|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331 |
Quote:
I don't think that would be enough but yeah, if your that willing to do that, might as well go to the top and give a little more right?
If the hype is true, maybe, just maybe RG3 is gonna be the first pick, not Luck.
Very good point. I think I said I'd be willing to give three firsts, a 3rd and 4th for Luck.
I'm not willing to give that for Griffin. Three firsts is a little over the top. Two firsts and our second should be more than enough to get him if we really want him. But we better be VERY sold on Griffin if that's the case.
If not, let's just take the safe route, stick with McCoy and get ourselves 3 starting quality players for next year, and one that's elite.
UCONN HUSKIES 2014 Champions of Basketball
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
Quote:
if there is a team willing to give up THREE 1st round picks.. they might as well make the trade w/ the Colts.. lol.
If the Colts would make that trade.
If I were the Colts, and knowing the value of a true franchise QB, as they do from their experience with Manning, I wouldn't trade the #1 overall for even 3 first round picks. A franchise QB is worth even more than that.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I have refuted all of those stats before... The Giants defense gave up more than 20 points 8 times this regular season, in those games they were 2-6... The Giants rushed for less than 100 yards 8 times this regular season, in those games they were 2-6... And in games where both of those things happened.. they gave up more than 20 and rushed for less than 100 yards.. they had 1 win. In games wehre the Giants had 2 or more turnovers, they were 2-6... Short answer, and this is to take nothing away from Eli.. but when the defense and the rushing game didn't show up, the Giants didn't win... take all of the cumulative stats you want, like when the Saints scored 49 and put up 577 yards.. but that's one game. More fun stats: When the Giants had more passing yards than their opponent, they were 6-4... when they had more rushing yards, they were 4-3... about the same.. When they had both, more passing and more rushing yards, they were 1-1... They basically played the last 6 games as playoff games since the first 2 were must wins to get in and the other 4 were playoff games.. in those 6 games, the Giants gave up an average of 14 ppg.. never giving up more than 20... In those 6 games they had 2 turnovers.. 2 in 6 games. The Giants are the champions because they were balanced down the stretch when it mattered.. very erratic during the regular season, which is why their cumulative stats are so bad, but in the final 2 weeks of the season and the playoffs they played almost flawless and that includes Eli but it includes a whole bunch of other players as well... So if you take the Giants rankings for the whole year and compare them to the Browns rankings for the whole year and conclude that Eli is the difference, you are only a small part correct. You want a real stat? When the Giants won the turnover battle, they were 0-5. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
In games they lost, their defense gave up 28, 36, 27, 17, 49, 38, and 23 points. It's not like the defense was losing games where they gave up 10 points. Only 2 of their losses was one where the defense gave up less than 24 points, and in 5 of their 7 losses, their defense gave up 27 or more points.
We lost games where our defense gave up 27, 31, 24, 20, 30, 13, 23, 24, 14, 20, 20, and 13 points.
By comparison, we lost 9 games where our defense gave up 24 or fewer points. Only 3 times did our defense give up 27 or more points. In our 4 victories we only scored 27, 17, 6, and 14 points.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
So, to paraphrase: If your offense scores more points than your defense gives up, you should win. Got it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I didn't say Eli, or a QB like Eli, wouldn't have made us better and more competitive... it very well may have won us a few of those games where we gave up less than 17..... just stating that if you wish to put a cape on him by quoting how bad their defense and running game was and yet they won the super bowl because of him and largely him alone, then do so at your own peril.
And how many of those games where we kept the score low did you really feel like the other team couldn't have scored more if they really had to?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
My point was that the Giants' defense wasn't just bad, but it was abysmally bad in games they lost. In their losses the defense gave up a couple of boatloads of points.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I know.. and nobody expects Eli to win all of those games.. and that's also why I used the word erratic.. because that is how their defense and running game played.. some pretty good games which they won and some pretty bad games which they lost... you made it sound as if the rushing game and defense was just consistantly bad and Eli was able to overcome it and win a super bowl, which just isn't true.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,620
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,620 |
Quote:
Quote:
I think it is a lock with Flynn reuniting with Philbin. Manning to Seattle and Flynn to Miami would make me a very happy camper.
I'd rather see Manning in DC. That would end the talk of trading up for RG3.
This.
If the Browns are interested in RG3, then Manning to DC and Flynn to Miami is undoubtedly the best case scenario for Cleveland. And the worst nightmare for the Rams.
Any other team that would conceivably be interested in RG3 would be in the mid-to-low portions of the round. How many draft positions are the Rams willing to drop? What would they want in return for dropping that far?
In this case, we sit tight at 4 and the Rams would have to decide to sit at 2 and still get a top-tier guy, or try to gouge someone to drop 15-20 slots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
Their running game was abysmal. They were dead last in the league in rushing, and averaged only 3.5 yards/rush. We were missing Hillis, and did better running the ball. We had, essentially, 2 rookie OL, and did better running the ball. The Giants ran for 89 yards/game. They averages 3.5 yards/rush. They had 4 rushing plays of 20+ yards. The Browns ..... with injuries galore to starter, backup, backup's backup, and so on averaged 96 yards/game, and 3.7 yards/rush. We had 7 rushing plays of 20+ yards. The Giants sucked running the ball. They were able to punch it in down close, but that's it. They were last in yards, and last in yards per carry. Their running game contributed very little other than that. They were, however, 5th in passing offense. They were 7th in fewest sacks allowed. Their passing game carried them, and without that passing game, they would not have been a playoff, let alone Super Bowl Champion, team. As far as the Giants "erratic" defense .... in the regular they held exactly zero teams to under 10 points this season. They held exactly zero teams to under 14 points. They held 4 teams to under 17 points. That's not what a good defense does. When your best effort is allowing 14 points ...... it's a rough year for your defense. Tampa Bay was one of the other defenses that really plummeted this year, they allowed 27, 20, 13, 17, 48, 20, 24, 27, 37, 35, 23, 38, 41, 31, 48, and 45 points ....... and what do most people talk about with regards to the Bucs? That Freeman had an off year.  He did ..... but man, he had a lot of help getting there. It's amazing how many good, or teams considered to be up and coming, had really bad years defensively. The bottom teams in terms of total defense were Green Bay, New England, Tampa Bay, Oakland, Carolina, The Giants, Buffalo, Indy, Detroit ........ And I know that for a lot of those teams, part of it is that they have powerful offenses, so other teams have to pull out all the stops to win games ..... but still ...... there are 4 playoff teams in there.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825 |
Quote:
Their running game was abysmal. They were dead last in the league in rushing, and averaged only 3.5 yards/rush.
We were missing Hillis, and did better running the ball. We had, essentially, 2 rookie OL, and did better running the ball.
The Giants ran for 89 yards/game. They averages 3.5 yards/rush. They had 4 rushing plays of 20+ yards.
The Browns ..... with injuries galore to starter, backup, backup's backup, and so on averaged 96 yards/game, and 3.7 yards/rush. We had 7 rushing plays of 20+ yards.
The Giants sucked running the ball. They were able to punch it in down close, but that's it. They were last in yards, and last in yards per carry. Their running game contributed very little other than that.
They were, however, 5th in passing offense. They were 7th in fewest sacks allowed. Their passing game carried them, and without that passing game, they would not have been a playoff, let alone Super Bowl Champion, team.
YT...so you are using the Giants offensive performance (which lead to a Super Bowl victory) this year as a model or an example of a "QB" providing most of his team's offense without much help from his supporting cast ?
You believe RG3 can do the same for the Browns and all the talk of a QB needing a supporting cast...just isn't necessary to win a Super Bowl ?
...is that what you are implying?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
YT...so you are using the Giants offensive performance (which lead to a Super Bowl victory) this year as a model or an example of a "QB" providing most of his team's offense without much help from his supporting cast ?
You believe RG3 can do the same for the Browns and all the talk of a QB needing a supporting cast...just isn't necessary to win a Super Bowl ?
...is that what you are implying?
mac, your questions really look like you have your response to his answer already typed up and ready to go. 
I'll let ytown respond to the question though.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
What I am saying, not implying, but saying, is exactly what I have said all along.
I believe that RG3 is a far, far superior QB when compared to Colt McCoy. I believe that he could well be a superstar in this league. I believe that RG3 is better in every regard compared to McCoy. I think that he has better accuracy, touch, mobility, pocket awareness, height, arm, feet, ability to read a defense, leadership, and so on. In fact, I honestly have trouble finding any category where I would rate McCoy above RG3. I think that RG3 will be the type of player who makes players around him better, as opposed to needing perfect players around him just to be effective.
I have also said that I believe that the Browns need a fast WR, and a RT. (and maybe a RB, if they don't re-sign Hillis) I do not believe that the offense is a tear down as some people seem to think. I do not think that the OL is in need of 4 new players t be a great line. I do not believe that we need 3 new receivers just to be able to throw the ball effectively. I think that we need a few additions to our offense, the most important being the QB, in order to make it into an effective NFL offense.
I do believe that the QB is the single most important position on the entire football field, and in many ways, more important even than the Head Coach. Until and unless we get the QB right, we will have a hard time consistently competing against, and beating teams in our division, We will struggle in trying to win our division, let alone becoming a playoff team. I believe that teams find offensive gems, like the receiver for the Giants, Victor Cruz, when they have the QB right. If you have a lousy QB throwing the ball, those type of guys get lost because they "just aren't good enough to help the team, and we need to draft more receivers high".
We have had receivers who weren't good enough to play for us ..... but who went on to win, and win Super Bowls, elsewhere.
We had a guy named David Patten, who was OK here ,.... but nothing special. We had another guy named Lance Moore, who was a practice squad guy. Both left us and won Super Bowls elsewhere. Why? Because they had great QB play that allowed their talents to shine. It is far easier to find those gems when you have consistently excellent QB play. It is far more difficult to develop receivers at all when you don't.
That is what I am saying. No implication or assumption necessary. I have not changed my position on any of these items. You seem to want to play "gotcha" or something, dissembling semantics and parsing phrases, but in the end, I am saying what I have said all along. If you don't get it by now, then I really don't know how I help you any further. I simply cannot state my positions any more clearly.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825 |
Quote:
Their running game was abysmal. They were dead last in the league in rushing, and averaged only 3.5 yards/rush.
We were missing Hillis, and did better running the ball. We had, essentially, 2 rookie OL, and did better running the ball.
The Giants ran for 89 yards/game. They averages 3.5 yards/rush. They had 4 rushing plays of 20+ yards.
The Browns ..... with injuries galore to starter, backup, backup's backup, and so on averaged 96 yards/game, and 3.7 yards/rush. We had 7 rushing plays of 20+ yards.
The Giants sucked running the ball. They were able to punch it in down close, but that's it. They were last in yards, and last in yards per carry. Their running game contributed very little other than that.
They were, however, 5th in passing offense. They were 7th in fewest sacks allowed. Their passing game carried them, and without that passing game, they would not have been a playoff, let alone Super Bowl Champion, team.
YT...your assumptions above are "fatally flawed".
You are implying that Eli Manning's ability to pass the ball overcame the Giants lack of a rushing attack and it was Eli's passing game that lead the Giants to a Super Bowl victory...
Here's the problem, you say the Giants only rushed for 89.2 yds per game..that was regular season.
The Giants rushed for 116.5 yds per game in the playoffs...or 27.3 yds more per game than in the regular season.
Of all the teams in the playoffs, the Giants rushing game ranked them 6th out of the 12 teams that were in the playoffs. In the playoffs, the Giants averaged 4.2 yds per carry
Eli Manning had "a lot" of support from his running game in the playoffs with 29% of the Giants total yards coming from the ground game.
Bottom line...QBs do need a supporting cast if their team is going to be successful. RGIII will not be able to produce a wins all by himself...he will need a lot of support from his teammates..Olineman, WRs, TEs and RBs.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
Save your breath Mac, Ytown has already made up his mind that Colt is the scum of the earth, and with Genie gone, Colt's the only one he can put the blame on.
Dawginit since Jan. 24, 2000 Member #180
You can't fix yesterday but you can learn for tomorrow
#GMSTRONG
I want to do it as a Cleveland Brown because that's who I am.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
And all of that means ... what ... exactly?
I have never once said that any player does everything by himself. Not even once .... not even as a joke. Never.
There is a difference between having guys around the QB, and having those guys be the driving force of the team. There is no question (to sensible and knowledgeable fans, anyway) who drives the Giants to victory. There is no question which player the Giants cannot afford to lose, not even "least", but cannot afford to lose at all.
Using your criteria, the Giants should have lost the NFC Championship, because they only ran for a total of 85 yards against the 49'ers. Of course, Manning did throw for 316 and 2 TDs against a team that allowed 230 per game and a total of 20 TD passes in 16 regular seaons games. Gee, aren't stats fun?
In the Super Bowl the Giants ran for 115 yards on 28 carries. No wonder they won! That's all there is to it! The fact that Manning drove them to the winning TD with 0:57 left had nothing at all to do with it. It was all those other guys ..... not Manning.
Bottom line is this: The Giants don't make the playoffs without Manning. Then, after making the playoffs, they don't win the Super Bowl without Manning. He is the driving force behind that team. He is their leader, and he is their one player they cannot do without.
How many games do you think that the Giants would have won with David Carr at the helm? There's no way to say for sure, but I would bet 3.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 745
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 745 |
tell ya what..give Colt, Hakeem Nicks.Victor Cruz, and Mario Manningham.
Give Eli Manning Brian Slobiskie, Greg Little, and Mohammed Massaqiou
which qb puts up better numbers?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
tell ya what..give Colt, Hakeem Nicks.Victor Cruz, and Mario Manningham.
Give Eli Manning Brian Slobiskie, Greg Little, and Mohammed Massaqiou
which qb puts up better numbers?
Depends on which NYG WR is getting all the concussions...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
Give McCoy and Manning exactly the same receivers from the time they are rookies in the NFL and who does a better job?
I bet that one goes Manning's way 100 times out of 100.
Massaquoi put up solid numbers as a rookie. Who knows what he might do with a QB who knows how to throw down the field a little bit. In his rookie season, he averaged over 18 yards/catch. He could probably be in that neighborhood again if we had a QB who knew how to throw the ball down the field.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Give McCoy and Manning exactly the same receivers from the time they are rookies in the NFL and who does a better job?
I bet that one goes Manning's way 100 times out of 100.
Massaquoi put up solid numbers as a rookie. Who knows what he might do with a QB who knows how to throw down the field a little bit. In his rookie season, he averaged over 18 yards/catch. He could probably be in that neighborhood again if we had a QB who knew how to throw the ball down the field.
Come on man McCoy would have to win at least once  but dont disagree with what your saying. Manning was a #1 over all pick hes better then RG3 Hes better then Colt hes better then 80% of the leagues current QB's and will continue to be so for at least 5 more years and until Luck/Newton/Bradford/Stafford wins their 2nd SB hes better then them as well.
Heck hes better then his brother atm
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825 |
Quote:
And all of that means ... what ... exactly?
YT...IT MEANS...you are wrong !
You imply that Eli Manning's ability to pass the ball overcame the Giants lack of support from their rushing game and it was Eli's passing game that lead the Giants to a Super Bowl victory.
BUT, now everyone knows your stat numbers were wrong meaning your assumptions were completely wrong. Eli did indeed have the support of his running game, which translated into a Super Bowl victory for the Giants.
You were saying...hey look, Eli Manning didn't need the help of a supporting cast to win a Super Bowl...therefore those Browns fans believing the Browns need to use #$, #22 and #37 to address the supporting cast in this draft are wrong..all the Browns have to do is draft RGIII.
YT, you want the Browns to get into a bidding war for RGIII willing to give up "anything" to get him...#4, #22, #37 and more...believing RGIII doesn't need as much help from a supporting cast because he is just that good.
I say the best solution for the Browns is to sign Flynn to compete with McCoy and use our picks to upgrade the supporting cast...
...use that #4 to draft an elite WR or RB
...use the #22 to help the defense, which everyone seems to have forgotten
...use that #37 to address the offensive line
This way, regardless whom is at QB for the Browns in the future, he will have the necessary support to compete in the playoffs.
YT, you need to face the facts...the Giants surrounded Eli with support, giving him one of the very best group of 3 WRs in the NFL and a solid running game that produced 116 yds in the playoffs, not 89. The Giants even went out signed David Baas to help stop the push Eli was getting up the center..improving Eli's supporting cast in the off season.
Eli did not win the Super Bowl by himself...he had a superior supporting cast that allowed him to perform well.
The Giants also had a very good defense and would not have won a Super Bowl without them. The Browns not only have needs on offense, but they need help to build the defense into a playoff caliber unit. The Giants proved that a solid offense and solid defense is what wins Championships...not star players.
Signing Flynn and using all our hard earned draft picks to help build the offense and defense into playoff caliber units makes a heck-of-a-lot more sense than blowing so much on a player who may or may not succeed in the NFL.
imho, mac
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
Mac .... why did the Giants win the Super Bowl?
I mean, at the end, when they were down with 3:46 left in the game, at their own 12 yard line, and down by 2? Who was the main force behind the drive to take the lead?
What was the main reason they drove the field for that winning score ...... and what position messed up by "accidentally" running into the end zone instead of falling down at the 1, running the clock down?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
Further, you seem stuck on this rushing number, and it may be right overall, but it does not tell the true story. The Giants rushed for a grand total of 114 yards in the Super Bowl. Big deal. They rushed for a grand total of 85 yards against San Francisco. (while allowing 150 yards rushing to the 49'ers) So what? They rushed for 95 yards against the Packers, while allowing the Packers 147 yards rushing. So what? They blew up the Falcons from a rushing standpoint, running for 172 while allowing 64 in that game. So what? If the Giants didn't run the ball, they would have passed. If they had been unable to pass, would they have been able to run their way to victory? Really? Eli Manning threw for 1219 yards, 9 TDs and 1 INT in 4 playoff games. Are you really saying that the running game was a bigger factor in them winning? Are you really saying that Bradshaw's 272 or Jacob's 164, and their combined 2 rushing TDs in those 4 games were bigger factors? Really?  Man, I wonder what it's like to live in your own little world like you do ....... where up is down, black is white, and true is false.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825 |
Quote:
Are you really saying that Bradshaw's 272 or Jacob's 164, and their combined 2 rushing TDs in those 4 games were bigger factors?
Really?
Man, I wonder what it's like to live in your own little world like you do ....... where up is down, black is white, and true is false.
YT...you betcha, the running game was big part of the Giants winning.
Do you have any idea what team defenses do if they know there opponent is not going to run the ball?
You obviously are having a hard time with the facts...without the supporting cast around Eli...
...the protection from his offensive line
...the successful rushing game that supported Eli
...and the best wide receiving trio in the NFL
Without any one of those 3 support groups, Eli is not a Super Bowl winning QB.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,436 |
Quote:
Do you have any idea what team defenses do if they know there opponent is not going to run the ball?
Yep. It happened for most of the year for the Giants. They rushed for 85 yards/game in the regular season, last in the NFL, and also rushed for 3.5 yards/rush, also last in the NFL.
The 9-7 Giants were last in the NFL in rushing.
The 9-7 Titans were 31st.
The 10-6 Lions were 29th.
The 15-1 Packers were 27th.
We were 28th, by the way.
None of those teams topped 100 yards/game rushing.
We were better than each and every one of those teams in total defense. (10th)
We were better than each of those teams in scoring defense.
So .... we were better in defense and scoring defense ..... and about the same running the ball ....... why didn't we have a winning team mac? What was it about our team that
made us losers, while teams worse than us in these oh so important categories that you brought up wound up with far better records than us?
Manning did have a good OL.
How about Green Bay? How was the OL of the 15-1 Packers?
What about Pittsburgh? They were far better than us. Was their OL far better than ours? How about the 49'ers. They made the NFC Championship, so their OL must have played much, much better than ours, right?
Let me ask you another question. How do you know what kind of wide receivers you have, if your QB cannot effectively get them the ball? How do you evaluate the WR position if, for example, you had a JaMarcus Russell at QB? What criteria would you use to determine whether the WR corps, or the QB position was the problem? How would you make that determination? How would you decide which position needed upgrading to help the other ..... or would you just throw pieces at each, hoping to get lucky?
Further, mac, why is it that certain teams "find" exceptional receivers in the 2nd, 3rd, or later rounds, while other teams struggle mightily to find receivers, even in the first round? Why do some teams seem to find diamonds everywhere, while others, like us, find lumps of coal? What could cause such a thing? Are those teams just that much better at evaluating the WR position than we are? What does it say if another team can find better receivers in the UDFA market than we do in the high rounds of the draft? Why do you think that happens ..... and why do you think that some of the same teams keep finding gems at WR outside of the first round, while others struggle with the position no matter when they pick? Why is that mac?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,586
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,586 |
Mac, it isn't about supporting cast. Anybody knows you need that.
It's about getting a top QB.
Take the Giants with this great supporting cast.
The got Manning before they had the supporting cast because they had the chance to do so. You take a QB when you have the chance. You don't pass until you build everything else because you may not find that QB later on. QB is the hard part.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
they also traded two firsts, a third, and a fifth to get him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Mac, it isn't about supporting cast. Anybody knows you need that.
It's about getting a top QB.
Take the Giants with this great supporting cast.
The got Manning before they had the supporting cast because they had the chance to do so. You take a QB when you have the chance. You don't pass until you build everything else because you may not find that QB later on. QB is the hard part.
They actually had a fairly decent supporting cast when they got Manning. They were four years removed from a Super Bowl appearance, a year removed from a 10-6 season, they had Strahan coming off a Defensive Player of the Year performance, a Rookie of Year winner and two time Pro Bowler in Jeremy Shockey, a proven 1200+ runner in Tiki Barber, a proven 1000+ WR in Amani Toomer, who had led the NFL in receiving yards the year before Manning was drafted.
The Manning example is sort of the opposite of what you're saying ... they had a good supporting cast in place when they took Manning. You saw a similar situation with Roethlisberger ... teams with some nice pieces that were coming off a bad year and found themselves in a unique position to take a QB high.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Quote:
Quote:
Mac, it isn't about supporting cast. Anybody knows you need that.
It's about getting a top QB.
Take the Giants with this great supporting cast.
The got Manning before they had the supporting cast because they had the chance to do so. You take a QB when you have the chance. You don't pass until you build everything else because you may not find that QB later on. QB is the hard part.
They actually had a fairly decent supporting cast when they got Manning. They were four years removed from a Super Bowl appearance, a year removed from a 10-6 season, they had Strahan coming off a Defensive Player of the Year performance, a Rookie of Year winner and two time Pro Bowler in Jeremy Shockey, a proven 1200+ runner in Tiki Barber, a proven 1000+ WR in Amani Toomer, who had led the NFL in receiving yards the year before Manning was drafted.
The Manning example is sort of the opposite of what you're saying ... they had a good supporting cast in place when they took Manning. You saw a similar situation with Roethlisberger ... teams with some nice pieces that were coming off a bad year and found themselves in a unique position to take a QB high.
Didn't they also have Umenyura (sp) who had a great year the year they went to the Superbowl (strahans last year)
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Mac, it isn't about supporting cast. Anybody knows you need that.
It's about getting a top QB.
Take the Giants with this great supporting cast.
The got Manning before they had the supporting cast because they had the chance to do so. You take a QB when you have the chance. You don't pass until you build everything else because you may not find that QB later on. QB is the hard part.
They actually had a fairly decent supporting cast when they got Manning. They were four years removed from a Super Bowl appearance, a year removed from a 10-6 season, they had Strahan coming off a Defensive Player of the Year performance, a Rookie of Year winner and two time Pro Bowler in Jeremy Shockey, a proven 1200+ runner in Tiki Barber, a proven 1000+ WR in Amani Toomer, who had led the NFL in receiving yards the year before Manning was drafted.
The Manning example is sort of the opposite of what you're saying ... they had a good supporting cast in place when they took Manning. You saw a similar situation with Roethlisberger ... teams with some nice pieces that were coming off a bad year and found themselves in a unique position to take a QB high.
Didn't they also have Umenyura (sp) who had a great year the year they went to the Superbowl (strahans last year)
The season before Manning, he was a rookie who saw limited action. It's hard to call him a solid piece at the time, but, yes, he was on the team, and in hindsight can certainly be considered a part of the supporting cast.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180 |
The franchise that most closely resembles us is Houston.
Mired in the pits of expansionism, trying to rise up to a level of acceptability.
They took the long view and built the whole team. They finally traded for Shaub in '07. We just finished the '11 season and they JUST NOW made it to the playoffs - only after some final pieces were put into place for them... and they did it despite losing their starting QB (who has a winning record of under .500).
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,874 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Mac, it isn't about supporting cast. Anybody knows you need that.
It's about getting a top QB.
Take the Giants with this great supporting cast.
The got Manning before they had the supporting cast because they had the chance to do so. You take a QB when you have the chance. You don't pass until you build everything else because you may not find that QB later on. QB is the hard part.
They actually had a fairly decent supporting cast when they got Manning. They were four years removed from a Super Bowl appearance, a year removed from a 10-6 season, they had Strahan coming off a Defensive Player of the Year performance, a Rookie of Year winner and two time Pro Bowler in Jeremy Shockey, a proven 1200+ runner in Tiki Barber, a proven 1000+ WR in Amani Toomer, who had led the NFL in receiving yards the year before Manning was drafted.
The Manning example is sort of the opposite of what you're saying ... they had a good supporting cast in place when they took Manning. You saw a similar situation with Roethlisberger ... teams with some nice pieces that were coming off a bad year and found themselves in a unique position to take a QB high.
Didn't they also have Umenyura (sp) who had a great year the year they went to the Superbowl (strahans last year)
The season before Manning, he was a rookie who saw limited action. It's hard to call him a solid piece at the time, but, yes, he was on the team, and in hindsight can certainly be considered a part of the supporting cast.
Yes, he came in in 2003,, Manning in 2004. The second year with the team,, Umenyura had 7 sacks.. The year they went to the Superbowl 2008, he had 13 sacks, 52 tackles and forced 5 fumbles..
I'd say he was a contributer in a big way that year. he missed the next year due to injury... But he's been solid ever since..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Kurt Warner got the short end of the stick in NYG, people always claim he was good in Stl, good in Ari but "sucked" in NY...
He was 5-4 when they made the switch to Eli... Started off 5-2,
2,054 yds 6 tds 4 ints 62.8% 86.5 rtg in 10 games (9 starts)
Are those MVP numbers? No, Do I understand why Coughlin made the switch? Yes.
But he didn't suck...
This has been brought to you by the random information group of america.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825 |
Quote:
why didn't we have a winning team mac? What was it about our team that
made us losers, while teams worse than us in these oh so important categories that you brought up wound up with far better records than us?
yt...why didn't the Browns have a winning team in 2011?
Just year two of the rebuilding process
Rebuild might be at 50%
New, "first time" HC/OC
New playbook, the WCO
NFL lockout, no contact with coaching staff
No formal workouts in the offseason
Hillis strep throat
Steinie down and out
Rookie LG,
RG inexperienced, second year in the NFL
RT Pashos, Hicks, Cousins, nuff said
39 sacks and 83 qb hits
43 dropped passes..Browns receivers ranked #1 in the NFL in dropped passes
Browns 31st in NFL rushing for 3.7 yds per carry
Ryan Pontbriand
Even with this excellent supporting cast
...the Browns passing game ranked 24th in the NFL
...McCoy ranked 22nd in total passing yds
...McCoy ranked 25, tied with Josh Freeman in QB rating
...McCoy ranked 26th in completion percentage, just behind Flacco
...McCoy ranked 22nd in TD passes
...the Browns rushing game ranked 28th in the NFL
YT..you tell me, is this all McCoy's fault?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Just because it's not someone's sole fault, doesn't mean that position can't be upgraded...
NE changes out it's WRs practically every year (minus a few guy like Welker etc)
Trying to make that position better, But even though they haven't won a SB since 2004, they haven't changed out the QB position, why? Because it's almost impossible to improve on what they have there...
How ever you look at the 49ers this past year, almost made the SB, but, could conceivably upgrade their QB position if they wanted to/had the option...
Just because the team plays well or poorly, doesn't mean a single position cannot be upgraded...
NOONE has EVER said EVERYTHING is Colt McCoys fault, however, there are some that feel he can be upgraded along with other positions on the team...
Regardless of who they want to replace him with, you can at least agree he has short comings in his game that he may not be able to over come, right?
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,825 |
Quote:
NOONE has EVER said EVERYTHING is Colt McCoys fault, however, there are some that feel he can be upgraded along with other positions on the team...
osu...if the Browns address the other positions of need on offense...Oline, WR and RB...will they still need to address the QB position?
Only one way to find out...fix the offense first, then give the QB a chance to grow within that offense.
Some of you like to compare McCoy's performance at QB with the performance of Eli Manning or Aaron Rogers...but you never take into consideration that Eli Manning has 8 yrs of experience in the same offense and Aaron Rogers has 7 yrs experience in his WCO.
It's all McCoy's fault, right?
BTW...we do have someone on this board that blames McCoy for everything that is wrong with the offense...its is all McCoy's fault according to YT.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 187
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 187 |
If they didn't feel like they needed to upgrade the QB position now then why is there talk of Flynn and a budget or talking about trading up for RGIII? McCoy was named the starter outright last year but not this year. Why?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
osu...if the Browns address the other positions of need on offense...Oline, WR and RB...will they still need to address the QB position?
IN MY OPINION.. Yes.
Do I think maybe, possibly, somehow, with Colt as the starter the Browns can win enough games to get into the playoffs eventually if they fixed "everything else" sure... Do I think they'll be a contistantly winning/contending team with him as the starter? No, I don't.
Quote:
Some of you like to compare McCoy's performance at QB with the performance of Eli Manning or Aaron Rogers...but you never take into consideration that Eli Manning has 8 yrs of experience in the same offense and Aaron Rogers has 7 yrs experience in his WCO.
I don't compare people alot, but I would assume if Colt wants to be a Starting NFL QB, that's who he's going to be compared to... Would you rather they compared him to Tim Couch and Akili Smith? What would that accomplish?
Quote:
It's all McCoy's fault, right?
No, It's all LeBron's fault, don't you keep up with the news?
Quote:
BTW...we do have someone on this board that blames McCoy for everything that is wrong with the offense...its is all McCoy's fault according to YT.
Show me where he said this, I'm aware he's not Colt's biggest fan, but if you're going to blatantly state a fact then show proof of it...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,586
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,586 |
I don't know. I do know the Giants were 4-12 the year before manning was drafted and 6-10 his first year, so at least the record indicates they weren't all that great.
We were 4-12 last year, have a pretty good D that is seen as emerging, the best LT in the business, and some fairly decent extra parts.
It's time we got a QB.
This isn't hard.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,586
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,586 |
Quote:
they also traded two firsts, a third, and a fifth to get him.
I know. Is anybody in NY complaining today?? I just think we could do a bit better and turn that 3rd in to a 4th....but I'd have to research how far a drop the other team..(.San Diego??) had to make....plus, that was a weird trade....made after Manning had been drafted by SD...they had to figure Manning would make them better making a future pick less valuable.
At any rate, I have to say you made a compelling reason for not wanting Tannehill, at least early in the draft. I can't remember if it was on this thread or another...sometimes the thread topics start to become the same...at any rate, it made me rethink, and to be honest that doesn't happen all that often around here.
Good job.
I still like him, but maybe not as early as I was thinking this morning.
Yeah....lets just go all in, toss the dice and get RGIII. All it does is mess up this years draft*, and if we can't get them off a 3rd rounder, possibly we can defer that pick until next year...all the other teams are deferring a 1st rounder.
* It only messes up this years draft if the guy bombs out. If he makes it, a solid starting QB makes a draft, no matter what the other guys do.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Green Bay not expected to tag
Flynn
|
|
