The Giants...lol

[Busch1724]

What the Giants should have really done was draft o-line. A rookie QB behind that line would get David Carr'ed. Saquon will look good at times. There were too many times he was hit behind the l.o.s. and it wasn't because of his stutter steps. They need to build the trenches and quick. 

[Xameil]

19 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

I disagree.  What's the one thing a rookie QB usually wishes they had but typically don't? Running game to take pressure off of them on offense. 

Without an offensive line, what good is a RB?

 

the giants really havent done much improvement on the line

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, Xameil said:

Without an offensive line, what good is a RB?

 

the giants really havent done much improvement on the line

Without a line your QB gets beaten into submission like Patrick Ramsey and David Carr.  You only have one chance to develop a QB right before they are scared for life.  

[Xameil]

10 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Without a line your QB gets beaten into submission like Patrick Ramsey and David Carr.  You only have one chance to develop a QB right before they are scared for life.  

Exactly...that's why you draft an OLine before anything

[Renegade7]

10 minutes ago, Xameil said:

Exactly...that's why you draft an OLine before anything

Thats like drafting for need instead if talent. I'd have to look back at that draft, but it's not often a talent like Barkley justifies a RB that high anymore.  Getting an oline is easy, they shoulda tried to both, but i don't blame them on that one.  What Dallas did took several years, but they had Murray and he left before they drafted Elliot.

[Xameil]

Just now, Renegade7 said:

Thats like drafting for need instead if talent. I'd have to look back at that draft, but it's not often a talent like Barkley justifies a RB that high anymore.  Getting an oline is easy, they shoulda tried to both, but i don't blame them on that one.  What Dallas did took several years, but they had Murray and he left before they drafted Elliot.

Yeah...I disagree. I dont think you draft a RB or QB before you have a line

[Renegade7]

22 minutes ago, Xameil said:

Yeah...I disagree. I dont think you draft a RB or QB before you have a line

QB ya for reasons stated, but its a multiyear process anyway, keep that in mind

[Xameil]

15 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

QB ya for reasons stated, but its a multiyear process anyway, keep that in mind

I did...but what good is a RB if he gets injured from the decimation he get from not having any type of hole to.run through...

Keep that in mind

[Renegade7]

17 minutes ago, Xameil said:

I did...but what good is a RB if he gets injured from the decimation he get from not having any type of hole to.run through...

Keep that in mind

Gimmie an example of that, don't jus throw that out there, I've never heard of the rb getting hurt being a reason to build an online first.  How often do teams completely address oline before even looking at qb or rb?  That makes sense, but not typically what happens, some talent you cant pass up

 

What Dallas did was cool, but they had Murray while they were building the line

Edited September 13, 2018 by Renegade7

[Xameil]

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

Gimmie an example of that, don't jus throw that out there, I've never heard of the rb getting hurt being a reason to build an online first.  How often do teams completely address oline before even looking at qb or rb?  That makes sense, but not typically what happens, some talent you cant pass up

 

What Dallas did was cool, but they had Murray while they were building the line

look through history....you have a crappy line the RB takes more abuse, more abuse wears the body down..body wears down, they get injured. Its not rocket science here...

[Renegade7]

16 minutes ago, Xameil said:

look through history....you have a crappy line the RB takes more abuse, more abuse wears the body down..body wears down, they get injured. Its not rocket science here...

Thats more playing style then getting hit in the backfield, they getting smacked hard every down anyway.  Please give an example of an elite running back who's career was shortened because of a lackluster oline.  RB is not a position well protected from getting hit no matter what, they are getting hit hard every game in matter what

 

I mean, think about it, if someone like Barkely or Wentz shows up, you don't pass on them because you need a RT.

Edited September 13, 2018 by Renegade7

[benskins26]

22 hours ago, SkinsGuy said:

 

The cowboys and giants play each other this Sunday. One of them is going to start 0-2.

 

Maybe the game will end in a tie and both teams start 0-1-1.    

 

Dont see how the Giants win that. The cowboys are garbage, but they’re better than the giants. **** Mara

[Xameil]

7 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

Thats more playing style then getting hit in the backfield, they getting smacked hard every down anyway.  Please give an example of an elite running back who's career was shortened because of a lackluster oline.  RB is not a position well protected from getting hit no matter what, they are getting hit hard every game in matter what

 

I mean, think about it, if someone like Barkely or Wentz shows up, you don't pass on them because you need a RT.

That's not just playing style. If the Oline is a sieve, and the RB is getting hit consistently, then yes hes always getting hit in the backfield. If a stud RB is available, yeah, I take the RB, but in no way to I sell the farm to get him. 

I cant give you a specific example. Which proves nothing, because for 1 I'm not a rapid football fan who knows evey player of every team ever, and quite honestly I dont care enough to do medical google searches.

But as a player of a sport that takes ALOT of physical abuse, I can say without a doubt that taking hard hits constantly has incredible wear and tear on the body and will shorten any career. That's just a medical fact. 

Plus...I also know in talking to people who are MUCH smarter then I am in football knowledge, that good RBs are needed, but without an OLine, that RB is useless. A good OLine can make the worst RB look good, and a bad OLine can make Star RBs look like me trying to run the ball.

 

Theres a reason great coaches say. Build up the trenches...

[Renegade7]

2 hours ago, Xameil said:

That's not just playing style. If the Oline is a sieve, and the RB is getting hit consistently, then yes hes always getting hit in the backfield. If a stud RB is available, yeah, I take the RB, but in no way to I sell the farm to get him. 

 

I agree with you, but staying on topic, Giants had #2 pick, they didn't trade up to get Barkley.

 

Quote

I cant give you a specific example. Which proves nothing, because for 1 I'm not a rapid football fan who knows evey player of every team ever, and quite honestly I dont care enough to do medical google searches.

 

 

This is a debate, you cannot pass off opinions as facts without facts to back them up.  If it was obviously true, you wouldn't have to go to Library of Congress to prove it, so you should jua drop this point from this discussion because are closer on this topic then you think.

 

Quote

But as a player of a sport that takes ALOT of physical abuse, I can say without a doubt that taking hard hits constantly has incredible wear and tear on the body and will shorten any career. That's just a medical fact. 

 

No ****, thats why RB typically have shorter careers then other positions and that's regardless of line play, jus look at Demarco Murray.

 

Quote

Plus...I also know in talking to people who are MUCH smarter then I am in football knowledge, that good RBs are needed, but without an OLine, that RB is useless. A good OLine can make the worst RB look good, and a bad OLine can make Star RBs look like me trying to run the ball.

 

Theres a reason great coaches say. Build up the trenches...

 

I'm NOT disagreeing with this last point, your claim is oline should be built first before getting the running back.  I'm saying there's a lot that goes into having a successful run game thats really hard to do in one offseason, so if a generational talent at RB is staring you in the face, id support drafting him.  Its not jus the line, you need TEs and WR's that can block as well. 

 

I'm in the middle in regards to drafting BPA over need, i don't like leaving glaring holes open (why i went off after the draft about lot addressing LG), but i understand why Giants did that, they are in an unofficial rebuild and don't expect to win another ring with Eli.  They tried hard to address oline this offseason, and will continue to do so until they finally draft Eli's replacement.  In the meantime, they have what looks to be an elite running back that even with a weak oline is breaking runs and getting over 100 yards, elite backs make average lines look decent enough, I'm not sold on how bad that oline is until they play someone who isnt so dominant stooping the run as Jax is.

Edited September 13, 2018 by Renegade7

[Xameil]

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

 

This is a debate, you cannot pass off opinions as facts without facts to back them up.  If it was obviously true, you wouldn't have to go to Library of Congress to prove it, so you should jua drop this point from this discussion because are closer on this topic then you think.

 

 

I honestly have a life, so debating you on this pointless topic is useless...especially since what I said IS medical fact...constant hard hits like the way a RB has to take especially with a crappy OLine causes wear and tear..AND a shorter career. You even said it yourself...RBs have a shorter career...i will bet if you were really interested in truth instead of trying to win a pointless online debate youd be able to see the RBs who had excellent OLines during their career...had longer careers.

 

That's the point I'm trying to make. Giants had the 2 spot they picked a stud RB...Redskins picked a stud run blocker, and built up their line. We'll see which is the better way to go. 

 

Just remember the years the Redskins had stud DLines..stud RBs did ****.

 

[Renegade7]

2 hours ago, Xameil said:

I honestly have a life, so debating you on this pointless topic is useless...especially since what I said IS medical fact...constant hard hits like the way a RB has to take especially with a crappy OLine causes wear and tear..AND a shorter career. You even said it yourself...RBs have a shorter career...i will bet if you were really interested in truth instead of trying to win a pointless online debate youd be able to see the RBs who had excellent OLines during their career...had longer careers.

 

That's the point I'm trying to make. Giants had the 2 spot they picked a stud RB...Redskins picked a stud run blocker, and built up their line. We'll see which is the better way to go. 

 

Just remember the years the Redskins had stud DLines..stud RBs did ****.

 

 

And i don't?  Don't make a claim of something as fact without having the facts to prove it, its that simple.  You keep acting like we disagree on having a solid line being more important then getting a elite running back, we don't. 

 

Where we disagree and im done leaving at because you aren't really proving otherwise is that oline has to be built before getting a star running back.  It takes to long to make a solid line to spend 2-3 years just focusing on getting the blockers and not skill position players at the same time, thats what the giants are doing.  Giants will be fine as they've made clear oline is a priority to them, it just doesnt look like they did enough this offseason to make it a strength yet.  No doubt their first rounder next year will be on the line and theyll sign another starter, does that make sense? 

Edited September 13, 2018 by Renegade7

[benskins26]

I don’t understand how you can try to debate something, continue to spend the time to argue about it, and not bring facts. I’m not saying you’re right or wrong, but if you continue to argue it you should back it up. If you don’t want to debate, drop it. Can’t have it both ways

Edited September 14, 2018 by benskins26

[Xameil]

11 hours ago, benskins26 said:

I don’t understand how you can try to debate something, continue to spend the time to argue about it, and not bring facts. I’m not saying you’re right or wrong, but if you continue to argue it you should back it up. If you don’t want to debate, drop it. Can’t have it both ways

http://www.espn.com/espnmag/story?id=3459899

Article that discusses and gives stats of the effect of a good oline and a bad one.

https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/head-blows-on-the-football-field/

Article discussing repetitive hits and injuries...specifically to the head. Which if a RB doesnt have a hole to run through will take a huge hit to the head. The article also points out QBs taking the hardest hits...again most likely due to a bad Oline. 

As for giving direct proof if a RB getting injured due to constant hitting from a bad Oline, there aren't any articles. But as I mentioned before...that's common sense. Constant hits make you more prone to injury...thought that was common knowledge...oh well...guess I overestimated people.

As for @Renegade7,  I think we are closer in thought process then I let on. I just think that there are only a very small amount of RBs are worth a high pick due to the wear and tear. And it is only an select few that can overcome a bad oline. But it's not just a RB that suffers from a bad Oline..the QB does too, and Ramsey is the best example. Not because of injury...but shell shock. I bet he probably still shakes at night from that line.

 

Back to the cage rattler who doesnt want to draw the posters attention. If you want to show an even a sliver of moxy...you may want to quote the person you are trying to call out...

[Fresh8686]

I will say this. There is more than likely a reasonable difference in effect from getting smashed by DT's at or behind the line of scrimmage versus tackles at the second level.

 

If it was me and my body, I'd much rather have seasons where the majority of tackle attempts are coming from CB's looking to push me out of bounds than 300+ lbs dudes tryna do a yokozuna smash on my ass.

[Renegade7]

Ya, the order of how things should be done is a different conversation to the importance of each piece.  I'll add that not only is it in our best interests for me to be wrong, but talked to Giants fan from New York today who is all in with Barkley pick and also believes the line isn't any better then last year even with the additions.  He's not torn, he's pissed.

 

@benskins26 who are you referring to in your post?

[Xameil]

3 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Ya, the order of how things should be done is a different conversation to the importance of each piece.  I'll add that not only is it in our best interests for me to be wrong, but talked to Giants fan from New York today who is all in with Barkley pick and also believes the line isn't any better then last year even with the additions.  He's not torn, he's pissed.

 

@benskins26 who are you referring to in your post?

It is definitely one of those team philosophy discussions. Giants in my mind are the perfect example of a team that doesnt upgrade their Oline. The Redskins are the best example of a team that doesnt have a healthy Oline. 

 

[Renegade7]

I can't tell if the Saints defense is back to its last year form, but I have a lot of respect for giants defense considering how useless offense has been in this game.  

 

Whos the head coach of the giants now?

[Cooleyfan1993]

14 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Whos the head coach of the giants now?

Pat shurmur. I hate that i still can’t find anything to make fun of him for yet. Other than the obvious, which is the 1-2 record 

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, Cooleyfan1993 said:

Pat shurmur. I hate that i still can’t find anything to make fun of him for yet. Other than the obvious, which is the 1-2 record 

He's probably never best us as a head coach, used to coach Cleveland, remember him moat of OC for Vikings. 

 

Jesus, Giants, 97 yard drive for the L at home?  Ya i don't know what to think of you anymore.

[GhostofSparta]

1 hour ago, Cooleyfan1993 said:

Pat shurmur. I hate that i still can’t find anything to make fun of him for yet. Other than the obvious, which is the 1-2 record 

1-3