giants post game

[Stymietee]

Going into this past years draft I did not want to spend a 1st round draft pick on any of the QBs available. I wanted an OLB which we got. My idea was to draft a QB in round 3-5 and then look for a No. 1 next year in a better QB class. Since Haskin's has played I recommend playing him every game to see if he was worth a first round pick. He showed arm talent in the preseason, he made a couple of big plays in preseason, he was also to diagnose in preseason. He held the ball and was slow to diagnose yesterday. I am not saying he can't get better but the seal has been cracked so lets play him now. It looks like the Skins are going to have a very high draft choice. If that is the case then they should be open to a guy who has even better QB potential if Haskins does not improve. He may very well improve. If he does then you can use that 1st on another position. Nothing yesterday sold me on he was close or Case is anything more than what I thought before. That was a Giants defense that was averaging giving up over 300 yards per game before yesterday. I will say this, Haskin's 32.8% QB rating was almost 10 points higher than Keenum's and that was with three times as many picks.

The thing is, I don't believe that there's any sort of uniformity in how this young QB should be best prepared. In fact, I believe that Gruden was dead set against having him active at all this season, instead, hoping to rely upon Colt and Case throughout the year. When Colt didn't physically qualify he had no choice and Haskins became the back-up QB. Now here's the kicker, as a general rule back-up players, especially QB's are prepared in the event of injury, or really poor performance by the starter. Scout team reps and one walk through is a complete dereliction of coaching duties to insure that your back-up has some familiarity with the starting group and real time NFL speed.

I wonder if Gruden ever wanted Haskins on this team at all. It is interesting how we year in and year out get players who play well in school or on other teams, who then under perform here only to watch sheepishly as they leave and perform well again elsewhere. Perhaps it's time that we stop blaming the players as much as we blame the piss poor coaching that ask them to perform in ways or positions that made them desirable in the first place.

Sorry for the rant man, I know that coaching is your thing and that there's great pride taken in the profession when teachers such as yourself work tirelessly because of the love of the game and a desire to grow the person not just the player then have your profession so sadly represented by these ass clowns at the highest levels.

 

[Stymietee]

i dont buy the name has anything to do with bad karma . we won superbowls with that name . its just hocus pocus mumbo jumbo

I honestly don't care if you buy it or pretend to not buy it. The truth is, this organization from the top down is nothing more than hocus pocus mumbo jumbo. With respect to those Super Bowl years, the team was founded in 1937 and from that time to present, those very few exceptions have been outliers and not the norm.

 

[skinz2winz]

I honestly don't care if you buy it or pretend to not buy it. The truth is, this organization from the top down is nothing more than hocus pocus mumbo jumbo. With respect to those Super Bowl years, the team was founded in 1937 and from that time to present, those very few exceptions have been outliers and not the norm.

1982-1992 was the norm. Can't have a decade of outlier. It's really been since that time we have slipped into the abyss. It's finally time for Snyder to hire real leader of men to run his organization.

 

[skinsdad62]

I honestly don't care if you buy it or pretend to not buy it. The truth is, this organization from the top down is nothing more than hocus pocus mumbo jumbo. With respect to those Super Bowl years, the team was founded in 1937 and from that time to present, those very few exceptions have been outliers and not the norm.

And again the man In charge I can buy. But telling me we are losing because of our name won’t cut it with me

 

[Stymietee]

1982-1992 was the norm. Can't have a decade of outlier. It's really been since that time we have slipped into the abyss. It's finally time for Snyder to hire real leader of men to run his organization.

Sure we can, just because there are people here who only know of recent history, doesn't mean that there aren't others who have suffered through pre and post times that bracketed that really good decade. This team didn't begin its history during that golden period, however, it was the ONLY time in its history that it has enjoyed those really good times. (1937 Boston edition excepted)

 

[Stymietee]

And again the man In charge I can buy. But telling me we are losing because of our name won’t cut it with me

Clearly you speak for yourself and I can't or won't argue with your perspective, especially since it was you who made the charge that they were losing because of their name. I merely stated that the name contributed to the bad Karma that envelopes this organization. You inferred the rest.

 

[Sportster 72]

The thing is, I don't believe that there's any sort of uniformity in how this young QB should be best prepared. In fact, I believe that Gruden was dead set against having him active at all this season, instead, hoping to rely upon Colt and Case throughout the year. When Colt didn't physically qualify he had no choice and Haskins became the back-up QB. Now here's the kicker, as a general rule back-up players, especially QB's are prepared in the event of injury, or really poor performance by the starter. Scout team reps and one walk through is a complete dereliction of coaching duties to insure that your back-up has some familiarity with the starting group and real time NFL speed.

I wonder if Gruden ever wanted Haskins on this team at all. It is interesting how we year in and year out get players who play well in school or on other teams, who then under perform here only to watch sheepishly as they leave and perform well again elsewhere. Perhaps it's time that we stop blaming the players as much as we blame the piss poor coaching that ask them to perform in ways or positions that made them desirable in the first place.

Sorry for the rant man, I know that coaching is your thing and that there's great pride taken in the profession when teachers such as yourself work tirelessly because of the love of the game and a desire to grow the person not just the player then have your profession so sadly represented by these ass clowns at the highest levels.

I honestly don't care if you buy it or pretend to not buy it. The truth is, this organization from the top down is nothing more than hocus pocus mumbo jumbo. With respect to those Super Bowl years, the team was founded in 1937 and from that time to present, those very few exceptions have been outliers and not the norm.

It is not hard to figure out the folks that are going to soft soap one player while being harsh on another. Haskins is getting the same thing any other backup got. Remember, I said don't play him until at least the Miami game so he would have two weeks to prep. Now my statement is simple, it looks like we are going to have a very high pick next year. Since I favored waiting a year might as well let this kid play to see what he has. I am not blaming him for a bad game, just suggesting you find out what he has. Of course I believe Dan has his back for the next few years no matter what.

Start him from here on out, let him get the reps every week and see how it turns out. There might be a guy who could be better available to the team next year.

What the hell with a full week of reps he could go out and throw for 329 yards, 2 TDs and a win like another QB did when he was called on for one game.