Reader Mailbag: The "We Need Some Perspective" Edition
I usually jump right into the questions. But this week, I think a little perspective is necessary before rolling out the answers to your questions in light of the Giants' 0-2 start.
On the one hand, I get it. People are frustrated with the lack of winning. On the other, looking to start over after just two games? Let's take a deep breath here.
Look, the Giants have had three different head coaches since 2016. At some point, you have to roll with what you have. And in this case, unless Joe Judge loses his locker room--and there are no signs of that happening--you stick with the program he's built.
Again, I get the frustration. I have never been a fan of writing about a losing team, and quite honestly, sometimes I find myself writing about other teams that win games to make sure I don't get too rusty for when the day comes when I'm writing about a Giants win.
But let's remember a few things.
The Giants, a team with a new coaching staff, new schemes on both sides of the ball, and a new foundation, did not have an off-season program to start the jelling process. Their inconsistent and disjointed start out of the gate should come as no surprise to anyone.
And before you say it, yes, I know every team is in the same boat. But take Dallas, for example--Mike McCarthy has been a head coach before. So has Ron Rivera. Even Matt Rhule in Carolina has been in charge of a program, albeit at the college level. So I could be wrong here, but I suspect there isn't as much trial and error in those places as maybe there is in New York.
Second, the offensive line rebuild is not complete. (I know, we've heard that before and have been hearing it for three years now, so many of us are wondering when it's finally going to get done.)
I firmly believe Cam Fleming is keeping the seat warm until Matt Peart is ready. And I wonder if perhaps down the line, the plan is to swap out Kevin Zeitler for Shane Lemieux at some point? Again, having no off-season program has really hurt this team, though give them credit for not using it as an excuse.
Third--and I know some might not want to hear it, but I'm going to say it anyway. Dave Gettleman didn't twist Saquon Barkley's knee resulting in the torn ACL. He didn't jam Sterling Shepard's toe into the turf. The game of football did. Injuries happen in this game. They suck, but they happen.
I see both sides of the Barkley debate. The Giants thought they were getting a generational talent in Barkley, and thus far, he's shown signs of that. In 1981, the Giants had the second-overall pick in the draft. Back then, general manager George Young was drooling over the prospects of landing North Carolina defensive end/outside linebacker Lawrence Taylor.
For those who don't remember, Taylor suffered a few significant injuries in his day as well, injuries that would have sidelined a mere mortal like a badly injured shoulder in 1983 for which he had to wear a harness. He also suffered a ruptured Achilles toward the end of his career that he returned from.
The Giants, back in 1981, were rebuilding. Young could have easily traded down, but he went with the generational talent, and it worked out for the Giants. Barkley? His story is still being written, albeit it's on hold right now. And it's too soon to say that the Giants missed the boat by not trading that draft pick.
I'm not trying to make excuses for the Giants. I'm tired of hearing coaches, whether it's Ben McAdoo, Pat Shurmur, or Joe Judge, say that the team didn't quit. No, they didn't, but there's a difference between quitting and not having played good enough to win. Simply put, the Giants haven't played good enough to win these last three seasons, and so far this year, they haven't either.
But I'm just not ready to write this year off, not after two games. I lived through 2007, my favorite Giants season by far. They started 0-2 with a veteran team that arguably had way more talent than this year's croup.
In their first two games, that veteran group on defense, which was in a new system under then-rookie defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo, allowed 80 points in two games before finally jelling and clamping down. So there's something to be said about the newness of a system--and that group, remember, had a typical off-season.
So let's see what happens moving forward. Yes, 0-2 sucks. Yes, it's hard to overcome that kind of start and make the playoffs, but that's why teams take the field every weekend--to prove or disprove the common beliefs.
With all that said, let's get to this week's questions.
Head coach Joe Judge was asked about that very same play, and here's what he said: "I think he was out there over-communicating looking for a check. " Mystery solved.
Elijah, I wrote about what I think will happen at running back for this weekend in this article.
I think moving forward, though, Devonta Freeman will probably get the bulk of the touches as he’s the most similar to Barkley in terms of strengths and skillset. I don't know how much he has left in his tank, but the one thing I do know is that the Giants need to do a better job with run blocking as they have struggled to get a consistent push up front so far.
Yes, they're playing very good defenses, but at some point, they need to rise to the occasion and match wits with their opponents.
Yes, I would venture to guess that maybe 95% of the fan base and media would be surprised if that happened.
Look, I get it; he’s accomplished, and he was a Giant long before he became a Patriot. But with that said, he's 68 years old, one year younger than Dave Gettleman, who by the ay I've seen people scream that his methods are so antiquated that he has no business being in a front office, yet many of Belichick's ways are reminiscent from how George Young used to build rosters in his hey-day.
Getting back to Belichick and the general manager position, the Giants ownership craves stability and with good reason. Do you see how having to start over with a new coaching staff three times has continued to set this team back?
There's a little matter of cleaning out the rosters of the guys the new staff doesn't want and putting in place guys that the new staff does want. So now you have to go through the jelling process all over again, and it doesn't happen overnight.
I do think there is a very good chance that whoever replaces Dave Gettleman will be someone Joe Judge has worked with before. I do not think it will be Bill Belichick.
Have we been watching the same player this season? Daniel Jones has been playing behind a leaky offensive line, he hasn’t had much of a running game, and he’s been victimized by some dropped passes. Yes, he's had a few brain blips, but how many of them can we honestly say cost the team the game so far?
Otherwise, the kid has mostly made good decisions, he’s shown guts in the pocket, and he seems to be settling into the new offense. So I'm not sure why you're itching all of a sudden to replace him. Do you want to start all over with a rookie? I know I don't.
I am 99% certain that Trevor Lawrence will not be a Giant. It's nothing against Lawrence, but from everything I've heard both on and off the record about Jones, they like him, they believe in him, and they're planning to stick with him for better or worse for the foreseeable future.
So far, Joe Judge has come as advertised, and he's a highly intelligent individual with a sharp mind, but what exactly has he done that makes you think he’d be a good general manager candidate?
Has he shown he can put a winning roster together? Has he ever dealt with managing the salary cap or contracts? How involved in scouting has he been for any one side of the ball? Hard to say for sure outside of his weekly coaching duties.
With all that said, Judge probably isn't a fit at this point in his career for a general manger job. But a name that keeps popping up as a potential successor to Gettleman is Monti Ossenfort, the Titans director of player personnel who has a working relationship with Judge from heir time together in New England.
That's who I would keep an eye on when Dave Gettleman and the Giants go their separate ways.
Thanks for the question. I'm not sure where this "must-win" term developed--every game is a "must-win," especially when you only play 16 of them per year.
If you're asking if the Giants have a chance to win, the answer is yes. Did we not learn anything from Super Bowl XLII when everyone on the face of the planet said the Giants had no chance to win that game?
Well, a lot of people were proven wrong, weren't they? So yes, there is ALWAYS a chance for a team to win a game so long as it shows up to play Sunday.
