New York Giants News & Notes: Giants Sign Two More Draft Picks

they’re obviously older then they were in 2008, and McKenzie, Seubert and Snee (probably Diehl too) were all banged up last year.

Of course, given age and a probable new starter at LT, they may not be that good..or they may be better.

Diehl is probably better off, and elite, at anywhere along the OL away from LT. That was probably holding them back a bit with him at LT. So if he’s at LG or RT, the line as a whole is better (no diss to Seubert or Mack, both are pretty good)

Yea, the Giants OL is that good. I hope they stay healthy. And Beatty can give a needed breathe of fresh athleticism to the LT spot too.

Glad the picks are signing…I don’t remember the last time we had a draft pick unsigned by camp…I’m sure it was in the late 80’s help me out !

I will take the #8 OL with an eye on us becoming a top 5…

Oh and ummmm giggling @ broke Tiki…how’s that for irony

No they arent that good. But as stated above they did have some injuries. If healthy, and if Beatty plays to his potential then yes they can be an elite group. Snee and O’Hara are both pro-bowl players. I think most people believe Diehl can be a pro-bowl caliber G (at least close). If Mckenzie is healthy and Beatty plays well then the sky is the limit.

Talk about fall from grace, oh well he brought it all on himself.

As far as the best team, I am gonna go out on a limb because it might be my favorite team. I am going with the 90 Giants, Phil was playing out of his head that year and we lost him and still won the SB with a backup QB.

but he has caused his own demise and i wouldnt say I pity him either

was an ass but I wouldnt wish financial woes on him. It sad when an athlete that made millions is broke. Tiki is a smart guy. I dont understand how he can be broke.

Giants were definitely the most dominate Giant’s football team. However the 1990 team was pretty damn close. They refused to lose. In more than a few games including the playoffs they founds ways to win games. Many Giant teams through the years found ways to lose games they should have easily won.

Curse’s defensive ranking is 100% correct.
But I’m not sure the 1986 Giants were better than the 2007 Giants.

Let’s see.

DL/DE: ’86 – Banks, LT, Jim Burt, Erik Howard, and the great George Martin.
07: Strahan, Umenyiora…etc.. Advantage: ’86.

LB: No discussion neccesary. 1986.

DB: Any DB group that includes the name "Elvis “Toast” Patterson" is at a distinct disadvantage. Let’s just say it’s a good thing LT got to the quarterback so often. Advantage, 2007.

OL: Tough one. Both great. Both really really great. Shit. 1986: Oates, Karl Nelson, Benson, etc versus the current group? I’m going with 2007.

QB: Also tough…I’m going with Eli. I know Phil was amazing in that SB, but I think Eli is and will be a superior qb. (/ducks flying objects) So, 2007.

WR: No question – 2007.

TE: I love me some Kevin Boss and he was huge in the SB but…c’mon. Bavaro. 1986.

RB: Tough one. Little Joe Morris was bad to the bone. Maurice Carthon, too. Ottis Anderson was listed on the team – I don’t remember him in 86. I do remember Lee Rouson. (Remember Lee Rouson?) 2007 was pretty much the same group we have now, only with D. Ward. Ok, slight edge to ’86.

ST: Lawrence Tynes v. Raul Allegre? Bitches, please. 1986.

Coaching: Tuna at his best v. Coughlin at his. A real fooball geek might choose Coughlin. Me, I’m just a knucklehead posting on a football site in the middle of frickin’ June. Advantage, Tuna.

Huh. 6-4 for 1986, although that RB ranking is a real tough one.
Which means Tynes manages to cost his team again.

First of all the DB’s Toast was not as bad as people remember him, and on the other side of toast was Mark Collins who basically shut Jerry Rice down without much help. Mark Collins is one of the best Giant CB’s ever. I would have to give the DB’s to the 86 team.

 On top of that I would say the QB’s are a push. Phil Simms in his prime was about as good as anybody.

OL love our 07 lineman, but better better than the suburbanites, again at best this is a push.

The 86 team was better, the 07 team came out and shocked the world.

I don’t understand how these players are leaving the game with no money.

If I were a GM, or even an agent that actually gave a crap about my players, I’d contractually obligate them to putting, say, half their signing bonus into solid investments. I’d also have a financial advisor on staff and force the players to meet with them twice a year or something like that. The fact that agents, teams, NFLPA seem to have no interest in this type of stuff really makes me wonder if they care beyond dollars and cents. I also don’t get how no hedge fund genius has capitalized on pro (not just NFL) money and convinced these guys to invest in things for the future. That being said, if you’re gonna crank out a dozen kids with a dozen chicks, then I dunno what to tell you.

1 and 1A. Actually I feel that they were one ring short of being a dynasty. The core of the team remained, and if we were able to have taken another one in between those two, would be talked about as one of the great dynasties along with the niners, boys, steelers and so forth.
And tiki is not broke. He is claiming poverty for some leniancy in his divorce proceedings. Its a common tactic. Hell, you can file for backruptcy and not be bankrupt. So let’s not feel too bad for ole 21. I’m sure his bank acct still has more zeroes than most of ours.

that team was every bit as good as the 86 team but they get lumped in the “magical” run category of the 07 team becasue they had two very close playoff games at the end. First to Eds point about how the 86 team was more dominate from start to finish, not ture. The 90 Giants were more dominate thorugh the first 10 games than the 86 team, in fact they beat the crap out of almost every oppenet to to get to a 10-0 start while the 86 team was 8-2 and played a lot of very close games against inferior teams. The 86 team finished stronger after the Monday night win in SF while the 90 team lost two close games to other elite teams SF and Buffalo and struggled against lesser teams late to finish 13-3 so because of that people act like the 90 team was some cinderella team but remember in 86 they did not play the Bears in the regular season and at the time the Bears were considered the dominate team that was going to repeat so who knows how the Giants would of faired against them in the regular season. Also they barley lost to SF and Buffalo during the regular season that year, those games could of gone either way the Giants lost by a total of 8 points in those two games combined I mean it was not like in 07 when Dallas and GB beat them by double digits. Not only that the 7-3 lost to SF showed they could shut down Rice and Montana. Also in 1990 the Giants played 7 (Wash 2, Philly 2, Buffalo, SF, Miami) playoff teams compared to 4 (Wash twice, Denver, SF) in 86 durring the regular season.

Now lets look at the playoffs the 86 team rolled through the playoffs without much of a sweat but again they never had to play the Bears, who were the only team in 86 that could hang with the Giants, while the 90 Giants had to significantly tougher Championship game and SB oppents (SF, Buffalo) while the 86 team had Wash and Denver and niether one of those teams was nearly as good as SF and Buff. Not only that Clevland would probabbly have been a tougher SB oppenet than Denver in 86 but they got upset by Elways drive. In 90 the Giants blew out the Bears 31-3 in the divisional round, thats was about the level of all three playoff teams in 86. Point being is the 86 team had a significantly easier road to a SB championship while the 90 team had to play two oppents that were every bit the equal of that 90 Giants team. I mean lets think back to 90, SF was going to make history and 3-peat, they were crowned as the greatest team of all time and the Giants D held them to 20 points in two meetings that year, if thats not dominate then I don’t what is.

I will admit the 86 team had a better offense, and I understand the the 90 team had a backup QB in the playoffs thats why they are considered a “cinderella” team but Hostetler was of starting QB caliber and a seven year vet at that point he was not Trent Dilfer. Buffalo being a 7 point favorite in that SB was a joke, I mean the Giants were a better team in every department other than skill players and DE. Just becasue they blew out the Raiders in the AFC chmapionship game while the Giants struggled with a sifnificantly bettter SF team. I get Buffalo being the favorite based on there regular season win but seven points that was insane.

My point is the 90 team was a very dominate team that played two very good teams in the playoffs not some magical upstart like the 07 team. Just becasue they played clsoe playoff games does not mean they were a cinderella. The 1990 Giants were like the Saints winning it last year a dominate team all year that slumped late, so everybody jumped off the bandwagon, but played great against some very good playoff oppents which made for some close games. Yea NO beating Indy was an upset but a very mild one like the 90 Giants beating the Bills a very mild upset. 07 against the Pats that was a historic upset.