Somewhere in the last few years the player evaulation organization and the GM completley changed how they view OLs and LBs. It seemed to me that they said pick an OL or LB with a top 15-16 pick? We can get a skill position player at that pick. Then they thought they could make up for it in later rounds and find a Diehl, a Gary Reasons or we can coach up a Seubert.
hallgrad80 makes one of the most ridiculous arguments I have ever seen here. This team was 2:00 away from winning plentyof games until the coaches blew it with clock management and also allowed the only plays to happen that could cause your team to lose like kicking the ball to the most dangerous PR opposing player. Two season when the team was 6-2 at the mid point and collapsed it's the entire organization's fault because of no talent? Two season ago when they could have beaten the Ravens to make the playoffs there was no talent? Then they beat the Eagles 42-7 the final game of the year, but needed help to back into the playoffs there was no talent.
Maybe the organization should fire everybody like John Mara wanted to do emotionally after the Jacksonville game debacle (was that loss an organization failure also). Then he can evaluate and pick all the talent just like his father used to do. How did that work out from 1964-1978?
The critical mistake that TD82 makes is that he fails to recognize the difference between professional and collegiate sports.in college the head coach also has responsibility for acquiring the talent while in the pros the coach coaches and the GM acquires the talent except in the rare cases where the coach performs both functions. Given the lack of talent on this team , and this team is woefully short of talent, why isn't the blame vested on the GM the same way he places blame on the coach for certain losses. He wants to get rid of TC and appears to believe that will return the Giants back to the top whereas I believe that both the GM and coach must go to achieve that goal. I won't convince him and he won't convince me of what we each see as the solution.