We asked our 'Facebook' friends to submit questions for this weekend's Big Blue View mailbag. There were so many good questions submitted that we will do this in two parts. Some questions will be answered today. Some questions will be answered on Sunday.
We thank our 'Facebook' audience for their submissions. We also remind you that you can e-mail questions to email@example.com or tweet them to@bigblueview with the hastag #bbvmailbag.
Question: We've lost Beatty for half the season, Pugh is transitioning to G, and now we're looking at a rookie protecting Eli's blind side.
This got me thinking, if there's a steady rotation of players for the D-line throughout a game, why are teams set on playing only 5 for the O-line? Wouldn't these big men benefit from getting a breather in order to stay fresh for later in the game, much the way D-linemen do? -- David from Bellmore
Ed says: This is an interesting theory. With the Giants, for example, you have John Jerry as the probable sixth lineman. In this 'rotation' scenario, you could use Jerry and perhaps move Geoff Schwartz or Justin Pugh around to give guys a series or two off throughout the game. I do understand where this thought comes from. Problem is, I doubt that this could work at the NFL level.
An offensive line, more than any other position group in football, functions as a unit. They must play together, they must communicate properly with each other, they must have timing and they must understand what the player next to them is or is not going to do in certain situations. The only way to develop this is through constant practice repetitions and through playing in games together. Often, we see how one mid-game injury can completely disrupt an offensive line.
Rotating players in and out, while it would keep them fresher, would disrupt all of that communication and trust that offensive lines depend on. Not that it couldn't work, but this is why you don't see teams try it.
Ed says: I think the answer is a mixed bag. If you are looking at the offense, the Giants are definitely in the top half of the league. Especially if all of their receivers are healthy. The offense could be really special if the receivers are healthy and the offensive line holds up. Defensively, who knows? There are a lot of unproven players the Giants think can do the job. The proof is in the pudding, though. Right now I really don't have a big problem with the ranking of No. 20. It could look low by the end of the season, but with all the question marks I can't blame anyone for putting the Giants there right now.
Brian Pug asks: Will Corey Washington get a chance to play with the 1's this year?
Ed says: Washington has been getting some opportunities with the first team during OTAs, and has taken advantage of them. Of course, neither Odell Beckham Jr. nor Victor Cruz are practicing. Reality is, if everyone is healthy Washington will at best be the Giants' fourth wide receiver. And yes, it is entirely possible he doesn't even make the team. The Giants have a lot of receiving depth, and it's a good competition.
RayandAmy Poisson asks: May the starting left tackle be someone who gets cut from another team?
Ed says: Sure. It could be Jake Long. It could be someone else who gets released. At this point, though, Ereck Flowers remains the best option. Besides, if a team releases a player during or after the preseason that means they don't think he is good enough to be on their team. Whoever that guy is, do you really want him protecting Eli Manning?
Andrew Reinhertz asks: 1) Will Cunningham make final 53? 2) How far behind on the learning curve for Spags defense will JPP be having missed OTA?
Ed says: No way to know if Cunningham will make the 53. The tight end competition is an intense one with a lot of talented players. What I can say is that Cunningham has made himself noticed, and put himself in a position to have a chance if his quality play continues. As for JPP, I wouldn't worry about his learning curve. He's a veteran and there are only so many techniques you can ask a defensive end to play. I would worry more about Pierre-Paul's mentality coming into the season and whether or not he can duplicate or surpass the way he played a year ago.
Steven Heights asks: 1. Will Landon Collins play some snaps at linebacker? 2. What's up with the rumors about mutual interest in James Jones?
Ed says: Collins is a safety. Period. Not a linebacker. He will likely play down in the box sometimes, and in the deep half at free safety sometimes. He won't be a linebacker. As for the James Jones, let's not go and make a big deal out of a report that the Giants had some contact with the guy back in May. It's mostly due diligence, which all teams do, just to find out about a player. That doesn't mean he won't be a Giant, it just means don't expect it to happen. When rumors like this come from the player or his agent it usually means the guy's phone hasn't been ringing and he's trying to remind teams he is out there.