Can somebody explain the interest in Fleener to me?

[Crimsoncrew]

Quit pretending you know something about NFL protections and how they are determined or calculated - trust me you haven't a clue.

The 6th ranking is the ranking - period! Or perhaps we should use the same BS about the differences in our running backs, hell the Giants o'line just got a whole lot better! So, stop trying to straw man this discussion to death. You are Crimson are 100% wrong! Get over it!

Question, Bem: would you agree that Eli Manning has better pocket presence and is better making plays under pressure than Alex Smith? Would you agree that Alex takes some sacks Eli would avoid?

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Well, let's see, you have yet to prove one thing I have said to be wrong so I guess you finally got something right - Congratulations! You are now 1 for, oh, I don't know, how many posts do you have?

Here is yet another claim that you are completely wrong about - MW and me, yeah, not the same poster, not even close actually.

Nope, apparently just "good friends."

To be fair, though, MW and I had a discussion about Smith's responsibilities for the sacks in the Cowboys game. He felt Smith was almost entirely to blame for them, while I felt it was largely on the OL. I've come around to his way of thinking - not entirely, but to an extent - while you seem to be taking the opposite position now. It is interesting. Given that you have acknowledged that he knows far more about football than you, though, I think we can assume that you are wrong in the OL discussion.

 

[Bemular]

Nope, apparently just "good friends."

To be fair, though, MW and I had a discussion about Smith's responsibilities for the sacks in the Cowboys game. He felt Smith was almost entirely to blame for them, while I felt it was largely on the OL. I've come around to his way of thinking - not entirely, but to an extent - while you seem to be taking the opposite position now. It is interesting. Given that you have acknowledged that he knows far more about football than you, though, I think we can assume that you are wrong in the OL discussion.

Friends since '86 - we met in Colorado and, yes, he knows what he is talking about when it comes to football. He watches more film in a month than most avid fans watch in an entire year. So, yeah, he knows more about football than I do.

I'm not sure what you mean by my taking an opposite position now? The only position I recall taking about the Giants o'line was that it was not markedly worse than ours as you claimed and I have I not budged from that stance. In fact, after the additional information that has come to light as a result of this thread I am shocked you even want to continue with your stance.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

And, of course, no opinion on Eli's pocket presence, awareness, and ability to make plays under pressure as compared to Smith's. Surprise, surprise.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Friends since '86 - we met in Colorado and, yes, he knows what he is talking about when it comes to football. He watches more film in a month than most avid fans watch in an entire year. So, yeah, he knows more about football than I do.

I'm not sure what you mean by my taking an opposite position now? The only position I recall taking about the Giants o'line was that it was not markedly worse than ours as you claimed and I have I not budged from that stance. In fact, after the additional information that has come to light as a result of this thread I am shocked you even want to continue with your stance.

Btw, what "additional information" is that?

All you've done is disputed the information that Clyde and I have provided. That's what you do. Criticize any evidence that disputes your view without providing any evidence to support your view. We're all familiar with it by now.

 

[deep9er]

can't even tell what the "point of contention" is? is it Davis vs Ballard, the Giants line is lousy, the 49ers line is lousy, Eli has pocket awareness, Alex has pocket awareness, we didn't have good receivers to bail Alex out,...........do you guys even know?

Crimson - went as far back as page 5 and didn't see where you posted statistical evidence to back up your point (OL/QB)? or are these statistics you posted on Davis vs Ballard? not disputing, just wanted to read it.

 

[h0ckeysk83r]

Because Bemular and MW are the same person.

Hmm i dont see the similarities here. MW is a highly regarded poster in my eyes. Its the offseason so i can see why hes not around much now.

 

[Bemular]

And, of course, no opinion on Eli's pocket presence, awareness, and ability to make plays under pressure as compared to Smith's. Surprise, surprise.

I do have an opinion and it is this. Your claim that the Giants o'line was "markedly worse" than ours [in 2011] was false when you made it, is just as false now and the answers to your questions, which not even you know, won't change that fact.

So, surprise surprise, I have chosen to not waste my time (beyond this response) with your attempt to create a slippery slope fallacy and subsequent meaningless argument about speculative opinions - but nice try.

And if this keeps me in the category of not answering your silly little questions - I can live with that.

 

[Bemular]

Btw, what "additional information" is that?

All you've done is disputed the information that Clyde and I have provided. That's what you do. Criticize any evidence that disputes your view without providing any evidence to support your view. We're all familiar with it by now.

The "additional information" is in the thread, feel free to track it down. As to the rest of your post all I can say is this. Perhaps if you spent more time researching the facts before posting your ridiculous claims, you wouldn't have to whine so much when you are called to the carpet for the claims you make.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

can't even tell what the "point of contention" is? is it Davis vs Ballard, the Giants line is lousy, the 49ers line is lousy, Eli has pocket awareness, Alex has pocket awareness, we didn't have good receivers to bail Alex out,...........do you guys even know?

Crimson - went as far back as page 5 and didn't see where you posted statistical evidence to back up your point (OL/QB)? or are these statistics you posted on Davis vs Ballard? not disputing, just wanted to read it.

What stats support an argument about the OL? Sacks are about it, and they are an unreliable stat to evaluate the OL because they depend on the RB, TE, and FB, and depend heavily on the QB. Unless folks believe that the Colts had the best OL in the league in 2010 - which would explain why they used their first two picks on OL in that draft. Elite QBs who do not take many sacks do so because they get rid of the ball on plays the less elite QBs tuck it and take the sack. Pressures aren't official and are subjective, and can also depend on a variety of factors. Though as said, the Giants allowed more pressure in the playoffs than anyone, and more than the Niners despite playing against the 14th, 19th, and 27th pass rushing Ds in addition to the Niners.

The Niners' OL was bad early in the year. Downright terrible. By the end of the season, they were playing much better. They were probably still only average, but the Giants were bad. Their running game was nonexistent. Manning was under pressure throughout the season. When they faced a tolerable pass rush (ours) in the playoffs, they were completely manhandled. "Markedly worse" is also a subjective statement. Taking run-blocking and pass-blocking into consideration, along with the difference in QB play, I stand by my statement. As usual, Bemular has disputed it, but hasn't produced anything to challenge it.

The same thing goes for Davis vs. Ballard. How anything can think that Ballard is not markedly worse than Davis as a receiver is beyond me. If we look at stats, Davis is the clearly superior player. If we look at measurables, Davis is clearly the superior player. I haven't watched enough Giants games or paid enough attention to Ballard to have a great idea, but I would bet heavily that he is much less flexible in terms of alignment and routes than Davis, who can line up pretty much anywhere and can run any TE route and quite a few WR routes pretty well. Again, Bemular has not actually put forth anything to challenge that claim.

 

[deep9er]

What stats support an argument about the OL? Sacks are about it, and they are an unreliable stat to evaluate the OL because they depend on the RB, TE, and FB, and depend heavily on the QB. Unless folks believe that the Colts had the best OL in the league in 2010 - which would explain why they used their first two picks on OL in that draft. Elite QBs who do not take many sacks do so because they get rid of the ball on plays the less elite QBs tuck it and take the sack. Pressures aren't official and are subjective, and can also depend on a variety of factors. Though as said, the Giants allowed more pressure in the playoffs than anyone, and more than the Niners despite playing against the 14th, 19th, and 27th pass rushing Ds in addition to the Niners.

The Niners' OL was bad early in the year. Downright terrible. By the end of the season, they were playing much better. They were probably still only average, but the Giants were bad. Their running game was nonexistent. Manning was under pressure throughout the season. When they faced a tolerable pass rush (ours) in the playoffs, they were completely manhandled. "Markedly worse" is also a subjective statement. Taking run-blocking and pass-blocking into consideration, along with the difference in QB play, I stand by my statement. As usual, Bemular has disputed it, but hasn't produced anything to challenge it.

The same thing goes for Davis vs. Ballard. How anything can think that Ballard is not markedly worse than Davis as a receiver is beyond me. If we look at stats, Davis is the clearly superior player. If we look at measurables, Davis is clearly the superior player. I haven't watched enough Giants games or paid enough attention to Ballard to have a great idea, but I would bet heavily that he is much less flexible in terms of alignment and routes than Davis, who can line up pretty much anywhere and can run any TE route and quite a few WR routes pretty well. Again, Bemular has not actually put forth anything to challenge that claim.

i agree stats for the O-line (the Unit) isn't all that, not by a long shot. thats why i was interested in seeing what you posted? cause you kept saying you posted stats to refute Bemular's point, and Bemular should also post stats to back him up.

so you didn't post stats but were telling Bemular you did? you don't believe stats by any means (OL), but kept implying it backed up your point? that he should respond in kind, sorta berating him for not posting stats? obviously, i don't get this "point of contention"???

btw - was just tring to understand what the two opinions were, didn't intent to butt in. but since i did, sorry for acting like a judge now.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

i agree stats for the O-line (the Unit) isn't all that, not by a long shot. thats why i was interested in seeing what you posted? cause you kept saying you posted stats to refute Bemular's point, and Bemular should also post stats to back him up.

so you didn't post stats but were telling Bemular you did? you don't believe stats by any means (OL), but kept implying it backed up your point? that he should respond in kind, sorta berating him for not posting stats? obviously, i don't get this "point of contention"???

btw - was just tring to understand what the two opinions were, didn't intent to butt in. but since i did, sorry for acting like a judge now.

I'm asking Bemular for some type of EVIDENCE, not stats. Clyde and I have both posted links to websites that rated the Giants' OL poorly. My biggest problem with Bemular is that he freely criticizes anything that tends to dispute his point, but never supports his point. He is dismissive and insulting, but doesn't back up his claims.

I did post stats on Ballard vs. Davis, which, on cue, Bemular dismissed out of hand without supporting his position that Davis' and Ballard's tangibles aren't that dissimilar.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

i agree stats for the O-line (the Unit) isn't all that, not by a long shot. thats why i was interested in seeing what you posted? cause you kept saying you posted stats to refute Bemular's point, and Bemular should also post stats to back him up.

so you didn't post stats but were telling Bemular you did? you don't believe stats by any means (OL), but kept implying it backed up your point? that he should respond in kind, sorta berating him for not posting stats? obviously, i don't get this "point of contention"???

btw - was just tring to understand what the two opinions were, didn't intent to butt in. but since i did, sorry for acting like a judge now.

Btw, Deep, since you're now apparently the arbiter of proper posts, what's your stance on the positions here? Or do you just want to sit on the sidelines and nitpick?

 

[deep9er]

Btw, Deep, since you're now apparently the arbiter of proper posts, what's your stance on the positions here? Or do you just want to sit on the sidelines and nitpick?

again, i apologize for acting like an arbiter.

at first i tried to understand the "point of contention", or "points" if thats more appropriate? glanced back thru pages to see if i could pick it up.....i didn't. thats why i first started asking what it wa, or if you guys knew?

still not sure what it is so can't offer a 'stance' (opinion).

 

[Jikkle]

Scout says Fleener "might be the most overrated guy in the draft"

 

[Bemular]

Scout says Fleener "might be the most overrated guy in the draft"

I wonder where the money for those opinions would lead? NYG perhaps? Interesting nonetheless.

 

[deep9er]

Scout says Fleener "might be the most overrated guy in the draft"

if this is the case, then not worried we'll draft him. if its this obvious then Baalke AND staff know it.

 

[Jikkle]

Well keep in mind overrated doesn't mean bad so even if we did pick him I still think he would be a solid contributor.

I just don't see Fleener as someone that's going to transform the offense into Patriots west like a lot of fans think will happen.

At 30 there is likely to be far more value to the team than getting a 2nd TE who's not even going to be elite.

 

[I_am_1z]

I remember when people were saying Andrew Luck doesn't have deep threats on the team. Lo and behold, Fleener runs a 4.45, Oswusu (sp?) runs a 4.36, and Toilolo is probably the best receiver out of the both of them.

 

[maniax]

I feel confident either way if we draft Fleener or pass on Fleener.

Because Harbaugh has coached him at the college level and now Harbaugh has a year under his belt in the NFL with Vernon on his team.

So if we take him, Harbaugh has confidence he can translate and contribute as #2 TE in NFL. If we pass on him then Harbaugh doesn't think he's that good.
Either way we are fine. We are in a unique position when it comes to Stanford players IMHO.