Off Topic · OT - NY Giants Teardown Underway (page 5)

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Bet above and most of our conversation was what a dumb idea (Yours) it was that Eli should be benched in the 8th game of the year for a 4th round draft pick.

No, it wasn't.

You first offered a bet that Eli would be the QB in 2019 & 20.

Was never about the 8th game either, in which case you would have wrote. "My point was that Eli will be the QB over Lauletta on Sunday, Oct 28."

You didn't. You wrote "My point was that Eli will always be the QB over Lauletta."

We both agree on what "always" means, right?

As it were, that's your second error. Your first is I never wrote Lauletta should be the QB Sunday against Washington. Point of fact, I wrote Manning should be the QB Sunday vs. Washington. Not implied. I wrote that literally.

Also wrote Manning should be the QB on week 17 home vs. Dallas.

I offered the opinion Lauletta should be the QB after the bye in San Fran, but later also offered the opinion that's unlikely to be the case.

I do think Lauletta WILL start multiple games after San Fran and before dallas, whether Manning is healthy or otherwise.

Since that directly contradicts "always", I assumed that would be a bet.

Guess not.

According to your statement, you think Lauletta should be starting Sunday.

Again, no. According to my actual statement "There is really NO reason to play him after Sunday. But you can't just move the scout team QB into the line-up in 4 days. Give Eli a home game against a division rival for fans to say goodbye" I think you can't just move Lauletta into the line-up in 4 days, therefore Manning should and will start Sunday.

Do you feel he will start this Sunday?

I hope the above clarifies my original and consistent position.

So do YOU think Lauletta will start multiple games over a healthy Manning in 2018, just not Sunday vs WSH or week 17 vs Dallas, yes or no?

If yes, cool, then we agree.

If no, we have a bet, right?

Whos on first. What's on second. I don't know is on third.

OK good. We have a bet. You think our 4th round savior will start this Sunday.

Well... that IS actually more likely than Manning being the Giants QB in 2019 and 2020 and every remaining game in 2018.

So, there's that.

You wanna bet?

newyorknewyork wrote:This year I was hoping for a power run game featuring Barkley opening up the play action which is Eli's strength. I had high hopes for the 2 TE sets with Ellison and Engram. Giving us our best run blocking formation with the threat to pass.

But we don't have a power run line which has set everything back.

I believe this will be the last year we see Eli as the Giants QB. Love the guy, allowed me to witness 2 SB with some epic moments. But Its time to move on. It's harder today to build good Olines then it was in the past. Need QBs who can move in and out of the pocket.

I believe the Giants are setting up with the recent moves to free up a ton of cap space. Eli and Jack Rabbit may be cut in the off-season. I have read this would free up something like $57mil in space.

Good post.

newyorknewyork wrote:This year I was hoping for a power run game featuring Barkley opening up the play action which is Eli's strength. I had high hopes for the 2 TE sets with Ellison and Engram. Giving us our best run blocking formation with the threat to pass.

But we don't have a power run line which has set everything back.

I believe this will be the last year we see Eli as the Giants QB. Love the guy, allowed me to witness 2 SB with some epic moments. But Its time to move on. It's harder today to build good Olines then it was in the past. Need QBs who can move in and out of the pocket.

I believe the Giants are setting up with the recent moves to free up a ton of cap space. Eli and Jack Rabbit may be cut in the off-season. I have read this would free up something like $57mil in space.

Manning and Jenkins would free up about $24m ($17 and $17) in space between them, which would then make the Giants total around $57m, yes.

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Bet above and most of our conversation was what a dumb idea (Yours) it was that Eli should be benched in the 8th game of the year for a 4th round draft pick.

No, it wasn't.

You first offered a bet that Eli would be the QB in 2019 & 20.

Was never about the 8th game either, in which case you would have wrote. "My point was that Eli will be the QB over Lauletta on Sunday, Oct 28."

You didn't. You wrote "My point was that Eli will always be the QB over Lauletta."

We both agree on what "always" means, right?

As it were, that's your second error. Your first is I never wrote Lauletta should be the QB Sunday against Washington. Point of fact, I wrote Manning should be the QB Sunday vs. Washington. Not implied. I wrote that literally.

Also wrote Manning should be the QB on week 17 home vs. Dallas.

I offered the opinion Lauletta should be the QB after the bye in San Fran, but later also offered the opinion that's unlikely to be the case.

I do think Lauletta WILL start multiple games after San Fran and before dallas, whether Manning is healthy or otherwise.

Since that directly contradicts "always", I assumed that would be a bet.

Guess not.

According to your statement, you think Lauletta should be starting Sunday.

Again, no. According to my actual statement "There is really NO reason to play him after Sunday. But you can't just move the scout team QB into the line-up in 4 days. Give Eli a home game against a division rival for fans to say goodbye" I think you can't just move Lauletta into the line-up in 4 days, therefore Manning should and will start Sunday.

Do you feel he will start this Sunday?

I hope the above clarifies my original and consistent position.

So do YOU think Lauletta will start multiple games over a healthy Manning in 2018, just not Sunday vs WSH or week 17 vs Dallas, yes or no?

If yes, cool, then we agree.

If no, we have a bet, right?

Whos on first. What's on second. I don't know is on third.

OK good. We have a bet. You think our 4th round savior will start this Sunday.

Well... that IS actually more likely than Manning being the Giants QB in 2019 and 2020 and every remaining game in 2018.

So, there's that.

You wanna bet?

Of course, if Eli Manning starts on Sunday and the remaining the 8 games this year and is brought back to be the starter in 2019 and is brought back to be the starter again 2020, you win.

if Lauletta starts Sunday, I win.

If Manning starts Sunday but isn't the starter from week 10 in San Fran through the start of 2020 season, it's a push.

Deal. Name your terms. I'm in.

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Bet above and most of our conversation was what a dumb idea (Yours) it was that Eli should be benched in the 8th game of the year for a 4th round draft pick.

No, it wasn't.

You first offered a bet that Eli would be the QB in 2019 & 20.

Was never about the 8th game either, in which case you would have wrote. "My point was that Eli will be the QB over Lauletta on Sunday, Oct 28."

You didn't. You wrote "My point was that Eli will always be the QB over Lauletta."

We both agree on what "always" means, right?

As it were, that's your second error. Your first is I never wrote Lauletta should be the QB Sunday against Washington. Point of fact, I wrote Manning should be the QB Sunday vs. Washington. Not implied. I wrote that literally.

Also wrote Manning should be the QB on week 17 home vs. Dallas.

I offered the opinion Lauletta should be the QB after the bye in San Fran, but later also offered the opinion that's unlikely to be the case.

I do think Lauletta WILL start multiple games after San Fran and before dallas, whether Manning is healthy or otherwise.

Since that directly contradicts "always", I assumed that would be a bet.

Guess not.

According to your statement, you think Lauletta should be starting Sunday.

Again, no. According to my actual statement "There is really NO reason to play him after Sunday. But you can't just move the scout team QB into the line-up in 4 days. Give Eli a home game against a division rival for fans to say goodbye" I think you can't just move Lauletta into the line-up in 4 days, therefore Manning should and will start Sunday.

Do you feel he will start this Sunday?

I hope the above clarifies my original and consistent position.

So do YOU think Lauletta will start multiple games over a healthy Manning in 2018, just not Sunday vs WSH or week 17 vs Dallas, yes or no?

If yes, cool, then we agree.

If no, we have a bet, right?

Whos on first. What's on second. I don't know is on third.

OK good. We have a bet. You think our 4th round savior will start this Sunday.

Well... that IS actually more likely than Manning being the Giants QB in 2019 and 2020 and every remaining game in 2018.

So, there's that.

You wanna bet?

Of course, if Eli Manning starts on Sunday and the remaining the 8 games this year and is brought back to be the starter in 2019 and is brought back to be the starter again 2020, you win.

if Lauletta starts Sunday, I win.

If Manning starts Sunday but isn't the starter from week 10 in San Fran through the start of 2020 season, it's a push.

Deal. Name your terms. I'm in.

Wow your so generous. Such a fair deviation / distribution. Sneaky Pete.

Nah, the bet is if Lauletta starts Sunday you win. Oh wait, this Sunday. Oh wait, for the Giants. Oh wait, for the Ny Giants.

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Bet above and most of our conversation was what a dumb idea (Yours) it was that Eli should be benched in the 8th game of the year for a 4th round draft pick.

No, it wasn't.

You first offered a bet that Eli would be the QB in 2019 & 20.

Was never about the 8th game either, in which case you would have wrote. "My point was that Eli will be the QB over Lauletta on Sunday, Oct 28."

You didn't. You wrote "My point was that Eli will always be the QB over Lauletta."

We both agree on what "always" means, right?

As it were, that's your second error. Your first is I never wrote Lauletta should be the QB Sunday against Washington. Point of fact, I wrote Manning should be the QB Sunday vs. Washington. Not implied. I wrote that literally.

Also wrote Manning should be the QB on week 17 home vs. Dallas.

I offered the opinion Lauletta should be the QB after the bye in San Fran, but later also offered the opinion that's unlikely to be the case.

I do think Lauletta WILL start multiple games after San Fran and before dallas, whether Manning is healthy or otherwise.

Since that directly contradicts "always", I assumed that would be a bet.

Guess not.

According to your statement, you think Lauletta should be starting Sunday.

Again, no. According to my actual statement "There is really NO reason to play him after Sunday. But you can't just move the scout team QB into the line-up in 4 days. Give Eli a home game against a division rival for fans to say goodbye" I think you can't just move Lauletta into the line-up in 4 days, therefore Manning should and will start Sunday.

Do you feel he will start this Sunday?

I hope the above clarifies my original and consistent position.

So do YOU think Lauletta will start multiple games over a healthy Manning in 2018, just not Sunday vs WSH or week 17 vs Dallas, yes or no?

If yes, cool, then we agree.

If no, we have a bet, right?

Whos on first. What's on second. I don't know is on third.

OK good. We have a bet. You think our 4th round savior will start this Sunday.

Well... that IS actually more likely than Manning being the Giants QB in 2019 and 2020 and every remaining game in 2018.

So, there's that.

You wanna bet?

Of course, if Eli Manning starts on Sunday and the remaining the 8 games this year and is brought back to be the starter in 2019 and is brought back to be the starter again 2020, you win.

if Lauletta starts Sunday, I win.

If Manning starts Sunday but isn't the starter from week 10 in San Fran through the start of 2020 season, it's a push.

Deal. Name your terms. I'm in.

Wow your so generous. Such a fair deviation / distribution. Sneaky Pete.

Nah, the bet is if Lauletta starts Sunday you win. Oh wait, this Sunday. Oh wait, for the Giants. Oh wait, for the Ny Giants.

Since I posted days ago Manning should and would be this Sunday's starter, no, that bet makes no sense for me.

Your lack of confidence that Manning will be the starter the remaining 8 games is noted, however.

Knickoftime wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

Moonangie wrote:Word, major misjudgment by the new management team. Still, I'm stoked about Saquon's future as a Giant. He's incredible, and thankfully, young.

I'm a Jets fan, and very happy with what the Giants did in the draft because we got our quarterback, but Saquon is a great player, and perhaps the most interesting RB to watch in the NFL. The big thing to observe over the next few years is whether he can take over the locker room from OBJ.

Barkley appears to be a good guy who is a leader and team player...can he and OBJ get along if Odell continues to be Odell?

I think this question is already answered to some degree. Beckham has had low moments - the Carolina game, the Dallas end zone celebration, Boatgate, but his relationship with manning as always been fine far as anyone knows.

I think people want the drama of assuming Beckham is a locker room cancer. I just don't think there is any evidence to suggest he actually is.

He seems like a genuinely good, accessible guy, seems to have the respect of his teammates, and despite his mistakes in the past, in a year in which Leveon Bell is STILL holding out, Beckham came to mini-camp without a contract.

THAT goes a long way, despite the stupid ESPN interview hiccup. He's handled Mara calling him out for it fine, both on and off the field.

The dude is far from ideal just because he creates stories for US. I don't have concerns about him in the locker room or in the field in terms of the respect of his teammates and the respect he gives them in return.

His team persona is not a good one...That interview was truly idiotic, and for a guy with a father who was a pro, he has not been a good role model. He HAS to be the center of attention, it would seem. Let's see him shave his head and try not to stand out with his on-field histrionics or dances. He could never do it, though, because he's unwilling to just let his performance on the field define him.

Let's see how he does if the Giants pick up a young quarterback...might not be good.

I'm old-school...always have been, always will be, and OBJ has turned me off from the beginning, despite his ability as a player. I've been shot down for saying it on this forum in the past, but he's the type of guy I would not want on my team unless I was a Patriots's fan, because they are one of the few teams who could probably control him.

And by the way, being popular in the locker-room is not necessarily a good thing, because he might be influencing them the wrong way. I never would have wanted a guy like him on any team I ever coached...he just demands too much attention.

WaltLongmire wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

Moonangie wrote:Word, major misjudgment by the new management team. Still, I'm stoked about Saquon's future as a Giant. He's incredible, and thankfully, young.

I'm a Jets fan, and very happy with what the Giants did in the draft because we got our quarterback, but Saquon is a great player, and perhaps the most interesting RB to watch in the NFL. The big thing to observe over the next few years is whether he can take over the locker room from OBJ.

Barkley appears to be a good guy who is a leader and team player...can he and OBJ get along if Odell continues to be Odell?

I think this question is already answered to some degree. Beckham has had low moments - the Carolina game, the Dallas end zone celebration, Boatgate, but his relationship with manning as always been fine far as anyone knows.

I think people want the drama of assuming Beckham is a locker room cancer. I just don't think there is any evidence to suggest he actually is.

He seems like a genuinely good, accessible guy, seems to have the respect of his teammates, and despite his mistakes in the past, in a year in which Leveon Bell is STILL holding out, Beckham came to mini-camp without a contract.

THAT goes a long way, despite the stupid ESPN interview hiccup. He's handled Mara calling him out for it fine, both on and off the field.

The dude is far from ideal just because he creates stories for US. I don't have concerns about him in the locker room or in the field in terms of the respect of his teammates and the respect he gives them in return.

His team persona is not a good one...That interview was truly idiotic, and for a guy with a father who was a pro, he has not been a good role model. He HAS to be the center of attention, it would seem. Let's see him shave his head and try not to stand out with his on-field histrionics or dances. He could never do it, though, because he's unwilling to just let his performance on the field define him.

Let's see how he does if the Giants pick up a young quarterback...might not be good.

I'm old-school...always have been, always will be, and OBJ has turned me off from the beginning, despite his ability as a player. I've been shot down for saying it on this forum in the past, but he's the type of guy I would not want on my team unless I was a Patriots's fan, because they are one of the few teams who could probably control him.

And by the way, being popular in the locker-room is not necessarily a good thing, because he might be influencing them the wrong way. I never would have wanted a guy like him on any team I ever coached...he just demands too much attention.

You officially lost me with "Let's see him shave his head". I don't consider such sensibilities part of any worthwhile pro football school, new or old or otherwise.

I think he doesn't know how to not draw attention to himself, which I do consider a social media/millennial/generational thing.

I just don't know if it has any any negative impact the field. I can't rebut it doesn't suit your persona sensibilities, you win that argument.

I just stopped wanting to my favorite team's player to look, dress and act to my specific personal tastes years ago.

I just see no evidence any Giant is playing worse because of Beckham's behavior or the team would perform better without him.

HofstraBBall wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

Moonangie wrote:Word, major misjudgment by the new management team. Still, I'm stoked about Saquon's future as a Giant. He's incredible, and thankfully, young.

I'm a Jets fan, and very happy with what the Giants did in the draft because we got our quarterback, but Saquon is a great player, and perhaps the most interesting RB to watch in the NFL. The big thing to observe over the next few years is whether he can take over the locker room from OBJ.

Barkley appears to be a good guy who is a leader and team player...can he and OBJ get along if Odell continues to be Odell?

Happy with Barkley. Think he will be a star player. Only problem with the pick, for me, is that it is very hard to justify a top 5 pick on a RB. Tough position to stay healthy and have a long career at. Think Darnold will be a good QB and the Jets got lucky. For once. And after posting with Kickoftime, I don't feel so bad we did not draft him. As we have Lauletta!!

Look at some clips of Jim Brown in his prime...there are some similarities between Barkley and him in how they run.

Again, I'm a Jets fan, but I have some roots with the Giants. My father was at that famous overtime game with the Colts almost 60 yrs. ago, and I actually got to see the Giants play in Yankee Stadium with Y.S. Tittle quarterbacking the team. If they play the Jets, I root for the Green, but I like having the Giants play well.

But the Giants have been the old-school team, unlike my frequently inept Jets. Strange to see what they are going through now.

Too early for me to judge Lauletta...he seemed small on the field when I saw him on TV. I was actually happy that we picked up Webb after you cut him.

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Bet above and most of our conversation was what a dumb idea (Yours) it was that Eli should be benched in the 8th game of the year for a 4th round draft pick.

No, it wasn't.

You first offered a bet that Eli would be the QB in 2019 & 20.

Was never about the 8th game either, in which case you would have wrote. "My point was that Eli will be the QB over Lauletta on Sunday, Oct 28."

You didn't. You wrote "My point was that Eli will always be the QB over Lauletta."

We both agree on what "always" means, right?

As it were, that's your second error. Your first is I never wrote Lauletta should be the QB Sunday against Washington. Point of fact, I wrote Manning should be the QB Sunday vs. Washington. Not implied. I wrote that literally.

Also wrote Manning should be the QB on week 17 home vs. Dallas.

I offered the opinion Lauletta should be the QB after the bye in San Fran, but later also offered the opinion that's unlikely to be the case.

I do think Lauletta WILL start multiple games after San Fran and before dallas, whether Manning is healthy or otherwise.

Since that directly contradicts "always", I assumed that would be a bet.

Guess not.

According to your statement, you think Lauletta should be starting Sunday.

Again, no. According to my actual statement "There is really NO reason to play him after Sunday. But you can't just move the scout team QB into the line-up in 4 days. Give Eli a home game against a division rival for fans to say goodbye" I think you can't just move Lauletta into the line-up in 4 days, therefore Manning should and will start Sunday.

Do you feel he will start this Sunday?

I hope the above clarifies my original and consistent position.

So do YOU think Lauletta will start multiple games over a healthy Manning in 2018, just not Sunday vs WSH or week 17 vs Dallas, yes or no?

If yes, cool, then we agree.

If no, we have a bet, right?

Whos on first. What's on second. I don't know is on third.

OK good. We have a bet. You think our 4th round savior will start this Sunday.

Well... that IS actually more likely than Manning being the Giants QB in 2019 and 2020 and every remaining game in 2018.

So, there's that.

You wanna bet?

Of course, if Eli Manning starts on Sunday and the remaining the 8 games this year and is brought back to be the starter in 2019 and is brought back to be the starter again 2020, you win.

if Lauletta starts Sunday, I win.

If Manning starts Sunday but isn't the starter from week 10 in San Fran through the start of 2020 season, it's a push.

Deal. Name your terms. I'm in.

Wow your so generous. Such a fair deviation / distribution. Sneaky Pete.

Nah, the bet is if Lauletta starts Sunday you win. Oh wait, this Sunday. Oh wait, for the Giants. Oh wait, for the Ny Giants.

Since I posted days ago Manning should and would be this Sunday's starter, no, that bet makes no sense for me.

Your lack of confidence that Manning will be the starter the remaining 8 games is noted, however.

Again, if we are talking benching Eli for Lauletta before we have played our 8th game, IMO, it is a waste of time and wrong.
Will Eli be benched, due to Knickoftime like fans knee jerk frustration, if the giants go 1 and 9 or 1 and 10? Maybe. To me move like these are simplistic and what arm chair QB fans crave. Does not improve the team in any way or work (See last year)
Will Eli be cut for cap space in 2019? Good possibility. Saves a lot of money. But, imo, only if someone better (Not Lauletta) is added at QB. ie. First rounder, FA
Will he be cut in 2019 to make room for Lauletta? For Sneaky Petes sake NO.

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Bet above and most of our conversation was what a dumb idea (Yours) it was that Eli should be benched in the 8th game of the year for a 4th round draft pick.

No, it wasn't.

You first offered a bet that Eli would be the QB in 2019 & 20.

Was never about the 8th game either, in which case you would have wrote. "My point was that Eli will be the QB over Lauletta on Sunday, Oct 28."

You didn't. You wrote "My point was that Eli will always be the QB over Lauletta."

We both agree on what "always" means, right?

As it were, that's your second error. Your first is I never wrote Lauletta should be the QB Sunday against Washington. Point of fact, I wrote Manning should be the QB Sunday vs. Washington. Not implied. I wrote that literally.

Also wrote Manning should be the QB on week 17 home vs. Dallas.

I offered the opinion Lauletta should be the QB after the bye in San Fran, but later also offered the opinion that's unlikely to be the case.

I do think Lauletta WILL start multiple games after San Fran and before dallas, whether Manning is healthy or otherwise.

Since that directly contradicts "always", I assumed that would be a bet.

Guess not.

According to your statement, you think Lauletta should be starting Sunday.

Again, no. According to my actual statement "There is really NO reason to play him after Sunday. But you can't just move the scout team QB into the line-up in 4 days. Give Eli a home game against a division rival for fans to say goodbye" I think you can't just move Lauletta into the line-up in 4 days, therefore Manning should and will start Sunday.

Do you feel he will start this Sunday?

I hope the above clarifies my original and consistent position.

So do YOU think Lauletta will start multiple games over a healthy Manning in 2018, just not Sunday vs WSH or week 17 vs Dallas, yes or no?

If yes, cool, then we agree.

If no, we have a bet, right?

Whos on first. What's on second. I don't know is on third.

OK good. We have a bet. You think our 4th round savior will start this Sunday.

Well... that IS actually more likely than Manning being the Giants QB in 2019 and 2020 and every remaining game in 2018.

So, there's that.

You wanna bet?

Of course, if Eli Manning starts on Sunday and the remaining the 8 games this year and is brought back to be the starter in 2019 and is brought back to be the starter again 2020, you win.

if Lauletta starts Sunday, I win.

If Manning starts Sunday but isn't the starter from week 10 in San Fran through the start of 2020 season, it's a push.

Deal. Name your terms. I'm in.

Wow your so generous. Such a fair deviation / distribution. Sneaky Pete.

Nah, the bet is if Lauletta starts Sunday you win. Oh wait, this Sunday. Oh wait, for the Giants. Oh wait, for the Ny Giants.

Since I posted days ago Manning should and would be this Sunday's starter, no, that bet makes no sense for me.

Your lack of confidence that Manning will be the starter the remaining 8 games is noted, however.

Again, if we are talking benching Eli for Lauletta before we have played our 8th game, IMO, it is a waste of time and wrong.

We are not and never have been and it was perfectly spelled out the entire time. I wrote in one of my first posts to you Manning should play tomorrow.

You are either pretending that was ever a suggestion or are very confused.

Does not improve the team in any way or work (See last year)

I have never even once suggested it will improve the 2018 team in any way. It will in fact do the opposite. The same way trading Harrison and Apple won't improve the 2018 and like the 2019 team in any way.

You are either pretending that was ever the point of this or are very confused.

Will he be cut in 2019 to make room for Lauletta? For Sneaky Petes sake NO.

Was never the point. You are either pretending it was or are very confused.

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Bet above and most of our conversation was what a dumb idea (Yours) it was that Eli should be benched in the 8th game of the year for a 4th round draft pick.

No, it wasn't.

You first offered a bet that Eli would be the QB in 2019 & 20.

Was never about the 8th game either, in which case you would have wrote. "My point was that Eli will be the QB over Lauletta on Sunday, Oct 28."

You didn't. You wrote "My point was that Eli will always be the QB over Lauletta."

We both agree on what "always" means, right?

As it were, that's your second error. Your first is I never wrote Lauletta should be the QB Sunday against Washington. Point of fact, I wrote Manning should be the QB Sunday vs. Washington. Not implied. I wrote that literally.

Also wrote Manning should be the QB on week 17 home vs. Dallas.

I offered the opinion Lauletta should be the QB after the bye in San Fran, but later also offered the opinion that's unlikely to be the case.

I do think Lauletta WILL start multiple games after San Fran and before dallas, whether Manning is healthy or otherwise.

Since that directly contradicts "always", I assumed that would be a bet.

Guess not.

According to your statement, you think Lauletta should be starting Sunday.

Again, no. According to my actual statement "There is really NO reason to play him after Sunday. But you can't just move the scout team QB into the line-up in 4 days. Give Eli a home game against a division rival for fans to say goodbye" I think you can't just move Lauletta into the line-up in 4 days, therefore Manning should and will start Sunday.

Do you feel he will start this Sunday?

I hope the above clarifies my original and consistent position.

So do YOU think Lauletta will start multiple games over a healthy Manning in 2018, just not Sunday vs WSH or week 17 vs Dallas, yes or no?

If yes, cool, then we agree.

If no, we have a bet, right?

Whos on first. What's on second. I don't know is on third.

OK good. We have a bet. You think our 4th round savior will start this Sunday.

Well... that IS actually more likely than Manning being the Giants QB in 2019 and 2020 and every remaining game in 2018.

So, there's that.

You wanna bet?

Of course, if Eli Manning starts on Sunday and the remaining the 8 games this year and is brought back to be the starter in 2019 and is brought back to be the starter again 2020, you win.

if Lauletta starts Sunday, I win.

If Manning starts Sunday but isn't the starter from week 10 in San Fran through the start of 2020 season, it's a push.

Deal. Name your terms. I'm in.

Wow your so generous. Such a fair deviation / distribution. Sneaky Pete.

Nah, the bet is if Lauletta starts Sunday you win. Oh wait, this Sunday. Oh wait, for the Giants. Oh wait, for the Ny Giants.

Since I posted days ago Manning should and would be this Sunday's starter, no, that bet makes no sense for me.

Your lack of confidence that Manning will be the starter the remaining 8 games is noted, however.

Again, if we are talking benching Eli for Lauletta before we have played our 8th game, IMO, it is a waste of time and wrong.

We are not and never have been and it was perfectly spelled out the entire time. I wrote in one of my first posts to you Manning should play tomorrow. Nope, you said he should be benched. I guess for you that means at some future point. Real specific. But glad you now agree with me it was a stupid suggestion.

You are either pretending that was ever a suggestion or are very confused.

Does not improve the team in any way or work (See last year)

I have never even once suggested it will improve the 2018 team in any way. It will in fact do the opposite. The same way trading Harrison and Apple won't improve the 2018 and like the 2019 team in any way. So your making suggestions just to prove your crystal ball skills? Here I thought we cared about he Giants getting better. Now your suggestion seems even more pointless

You are either pretending that was ever the point of this or are very confused.

Will he be cut in 2019 to make room for Lauletta? For Sneaky Petes sake NO.

Was never the point. You are either pretending it was or are very confused. Saying it was never the point implies you made a point. So you agree there is no point to what you are saying. I agree

I win! No Lauletta today?

Do you really know what you were trying to say or what point you were trying to make? Why are you so defensive? Everything I said above was non censorious. Just a simple attempt to clarify my opinions(realize you dont like those) with some concession. Yet you took it as accusotory? Relax bud, we are just talking sports here. But fine, will add some bold above to keep it combative.

Btw.... went to the game today. Real POS. Can you ask your crystal ball if Lauletta will be "active" the next game?

How about bets about the entire O-line being cut during the bye week?
We can't run block, we can't pass block... for the love of Pete, we can't even block enough to get into the end zone from the 1 yard line.

Any bets that it will be leaked out that Shurmur is actually paying premiums for the O-line to allow sacks? Then when he benches Eli, it will look like a mercy killing.

jrodmc wrote:How about bets about the entire O-line being cut during the bye week?
We can't run block, we can't pass block... for the love of Pete, we can't even block enough to get into the end zone from the 1 yard line.

Any bets that it will be leaked out that Shurmur is actually paying premiums for the O-line to allow sacks? Then when he benches Eli, it will look like a mercy killing.

I have always wondered...when the O-line starts underperforming to such a degree, whether its payback to the QB for not making the right plays when they did block.

Cartman718 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:How about bets about the entire O-line being cut during the bye week?
We can't run block, we can't pass block... for the love of Pete, we can't even block enough to get into the end zone from the 1 yard line.

Any bets that it will be leaked out that Shurmur is actually paying premiums for the O-line to allow sacks? Then when he benches Eli, it will look like a mercy killing.

I have always wondered...when the O-line starts underperforming to such a degree, whether its payback to the QB for not making the right plays when they did block.

I read that one of them, I think it was the rook, Hernandez, didn't know how many times Eli got sacked. LMAO. He's been sacked 31 times already, which is just 8 less than the total for all of last season.

Doesn't matter whether Eli waives his NTC; there's not going to be anything of him left at all to trade pretty soon...

jrodmc wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:How about bets about the entire O-line being cut during the bye week?
We can't run block, we can't pass block... for the love of Pete, we can't even block enough to get into the end zone from the 1 yard line.

Any bets that it will be leaked out that Shurmur is actually paying premiums for the O-line to allow sacks? Then when he benches Eli, it will look like a mercy killing.

I have always wondered...when the O-line starts underperforming to such a degree, whether its payback to the QB for not making the right plays when they did block.

I read that one of them, I think it was the rook, Hernandez, didn't know how many times Eli got sacked. LMAO. He's been sacked 31 times already, which is just 8 less than the total for all of last season.

Doesn't matter whether Eli waives his NTC; there's not going to be anything of him left at all to trade pretty soon...

The offensive line is awful. One of the worst in football.

But Manning isn't being killed. He's falling down a lot.

It was what, 3 weeks in a row Clay Matthews was penalized for roughing the passer? You know what all of them had in common? The QB saw him coming and threw the ball and took a flush, straight on hit.

Manning doesn't get sacked like that. He takes ring around the rosey sacks. When pressure is around him, he falls down.

HofstraBBall wrote:Do you really know what you were trying to say or what point you were trying to make?

I do.

At 1-7, the NY Giants have little reason to keep playing Eli Manning every Sunday and some reason to give Lauletta some starts over the final 8 meaningless games.

Why are you so defensive?

I can't answer why you perceive things a certain way, that's about you, not me.

Me, I perceive you consistently trying to project some sort of false happy-go-lucky approach, as how you are perceived means something to you.

But that's just how I read it. Maybe I'm wrong and you're not actually trying too hard. I haven't mentioned it because it's irrelevant.

Can you ask your crystal ball if Lauletta will be "active" the next game?

I don't know.

I'm certain he'll be active for some of the last 8 games and reasonably certain he'll start some of them too.

All I ever argued. It is my interpretation of this dialogue that you deny this would and/or should happen.

http://www.espn.com/blog/new-york-giants...

Ummmm ... duh.

Ummmmm... duh.

https://www.bigblueview.com/2018/10/29/1...

Now the talk this morning is where is OBJ going to get traded to? Cleveland? Oakland? Who gives us the best draft picks...

Gints going full tank if they go that route. Your O line suhucks donkey kong, so trade one of the best wideouts in the sport.

Knickoftime wrote:Ummmmm... duh.

https://www.bigblueview.com/2018/10/29/1...

Think SIRI recorded you.

I think i gave you too much credit. I think you are as dense as the blogger you are boasting about. Probably another top notch NFL guy, like yourself.

Shumur: "Eli is our quarterback"
Knicksoftime: "So Lauletta is starting?"

Shumur: I think you always want to make sure, when you replace somebody, you replace him with guys who can do that job,” “I think you always consider that, because the team counts on the fact we’re gonna play the best people at all positions.”
Knocoftime: "So Lauletta is starting?"