The Giants came to town! (Unofficial Post Game Thread)

[50-yard-line]

That’s just a fan theory because the team kind of sucks coming out of the gates every so often. Then a trade is made or they find what works. Was 2016, 2015, 2011, etc just an extension of the preseason?

Yeah, and three of the first four opponents are division. I don't see BB taking those games as "whatever."

 

[captain stone]

Carry just 2 QBs and trade Hoyer. The extra roster spot for a TE.

A TE who is currently NOT on this roster, I ass-ume.

 

[signbabybrady]

I like Brooks and Obi but carrying 3 safeties would make some added room for the crowded CBs. If JoeJuan can back up some at safety maybe he can spare Crossen or Dawson. Not sure I wouldn't just prefer Brooks or Obi to Dawson or Crossen but there's alot of other versatile guys in the DB group so the numbers could be off a little at S or CB.

2nd point when deciding on a back up QB I quit if your statement reads player x wouldn't win a playoff game. Most back ups won't. Instead I prefer to judge a back up on two fronts first being the most critical which is can you keep us afloat over a short period in the regular season. If the starter goes down for 4 weeks can you not ruin the whole season. Second front depending on who your starter is is less important but that's to develop a potential starter too. Obviously TBs age makes second front more important here but the first front is still the most important aspect of a backup QB. My opinion is they both can handle front 1 but I have more faith in Hoyer right now obviously Stidham wins on front 2.

 

[SBLIII]

No more 5’10 corners in the 2nd and 3rd round B.B. Asante Samuel ain’t walking through that door.

Love the 6’4 corner we drafted in round 2. he will not be a miss

He still has some miscues but to be expected. Overall looks like a good player with potential.

 

[Triumph]

A TE who is currently NOT on this roster, I ass-ume.

Yes, until Gronk comes back.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

FY(and my) I...

Maybe some teams operate that way. But wouldn't this also be a function of the IR rule? For example, if the Pats think there is a remote chance Andrews could play this year, he would need to make the initial 53 man roster and then be placed on IR. If they IR him immediately at cutdowns, he'd be ineligible to return at all this season. To choose this route, it means they must cut someone that they might intend to have on their week 1 roster.

Players who are not "vested veterans" have to go through waivers, but vested veterans do not - they are free to sign with anyone. Wouldn't it make more sense to tap someone like Brandon Bolden on the shoulders and say, we're temporarily cutting you for roster space, but we will immediately resign you if you're ok with that (and obtaining Bolden's buy-in)? As opposed to cutting someone like Keion Crosson and hoping he makes it through waivers unclaimed before you can resign him?

 

[Uptown]

Maybe some teams operate that way. But wouldn't this also be a function of the IR rule? For example, if the Pats think there is a remote chance Andrews could play this year, he would need to make the initial 53 man roster and then be placed on IR. If they IR him immediately at cutdowns, he'd be ineligible to return at all this season. To choose this route, it means they must cut someone that they might intend to have on their week 1 roster. Players who are not "vested veterans" have to go through waivers, but vested veterans do not - they are free to sign with anyone.

Wouldn't it make more sense to tap someone like Brandon Bolden on the shoulders and say, we're temporarily cutting you for roster space, but we will immediately resign you if you're ok with that (and obtaining Bolden's buy-in)? As opposed to cutting someone like Keion Crosson and hoping he makes it through waivers unclaimed before you can resign him?

I concur.

 

[slam]

I also thought of Bolden as a cut and resign candidate to accommodate Andrews and maybe Froholdt if his injury is returnable this year. The danger is if another team were to make him an offer he can’t refuse. Who else could be such a candidate? Ebner? Hoyer?

 

[Patriots801]

Yes, until Gronk comes back.

Yes. Tell Gronk come back please. We need Gronk so badly!

 

[RobertWeathers]

The reason is simply. First you take on dead money and 2nd you would have to tell yourself, yeah I passed up several quality players, then traded up, drafted a scrub and this was extremely dumb. That's a lot harder than people think it is.

BB has shown the ability to move on from a mistake very quickly.

I think he over-valued Richards.

My hope is he does not with Dawson.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Dude, what's your take on your binky Berrios? You were all in on him. Does he get cut or stuffed in PS?

Hes gone. I was hopeful but hasn't done enough in the return game and not good enough of a WR to deserve to be on the roster.

Gunnar might have a shot.

 

[PatsDeb]

So much for 23-0.

As my son (who likes to needle me about the Patriots) said, "Tom Brady just can't beat those Giants..." GRRRR!

 

[SBLIII]

BB has shown the ability to move on from a mistake very quickly.

I think he over-valued Richards.

My hope is he does not with Dawson.

mistake isn't mistake. He traded up in the 2nd round. To move on from that after 1 year will not be easy.

 

[RobertWeathers]

mistake isn't mistake. He traded up in the 2nd round. To move on from that after 1 year will not be easy.

No. It won't.

 

[Sicilian]

BB has shown the ability to move on from a mistake very quickly.

I think he over-valued Richards.

My hope is he does not with Dawson.

I think he definitely over-valued Richards due to his (from what we heard coming out of school) football IQ, but I also think he was a core special teamer for each year he was here. It was really in that training camp where he missed several ST tackles and looked generally lost even there that they decided to move on. I think fan view aside, if he had continued to provide value on ST, he probably would have still been here last year, especially having lost Bolden. But he stopped giving us even that, so what good was he.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

So much for 23-0.

it’s all Gunner’s fault

 

[Mike the Brit]

Useful article on the "blindside block" rule.

Hurley: NFL's Terrible Rule For Blindside Block Appears To Be A Major Problem
​

(This is what Zolak and Ninkovich should have been explaining to the baffled spectator instead of comparing their clothes, waistlines and appetite for ice cream. )

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I think what we see on TV is the whole second, and not the milli-second, so it's possible there was something like 0.4 seconds left when they snapped, but all we see is the "0" part. I feel like we see the clock hit 0 all the time right off the snap and it's usually fine.

Yes. The refs have been letting the playclock hit zero for years. As long as you snap it within a small fraction of a second after it hits zero they consistently let it go. They do not (any longer) throw the flags the moment it shows zero.

Personally, I'd like to see the clock show tenths in the last 2 seconds and then have a red colored border light up when it hits zero, with the refs told to throw the flag if the red comes on before the ball is snapped.

It's been a while since I've really paid attention to the playclock. Say there's been some stoppage where they have to halt the playclock, and then they set it to 0:25 and then the ref says to start the playclock. Does it immediately change to 0:24 or does it sit at 0:25 for a second or does it sit at 0:25 for a half-second? The answer to that will tell you if zero on the playclock is truly zero, or if zero on the clock actually means a second to go or if zero on the clock means a half-second to go.

 

[reflexblue]

Yes. Tell Gronk come back please. We need Gronk so badly!

After listening to gronks health issues he should stay retired.

 

[patfanken]

Maybe some teams operate that way. But wouldn't this also be a function of the IR rule? For example, if the Pats think there is a remote chance Andrews could play this year, he would need to make the initial 53 man roster and then be placed on IR. If they IR him immediately at cutdowns, he'd be ineligible to return at all this season. To choose this route, it means they must cut someone that they might intend to have on their week 1 roster.

Players who are not "vested veterans" have to go through waivers, but vested veterans do not - they are free to sign with anyone. Wouldn't it make more sense to tap someone like Brandon Bolden on the shoulders and say, we're temporarily cutting you for roster space, but we will immediately resign you if you're ok with that (and obtaining Bolden's buy-in)? As opposed to cutting someone like Keion Crosson and hoping he makes it through waivers unclaimed before you can resign him?

I will be very surprised NOT to see something like this happening come Sunday. The list of vested vets that would fill this role are Hoyer, Ebner, Bolden, Harmon and Thomas. You can put as many guys on returnable IR but only 2 can come back. Before last night's game I had Thomas filling that role on my final 53. I had he and Ebner being cut and brought back after putting Rivers and Calhoun on IR.

I think you will see the Pats use something like this to get guys they want to keep on IR without the risk of losing some cuts they actually want to keep.

Now let us all pray for Gunner to make it to the PS