facing the Right Tackle

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 27, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Dude, you couldn't be more wrong

    When Osi had 5 sacks it was against Justice who was starting for Tre Thomas who was a LT. Runyan was the RT. Tuck plays where strahan did which is LE.

    by Giants56 on Apr 27, 2010 6:57 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

    Back in the day....

    Strahan had some epic battles with John Runyan RT. This would put Strahan at LE while Osi was at RE. Tuck eventually took over for Strahan at LE.

    No beer and no girls make Big Ben a dull boy

    by Mother Tucker on Apr 27, 2010 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Thank you

    How soon we forget

    by Giants56 on Apr 27, 2010 7:10 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

    You have this backwards

    Osi plays RDE and faces the left tackle (the guy to the QBs left).

    by Ed Valentine on Apr 27, 2010 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Eh

    Yeah, my bad. I could have sworn it was the other way around, but I looked at SB42 and strahan was on the left side.

    I don’t know how I mixed it up

    Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

    When there's a WILL there's a WAY

    by Willgfass on Apr 28, 2010 7:38 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Thanks Ed

    This convo was starting to expose some basic lack of footbal knowledge, I think yesterday was just an off day some people ( hopefully)

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 28, 2010 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Oh YEEEA no doubt

    Tuck is the starter, I was saying he is always trying to give the starter spot to Osi and Kiwi because of all the talking and bickering over who is the starter, he is a team player like that but he is the base LE for sure, thats not even up for discussion but I think he gets back to being moved around alot more this year as Fewell wants it. I also agree with you that Kiwi gets the 1st and 2nd dwn spot for sure. Reese is playing it smart he is probably waiting for Osi to get a few sacks and raise his value by week 6 before he trades him…….. if he does at all.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I think you could see JPP inherit the Tuck role from 2007

    Like a wild card pass rusher lined up wherever Fewell likes.

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions  

    The raiders would probably do it hahaha

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Does Petrus start at LG?

    Beatty at LT
    Diehl to RT
    Seubert to super sub

    Not necessarily advocating this but it is an interesting idea and worth a comment or two.

    by MSP Giant on Apr 27, 2010 9:56 AM EDT reply actions  

    he's gonna have to earn it

    but I doubt it.

    I think the only change will be McKenzie for Diehl at RT.

    I doubt they go with 2 young players like that on Eli’s blindside. I think Seubert stays in. At least for now. They could always go with Petrus at some point in the season

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions  

    prob true

    but Diehl started as a rookie

    But agree – 2 youngsters on Eli’s blind side is prob not a good idea.

    Wonder how Diehl feels about moving to RT?

    by MSP Giant on Apr 27, 2010 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I don;t think he'll like it

    but he’s gonna have to battle it out for that LT spot..so he could win that spot again too.

    Its possibly we see the same starting OL again.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

    +1

    I agree. I dont know if i want 2 young guys protecting Eli’s blindide. If Beatty plays well and handles all of his assignments and Seubert continues to struggle Petrus can come in then.

    by Giants56 on Apr 27, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

    He has a good chance

    but a healthy Richie is gonna compete like hell though

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Love that guy!

    But methinks Seubert has gotten as much from his skills as he can and he may be begining to break down physically

    I hope I am wrong

    by MSP Giant on Apr 27, 2010 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Giants don't like to change 2 OL in same year

    They will if they have to, but Petrus would have to knock their socks off

    Expect Beatty to start and Diehl to move somewhere. Seubert and McKenzie are the likeliest candidates, both played well, but were showing wear.

    by trueblue63 on Apr 27, 2010 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Here we go again I think its good that the only thing anyone wants to ever talk about is the middle linebacker. That means you don’t really have anything else to worry about.I don’t think this guy even considered the cost of trading from 15 to 7 …for an unknown commodity. McClain is the best LB in this class but he’s not Patrick Willis, Brian Urlacher or players of that ilk. He’s also never played in a 3-4 so the question is any non-qb worth basically your entire draft ?

    As far as Tuck goes … Justin is All Pro caliber when he’s healhy. Although I’d love to see them occassionally move inside where his quickness and athleticism causes serious problems for guards and centers.

    by TheBXRepresenta on Apr 27, 2010 9:58 AM EDT via mobile reply actions  

    In a 4-3 … Damn u blackberry

    by TheBXRepresenta on Apr 27, 2010 10:00 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

    no

    U R

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions  

    This is great!haha..A BBV version of "I know you are, but what am I"..haha

    "When I was a boy and had no sense I got my pecker stuck in an electric fence..Well it curled my hair and tickled my balls, and made me shit in my overalls"

    by Bobbiblue on Apr 27, 2010 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Phillip Dillard

    “Dillard has a muscular build and a strong lower half. Reads his keys well, reacts fast and has a good initial burst. Takes proper pursuit angles, maintains leverage tracking the ball and has the top-end speed to be a sideline-to-sideline player. Tough kid who fights to the whistle.”

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 10:07 AM EDT reply actions  

    And

    “Pick Analysis: The Giants finally address their middle linebacker need with the selection of Phillip Dillard. The highly productive linebacker from Nebraska has good instincts, and is a tough, downhill player in the middle. He should compete for the starting job as a rookie. "
    -nfl.com

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I may have to change my handle

    “Simms-McConkey-Dillard”

    … but it’ll have to wait until he comes up big in a Superbowl!

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

    but he wuz only a teh FourF rounderz!!!

    we didn’tz get a LBz in the top 3 rounders! He can’tz bez all that teh good.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

    So true!

    What am I thinking?! All players in the top 3 rounds are guaranteed to no bust, I forgot!!!!
    Damn we should’ve traded up for McClain!!! Who needs Linval and Chad???? I’d rather have Rocky Bernard and C.C. Brown anyways!!!

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

    JPP

    I hope I am wrong but my point is that the other players available when we drafted at 15 will help us more and in the future than JPP.I agree that any rookie is going to be a immediate starter in year 1.I just think JPP is a huge risk for us.The other players come with risk but not as much of a boom or bust scenerio.I will root for JPP but will not be surprised if he is a bust and not part of our team in 3-4 years.Free Did you prefer JPP or Morgan before the draft?

    by GENEA on Apr 27, 2010 10:24 AM EDT reply actions  

    I preferred Morgan

    so yea, of course I was pissed. But there’s a reason he went at #16…something we all don’t know and probably won’t know until they play the games.

    But there’s some writing on the wall there. The Jags passed at #10. The Eagles traded up and drafted a DE not named Morgan, and the Giants drafted a DE not named Morgan.

    So basically 3 teams passed on this guy.

    I doubt the Giant are drafting a player at #15 who they don’t feel helps them at #15. People, including myself, are looking at this dude as raw and a project.

    Maybe the Giants don’t feel that way? There’s a reason they passed on Morgan.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Im sure Morgan looks at is 15 teams passing him up

    so that should light a fire but he better be glad the Giants didnt select someone else because The Titans loved JPP and that means that he wouldve fell even further, but look at it this way too…………..There’s a reason that teams who need or want DE’s passed on him as well.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

    How exacly did u decipher who’s goin to be good I 3-4 years ? Pierre-Pauls size-speed numbers are elite. He’s got the ideal body type and he was productive enough to be a First Team All-American and All Big East in his 1st year of D1 football. He also killed at the J.C. level. That means the one publication and the coaches in the Big East which was better than the ACC voted him to that team.Any pick in the NFL draft can be a bust. But not every pick can be a Pro Bowler or All Pro if he goes back to USF he’s a top 10 pick next year. He can be as good as he wants to be

    by TheBXRepresenta on Apr 27, 2010 10:43 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

    DL good for catching slippery bastard QB's

    Let’s not forget how McNabb danced around our D-line with ease—-we need guys who can close the pocket and sack slippery bastards like McNabb. Secondly, as mentioned if we can stop the run and pressure the QB—-that will help the LB’s and Dbacks tremendously.
    I know McClain is the top LB but that doesn’t always mean he’ll become NFL talent. I know he’s good, but is there a lot of hype because the LB’s coming out are weak overall. Trading away picks would have hurt the Giants.

    by Gmenfan on Apr 27, 2010 10:25 AM EDT reply actions  

    +1

    Joseph and JPP have long vines for arms. Lets see Romo and McNabb get away now.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

    +2..

    If that Joseph hits somebody square..Quarters will start flying out of their butts..

    "When I was a boy and had no sense I got my pecker stuck in an electric fence..Well it curled my hair and tickled my balls, and made me shit in my overalls"

    by Bobbiblue on Apr 27, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions  

    well if its Romo

    it might be a gerbil or even Jerry Jones who falls out of there

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

    Joseph and JPP

    Love to enjoy Cobb Salads or Kolb Salads for breakfast lunch and dinner. Mmm tasty.

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

    'swing hard in case you hit it'

    “Jason Pierre-Paul could end up being a 15 sack a year type of talent, and he could also go down in flames. I don’t know that there’s going to be anything in-between.”

    Actually, there’s a 99% chance that it’ll be something in-between, as is the case with every guy that these guys declare as boom-or-bust prospects.

    It’s comments like those that make me cringe at draft analysis.

    by tulls200 on Apr 27, 2010 10:38 AM EDT reply actions  

    +1

    agreed. This whole boom or bust crap got me thinkin. The hell does that mean? 15 sacks or nothing?

    That’s crap. JPP will be out of the league, a complete bust, if he doesn’t work to get better and/or gets injury enough to hurt his development.

    That’s how he’ll be a bust. Does he have the work ethic? All reports say yes, and then some.

    Whether he gets 15 sacks a year, or 8..is up to him and of course his playing time.

    by FreeBradshaw on Apr 27, 2010 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

    seriously

    it’s like any guy with great athletic ability has a 0% chance of being a pretty solid, 2nd-tier player, it’s just assumed they’re a total home run, or out of the league in 2 years.

    let’s think about reality here – the guy is maybe somewhat lacking in overall feel for the game, but makes up for it with great athletic ability. doesn’t that sound like the MAJORITY OF PLAYERS in the nfl that you’d probably classify in that “pretty solid” group?

    by tulls200 on Apr 27, 2010 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions  

    +1

    That was an idiotic statement.

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Yeah that was a wishy-washy comment..He should run for Congress..

    "When I was a boy and had no sense I got my pecker stuck in an electric fence..Well it curled my hair and tickled my balls, and made me shit in my overalls"

    by Bobbiblue on Apr 27, 2010 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I gotta give Ed alot of credit for hearing a comment like that and maintaining his composure..

    I’d have started laughing hysterically..Thanks for joining us tonight, Scott..Obviously, your ass cheeks reside in two-counties.

    "When I was a boy and had no sense I got my pecker stuck in an electric fence..Well it curled my hair and tickled my balls, and made me shit in my overalls"

    by Bobbiblue on Apr 27, 2010 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions  

    LOL!!

    I like Scott a lot. But, with all of these guys who study the draft for a living you have to understand there is a language and a mentality that the rest of us don’t share. The ‘scout speak’ makes me nuts sometimes, but I’m looking for the quality nuggets mixed in with the silly ‘boom or bust,’ ‘natural bender,’ etc., etc., comments.

    by Ed Valentine on Apr 27, 2010 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Back after a few days away

    still hate the JPP pick, but I loved everything else the Giants did. I have high, high hopes for both Linvall and Chad Jones, and wouldn’t be shocked in the least if either of them perform at first round levels, which means that even if JPP is a bust, it doesn’t hurt the Giants too much.

    And as much as I would have loved McClain and dislike the JPP pick, I agree with what Free said in the first comment: you can’t justify trading away all the late round picks to move up for him. The Giants made great use of those later picks. Even though I disagree with who they took at 15, I think they did a great job with the rest of those picks. Overall, I rate this draft a B

    2009 Did Not Happen

    by cjmulrain on Apr 27, 2010 10:39 AM EDT reply actions  

    Yes I rated them a 'B'..also..(Not that that means much..lol)

    But when you consider that fact they that stood their ground and didn’t go trade happy on us..they did a pretty damn good job..The only teams that faired better are the ones who sucked and got higher picks as a result of fielding losers.

    "When I was a boy and had no sense I got my pecker stuck in an electric fence..Well it curled my hair and tickled my balls, and made me shit in my overalls"

    by Bobbiblue on Apr 27, 2010 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Trading up in the first round

    Is generally a loser’s strategy — putting too many of your eggs in one basket. McClain may be a good player but he may also be a bust If you trade up to take him you give up two valuable draft spots.

    The fact is in the NFL these days middle linebacker has become a much less valuable position. Yes we could stand an upgrade at that position but you can’t sell the house to do it.

    I thought the Eagles had blown their draft by trading 24 and two threes to move up and take Graham — another guy who has some question marks. But then they took a second round pick and by repeatedly trading back turned that second rounder into a bunch of 4th rounders. Still not sure how well they did overall. But generally trading back and having more picks is better than trading up and having too few. It’s al a crapshoot anyway and having more picks gives you more chances to hit. I thought Reese was right to stand pat. Now it’s just a question of whether his talent evaluation is sound.

    by Tucker Fredrickson on Apr 27, 2010 10:41 AM EDT reply actions  

    I slightly disagree

    Having more picks does not mean you have more chances to hit on a decent player.

    I know that sounds the wrong way round but I think it is true.

    The variable is a) a smaller pool to draft from and b) a player is and will remain a dud whether he is picked in the first or seventh round

    With the say 48th pick you are picking from a larger pool and you can pick up a very good player. If you apply a scattergun approach in the 3rd to 5th rounds where you are picking from a smaller pool the chances of a good player decrease.

    Throw in bad drafting and you can end up with noone in either scenario.

    by G Fan in England on Apr 27, 2010 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

    OK

    I agree that if you are incompetent at evaluating talent, having more picks does not increase your odds of getting more value in a strict mathematical ratio. But if we had traded up with our first third and 6th round picks this year (I’m not sure if that would have been enough BTW) we’d have McClain, but we wouldn’t have JP, Jones and Adrian Tracy. Even if tracy washes out entirely, the odds that we come out with more overall value than if we got McClain. If Jpp washes out, but Chad Jones becomes a good NFL safety, were no worse off. And if either Jpp or (less likely) Tracy hit we’re way better off. On the other hand if we took McClain and he turned out not to be fast enough or unable to adjust to our system or debilitated by Crohns, we’d have completely crippled ourselves. I think the odds really favor you taking more players. That’s why the Patriots almost always trade down.

    The fact is I think the values for these trades are skewed in ways that make it worse to trade up. Does anyone really think that we couldn’t get a player at 15 who was just as good as a player at 8. Whether we did or not will be a product of Reese’s judment.

    by Tucker Fredrickson on Apr 27, 2010 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Well more picks does mean you have

    a better chance of getting a good player but you have to be skilled at drafting still, if you are a bad GM with a 100 picks then it doesnt matter like Matt Millen or like when KC had 14 picks a few yrs back and did nothing with it, but you see what happens when Bilichick and co. have a ton of picks, they hit on all of them basically ( well it would seem so right now) and still came away with 4 in next years first 2 rounds….. those guys are masters of the board even though they draft strictly need.

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 27, 2010 11:31 AM EDT reply actions  

    Alot of experts

    are putting the Pats decline down to the very fact they have had poor drafts by continuing to trade down to acquire more picks.

    by G Fan in England on Apr 27, 2010 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

    personally I wouldn't say its because they trade down always

    but when they do finally pick someone they pick the wrong players.

    For example in 2008 they took a bust CB when Terrell Thomas was still on board.

    by mclaren_is_the_best on Apr 27, 2010 9:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Then

    trading down and picking the wrong player will set a team back for years.

    I think we should be happy that JR sticks to where he is in the draft and takes who he thinks is best.

    by G Fan in England on Apr 28, 2010 4:04 AM EDT up reply actions  

    A lot of experts

    didn’t win 3 Superbowls in the last decade

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 28, 2010 7:42 AM EDT up reply actions  

    lol

    thats true simms, people are questioning a guy who gets rid of big names for fun and still wins

    Peyton May Have The Wins!!
    But Eli Will Have The Rings!!!

    by Blue Gates on Apr 28, 2010 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

    I think

    the interest in Henderson and the trade speculation on Cofield led to that remark. It follows reasoning that they are still not completely satisfied at DT if those two rumors are correct.

    by ronjohnson on Apr 27, 2010 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Exactly

    There is also speculation about Rocky Bernard’s future, though nothing concrete. So, we have to wait and see.

    by Ed Valentine on Apr 27, 2010 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I like what JR did in the draft

    This team had multiple needs, you cant fix every need in one off-season. So instead of going all out for McClain, we filled multilpe needs, and possibly filled a position at DE before it becomes a need.

    Whether you were on board with the JPP pick or not (which I wasnt) you have to now love his upside. If he fulfills his potential he could dominate like Mario Williams or Julius Peppers (when he decides to turn it on).

    by Giants56 on Apr 27, 2010 12:24 PM EDT reply actions  

    well,

    they’re certainly gonna have to separate the wheat from the chaff. I think the real question becomes, who are our 4 best DTs (Joseph, Canty, Alford, Cofield) and what can we get in exchange for whatever’s left over… How many DTs do they traditionally carry? Might be the same or less given the versatility of some of these guys like Canty, Tuck…

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 12:27 PM EDT reply actions  

    You can get a body to fill the weaknesses of your D line or

    you improve the D-Line so that the LB’s you have can play to their strengths. The LB corp had to cover way too many wholes in the D-line and simply were out of position all the time. The Draft improved the line so LB’s should improve as well. The addition of a good tackler like Dillard will just make it that much better. I still think we need to bring in a vetearn LB to tutor the young guys for a year and we will be in good shape. Not a top 5 defense by light years ahead of last year.

    When its 3rd and long, throw the ball past the marker.

    by Fester McDougal on Apr 27, 2010 12:27 PM EDT reply actions  

    Honestly

    When a team looks as bad as the Giants D last year, it’s hard to pinpoint who were most responsible for the poor results. At least from this fans perspective. Some of you guys might be better at figuring out that stuff than I am.
     Was it the LB’s exposed by the poor line play in keeping lanes? Or the poor coverage of the LB’s who left the safeties covering way too much ground? Or the lack of a pass rush and push that led to too many opportunities for the opposing QB overall?
     I trust the Giants to figure it out and plug the holes. All this speculation is fun, but I can’t wait to see Fewell’s schemes and how the new guys play and the returning players respond this year. it should be fun!

    by ronjohnson on Apr 27, 2010 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

    It was everything

    However, what I found to be most distressing was the play of our back seven in zone coverage. With the Giants blitz-happy scheme, offenses often go max-protection, keeping 7 or 8 guys in to block. That means there are only 2 or 3 players running routes. There were lots of plays where Sheridan guessed correctly and rushed only 4, keeping 7 guys back playing zone when the offense was in max-protect. Recievers would still get wide open even though we had all those guys back there to cover them. In my opinion, it was a combination of bad coaching, bad execution, and oversized, slow personnel.

    by Be Driven on Apr 27, 2010 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Well..

    Here’s what I think..(that’s always dangerous)..I don’t think the Giants thought actually ever thought MLB was the problem at all..I think it is apparent that the middle DL was their focus..Yeah they probably would have grabbed McClain if he was there but they knew they had to find a huge plug to fill the leak we have in the middle and I think they did that in the draft, and I also think they are not done yet..A MLB isn’t going to cure a runner at full speed who just broke thru your middle linemen..the man with the mike calls plays and feeds on scraps..Y’all busted APs balls because he was slowing down..yeah his body looked like it had a keg of beer strapped on his mid-section last year..but they ain’t going to ever be expected to shut down a porous middle-line..If a runner gets by the DTs..that’s 4-5 yards easy..I think the guys who know a hell of alot more than we know..know it..and there are alot of really good tackles getting their walking papers..Pro-bowl caliber guys..We just all need to remember that all we did was go thru a draft..and you will probably also bust me for saying this but Dillard reminds me of Bruschi (spelling suspect).

    "When I was a boy and had no sense I got my pecker stuck in an electric fence..Well it curled my hair and tickled my balls, and made me shit in my overalls"

    by Bobbiblue on Apr 27, 2010 12:52 PM EDT reply actions  

    Reminds me of Brackett

    But I agree with your assesment. Once Pierce was released, everyone jumped to the conclusion that there was a “glaring hole” at the MLB position. It was obvious from the draft and free agency, the S and D-Line were the weak positions in the eyes of Reese and the FO, and those holes have been plugged. Now all we need is for someone to step up and claim the MLB spot. Goff, Wilkinsen, and Dillard will compete to be the MLB, one of those guys will earn it, and with a healthy D-Line this year, and a new scheme, there is a lot to look forward to.

    Just gimme some playmakers

    by I_Formation27 on Apr 27, 2010 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I am going to go waayyyyyy

    out on a limb and say Wilkinson gets hurt. I know, I know a bold prediction you say. That’s how I roll though. I will also predict that Eli wins the starting QB position.

    by Giants56 on Apr 27, 2010 1:27 PM EDT reply actions  

    Over Sorgi?

    You’re crazy

    You play to win the game!

    by Simms-McConkey on Apr 27, 2010 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Wow, 56!

    Are you one of those people who only places $2 ‘show’ bets at the race track? LOL!!

    by Ed Valentine on Apr 27, 2010 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

    LOL.

    Thats right. But I’m laughing all the way to the bank with my $2.75 when it hits.

    by Giants56 on Apr 27, 2010 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

    I'm going to cross my fingers

    and actually go out on a limb and say Wilk is the starting MLB on openning day.

    by bigblue777 on Apr 27, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

    If he stay healthy

    the talent is there for him to do well. And he has played the position.

    I would think Geris in the middle to be a good thing if he earns it.

    by MSP Giant on Apr 27, 2010 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

    If you are ever the dice-man when I play craps, I'm betting with you bro!!haha..

    You are definitely going out on a limb with the Eli bet though..I think Sorgi is a lock..and I think we should start a pool on hamstring pulls..Shit we are even drafting kids with them.

    "When I was a boy and had no sense I got my pecker stuck in an electric fence..Well it curled my hair and tickled my balls, and made me shit in my overalls"

    by Bobbiblue on Apr 27, 2010 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

    Osi

    This may be off topic or what not but I need to vent about something.
    Osi in particular.
    Why is everyone so bent on Osi being traded or what not?
    So the guy had a bad season, he still led the team with sacks, and i’m not postive but I’m pretty sure he put more pressure on the opposing QB more than any DE combined on the team.
    Okay, the guy sucks when i come’s to the run….didn’t we already know that?
    I mean since day one, Osi wasn’t Strahan against the run, and we all knew that.
    He was and still is a pass rushing specialist.
    Is it just me or did Osi not miss an entire season? (2008)
    So, I’d say he deserves a pass for last years performance.
    I just don’t see why fans want to get rid of the guy.
    Is it because of last season when he threw a fit on the sidelines for being benched?
    Well damn, I would throw a fit, too.
    If I was benched for somebody of lesser talent (Kiwi, who hasn’t done anything significant throughout his career i.e notice the team won a superbowl WITHOUT him, Osi was present and was a huge factor even without recording a sack) I would throw a fit just like Osi did. Especially when I’m the best player on the team doing what my team takes pride (pressuring the QB)

    So, yeah can somebody explain this to me?

    by JerellB on Apr 27, 2010 5:09 PM EDT reply actions  

    Glad you brought this up!

    I have been wondering the same thing. I remeber right before Plaxico shot himself, the Giants were putting hin in the game but using him as a decoy. Then when he started complaining about not getting the ball, the sports media started talking smack about him not being a team player and all.

    Now, they are doing the same thing with Osi. Personally, I don’t think that Osi should even be getting criticized. He was one of the most consistent players on the team. For the life of me, I cannot understand why this player is catching the hell he has been receiving lately.

    Whats sad about this is he can’t tell the fans whats really going on. I think that it has something to do with his contract. You know that they put clauses in there which state that if they reach so many yards in rushing; make so many tackles; make so many sacks; so forth and so on, they receive bonuses. For example, A contract can be valued on a base level at about 10 million standard. However, after the incentives, like the ones that I mentioned above, The contract jumps to 25 million. In the press they give the fans the high number and thats the understanding that we have.

    Then, the team starts criticizing the player; saying that he is underperforming even if he’s not. They sit him on the bench and because hes sitting on the bench, he can’t reach the milestones in his contract which means less money. The messed up part is. as I stated earlier, the player is contractually bound not to say anything about it. I truly think that Plaxico was having the same problem. Both are pro bowl players worthy of large contracts and if you need a player of that caliber, you lower them in with the attractive contract and then you play the performance game to avoid paying him his money. They will trade Osi, believe me and its messed up because I think Osi is a pehnomenal player and there are at least a dozen teams lined up to jump on him when he becomes available.

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 27, 2010 5:28 PM EDT reply actions  

    I don't think TC gives a damn

    About anyones contract. He is paid flat out to win games and make the right coaching decisions. Coughlin is only interested in winning, and postseason success. The kind we had in 07, not the kind the Jets had this year. TC wants to win Lombardi trophys. He wants the best players on the field. Osi was not cutting it in the run game last year so he got benched. It had nothing to do with incentives.

    by wangstu13 on Apr 28, 2010 1:03 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Dude chill

    Back door decision take place all of the time. These types of decisions take players on the field and take them off. Just ask Bill Parcells, Tony Romo and Jerry.

    Also, the giants inability to stop the run wasn’t entirely Osi’s fault. If it was all about winning with Coughlin, then why didn’t he take those cornbacks and safetys out of the game who were getting burned for mad yards like three of four times a game. Osi was clearly used as a scapgoat. The Giant offense wan’t performing either particularly Eli and Barndon. They didn’r get called out or replaced so that argument is dead in the water.

    Most Contracts in the NFL are non-garuanted whuch means that players have to perform to get payed. Football teams and Player’s agents know these contracts like the back of thier hands and nickel and dime each other all of the time. what I said in my comment above is only speculation. We only know what they are telling us but you are being real niave if you don’t think that this type of think goes on.

    Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

    by LoNJDTechnology on Apr 28, 2010 2:01 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

    I don't think TC gives a damn

    About anyones contract. He is paid flat out to win games and make the right coaching decisions. Coughlin is only interested in winning, and postseason success. The kind we had in 07, not the kind the Jets had this year. TC wants to win Lombardi trophys. He wants the best players on the field. Osi was not cutting it in the run game last year so he got benched. It had nothing to do with incentives.

    by wangstu13 on Apr 28, 2010 1:03 AM EDT up reply actions  

    Comments For This Post Are Closed


    User Tools

    Big Blue View is the best independent site on the Internet for year-round news and discussion about the New York Giants.

    Community Guidelines

    FanPosts

    Community blog posts and discussion.

    Recommended FanPosts

    Small
    If No Manningham, Get Randy Moss
    Hakeem_nicks_compartment_syndrome_leg_injury_small
    State of the Union - The End.
    Landeta_small
    All Time Giants Super Bowl Team
    Arqamaca-p218897_small
    Congratulations From a Raiders Fan
    Hakeem_nicks_compartment_syndrome_leg_injury_small
    The Jerry Reese Game! v2012

    Recent FanPosts

    I_bring_it_2_small
    Official "Things-you-can't-spell-without-Eli" Comedy Thread
    Usf_logo_small
    The JR Bandwagon!
    Small
    First moves?
    Img_0245_small
    Playoffs Fuhgeddabout it...
    Snv30403_small
    Rest In Peace, Whitney
    1bradshaw_small
    Jeremy Lin = Victor Cruz

    + New FanPost All FanPosts >

    Get Your Giants' Gear

    160x600_ny_giants_medium


    Editor-In-Chief

    Ed_valentine_2_small Ed Valentine

    Editors

    Small brisulph

    Authors

    Mike_farley_small Mike Farley

    Meme2_small Sean Kerr