New York Giants - Page 6

brettbrettr · #51 08-09-2007, 12:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]

he's not young enough. nothing about his past, either in college or the pros, suggests he will get radically better.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thing is, they expected him to be radically better than he is. They gave up a lot to get him. He's not horrible and he's shown some flashes of excellence. They're not going to cut ties in his 4th season and they shouldn't.

Triumph36 · #52 08-09-2007, 12:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

he's not young enough. nothing about his past, either in college or the pros, suggests he will get radically better.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thing is, they expected him to be radically better than he is. They gave up a lot to get him. He's not horrible and he's shown some flashes of excellence. They're not going to cut ties in his 4th season and they shouldn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

he's not any good. they gave up a lot to get him, but that already hurts - should they then continue to try to make a good quarterback out of this guy and hurt the team further? i'm sure that's what they will do - but it's not what they should do. to me, he's got this year - i don't see him improving much on last year, or much at all.

if his name were eli smith, the giants would've stayed at their spot and drafted philip rivers - they could be a radically better team.

craigruby · #53 08-09-2007, 12:36 PM

He made the playoffs the last 2 years last I checked.

Triumph36 · #54 08-09-2007, 12:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He made the playoffs the last 2 years last I checked.

[/ QUOTE ]

sigh - he had one of the best running backs in the league.

remember when danny kanell led the giants to the playoffs? not saying eli is that bad - but he's not that much better either.

Tyler Durden · #55 08-09-2007, 12:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He made the playoffs the last 2 years last I checked.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be tough to miss the playoffs w/ the supporting cast he's had.

And let's not forget, he hasn't won in the playoffs.

Wes Mantooth · #56 08-09-2007, 01:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He made the playoffs the last 2 years last I checked.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be tough to miss the playoffs w/ the supporting cast he's had.

And let's not forget, he hasn't won in the playoffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

the Giants pretty much had the same team the 2 years before when they did not make the playoffs... Toomer, Tiki, Shockey, Straham, Osi, etc...

Not sure why this is still being discused, the point of the thread was what is the outlook for the Giants this season, not should the Giants cut Eli now. If Eli has a bad year, then bring up this issue after the season, in 2008.

PokerFink · #57 08-09-2007, 02:02 PM

The investment the Giants made four years ago when they drafted Eli is now a sunk cost. You don't keep a mediocre player because you invested a lot in him four years ago, you keep him if you think he will improve. There are few (if any) signs that Eli will improve.

However, depending on how they restructured his contract, the Giants might take a huge cap it for releasing Eli. If that is the case, they might as well suffer through playing Eli rather than take that hit. If they can release him without a major cap hit, I think that would be the best move.

The Giants have a good core of young players, and are in the position that if they wanted to, they could get rid of their veterans and revamp the roster with young players. See: Arizona. Then when they're ready to, they can add veterans/free agents and take a real shot at competing. See: San Fran.

But they think they're too good of a team right now to do that, so instead they're stuck trying to plug holes on a 9-7 team year after year. But since they don't have enough talent to seriously compete for the Super Bowl, what's the point?

That's why I think they would be better off just getting rid of all the veterans and starting fresh with their young core (Kiwanuka, Umenyora, Jacobs, etc.) And while they're at it, might as well find a new QB too.

brettbrettr · #58 08-09-2007, 03:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The investment the Giants made four years ago when they drafted Eli is now a sunk cost. You don't keep a mediocre player because you invested a lot in him four years ago, you keep him if you think he will improve. There are few (if any) signs that Eli will improve.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree with the cost thing but they expect him to improve. I fail to see anyone better available to replace him.

[ QUOTE ]
The Giants have a good core of young players, and are in the position that if they wanted to, they could get rid of their veterans and revamp the roster with young players. See: Arizona. Then when they're ready to, they can add veterans/free agents and take a real shot at competing. See: San Fran.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who are their young players? Core? Their core is an aging lot. They have Osi and Pierce. Those two fit the good and young category. That's it, I think.

Also, citing Arizona and SF as teams to model themselves after *before* either of these teams have actually done anything is silly. I'd rather be a Cards or 9ers fan than a Giants now because they seem to be moving forwards instead of backwards, but neither team has had the amount of recent success the NYG have.

[ QUOTE ]

But they think they're too good of a team right now to do that, so instead they're stuck trying to plug holes on a 9-7 team year after year. But since they don't have enough talent to seriously compete for the Super Bowl, what's the point?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm convinced they re-upped Coughlin for 1 to wait on Fox/Cowher/Fisher/Belichick. I don't thin it was a good move, but I'm pretty sure that's why he's still around. I don't think they think they're very good. Its an aging team that should be ripped apart IMO. I think you'll see just that post this season. One year too late IMO.

[ QUOTE ]

That's why I think they would be better off just getting rid of all the veterans and starting fresh with their young core (Kiwanuka, Umenyora, Jacobs, etc.) And while they're at it, might as well find a new QB too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Next year. And if Eli doesn't improve, you'll probably see them search out other options there too.

PokerFink · #59 08-09-2007, 03:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Who are their young players? Core? Their core is an aging lot. They have Osi and Pierce. Those two fit the good and young category. That's it, I think.

Also, citing Arizona and SF as teams to model themselves after *before* either of these teams have actually done anything is silly. I'd rather be a Cards or 9ers fan than a Giants now because they seem to be moving forwards instead of backwards, but neither team has had the amount of recent success the NYG have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Osi, Pierce, Kiwanuka, Jacobs, Shockey, draft picks. Some good young talent there that would form the core if/when they revamp the roster.

Obviously Arizona and San Fran haven't done anything yet, but we both agree that atleast they have a plan and seem to be heading in the right direction. Will it work? That remains to be seen, and depends on whether their young players pan out. But that plan can work, and it's the best way to build a long-term contender, see: Eagles circa 2000. I just wanted to use 2007 examples for comparison.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm convinced they re-upped Coughlin for 1 to wait on Fox/Cowher/Fisher/Belichick.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are Fox and Bilichick going to be avaliable?

[ QUOTE ]
Its an aging team that should be ripped apart IMO. I think you'll see just that post this season. One year too late IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds about right.

Triumph36 · #60 08-09-2007, 03:39 PM

How are Pierce and Shockey young? They'd be on the outs as well - I mean, they could certainly be kept around and figure to be effective for a few more seasons - but neither one is particularly young.

Blowing up the team makes no sense unless you get rid of the quarterback and coach - problem is, there aren't many good coaches available and it wasn't the right time to get rid of Eli. It's just poor timing.