lol at anything near 15 or 20 for Nicks. He isn't a top 3 WR but he is a huge asset and already playing at a very high level.

Near the top of their positions = players playing at or near a pro bowl level (lol pro bowl voting, but instead the actually idea of what it should be).

Players that have been there for significant stretches over the past couple of seasons:

Bradshaw
Nicks
O'Hara
Snee
McKenzie
Osi
Tuck
Madison
Thomas

Other players like Rolle, Phillips, Eli, Canty, etc, are capable of it as well.

And no, not all of these players have played at a high level continuously for two years. That is the point. The Giants have a very deep and well constructed team that is built around the right areas. They do not have an elite QB but they have a team that is overall talented enough to be contending for deep playoff runs the past three seasons and the next few seasons.

What is even your argument? That the roster isn't talented enough? lol @ that. How can you watch a team crush teams for half the season and then crumble the second half of the season three years in a row, see what they are capable of, and then after yet another collapse just cop it out to not having a good enough roster?

The talent is there. The team has underachieved the past three seasons, the past two especially.

madison on that list is kinda lol - are you sure you don't mean webster

Yes, I mean Webster.

Seriously this is so dumb. The gap between elite QBs, hell even tier 2 QBs and "superstar players" at other positions is so huge that it totally negates this ******ed superstar league nonsense.

Football teams are built on units. Having many good players is the best way to build a team outside of having a great ****ing QB. Having a great ****ing QB and having lots of other good players is even better.

o that was sam madison? lol

i assumied madison hedgecock

and i think you should put kiwi on that list, he was gunna breakout this yr b4 injury imo

Sorry, it's late and I just got back from seeing Black Swan so I really don't know what is going on.

What the hell does this even mean? Most #1 WRs are "huge assets". I told you to be specific for a reason. He's not a top 5 WR and if he's top 10 it's barely. I think the consensus would put him somewhere between 10-15, which is awesome for a 2nd yr WR but still doesn't make him stand out when there are 32 teams in the league.

Bradshaw is a good rb, he's similar to Nicks in that he's not elite but definitely pretty good.

Snee is solid, don't think he's elite. Mckenzie and O'hara have both seen better days and are on the decline big time. They also have battled a ton of injuries recently.

No disagreements on Osi and Tuck.

Is that Terrell Thomas? Really? Who else thinks Terrell Thomas is one of the top CBs in the league?

Rolle is someone you actually should have listed instead of in the secondary list. He's played pretty well this year.



Yes, I definitely think the roster is not talented enough. I think you need some big time playmakers/game changers whatever you wanna call it. If you don't have it at QB you better have it somewhere else to make up for it, hopefully on defense. The Giants have a very solid D overall but it's nothing to write home about.

How can I watch a team crush for half a season and then crumble in the second half? Oh I don't know, I don't suppose the schedule has anything to do with it?

FOR GOD'S SAKE WE HAVEN'T EVEN CRUMBLED THIS SEASON! If we would have held on vs. the Eagles no one itt would even be complaining. We're 3-2 in our last 5 games. Of our 9 wins, only 2 are against teams with winning records, and both were at home.

Last season, out of our 5-0 record to start the season, only one of those wins was vs. a good team, and that was a last second nailbiter vs. the cowboys. The other 4 wins were vs. miserably bad teams.

After that, we played 4 playoff teams in a row and lost all 4.

Then we won another nailbiter in OT vs. the Falcons at home (a non-playoff but competitive team). Lost @ Denver who started hot and then lost a lot of steam like the Giants but was at least respectable. Beat the Cowboys in another very close game, lost to the Eagles (playoff team), crushed the Skins (terrible), and then lost to the Panthers (competitive team who finished .500 and seem to play well in the Meadowlands historically) to end our season.

Face the facts..........we're just not that good. The Giants are very adroit at beating up on bad teams, and that's a good thing. But they are simply outclassed most of the time (the last 2 years anyway) when they play worthy competition. You could blame Tom Coughlin for the Eagles coming back to beat us in the 4th quarter 2 weeks ago if you want, but I believe you'd be wasting your breath. The Eagles are a better team and even though we should have won having such a big lead, they came back and outplayed us significantly when it counted, and won the game. You have every right to be angry as a fan but what can you do but tip your hat to them and move on. As for last week's loss, the Packers are just better, and they were home.

There's no trend here other than we've done quite well vs. very bad teams, so-so vs. mediocre teams, and quite poorly vs. very good teams. It just so happens we've had to play very good teams when the playoffs are on the line at the end of the season.

oops

We have a good roster with a lot of quality players but nobody has really stepped up.

We've been waiting for years for Eli to be Manning. Every time he shows a flash he gives us a choke job, keeping him firmly in the second tier of QBs.

In the NFL, its very hard to win without an elite QB. It can happen, but a lot of things have to be right, like a Burres that's always open and a Tiki forcing opponents to always defend the run.

When your best receiver is Nicks and best runner is Bradshaw(fumbles), Eli just isn't good enough, especially with our banged up o line.

I'm not saying they were correct. I am using this information to show that the idea that he was "clearly" far from a top 10 guy is probably not correct.

Why is my post an "oops"? I think it has proven to be fairly accurate. They beat up on bad teams this year and struggled to beat anyone good, with the exception of the Bears.

Right, and I was agreeing with you.

lol the oops was my post obviously! especially the part where I said "its not just who we are beating, its how we are beating them"----it probably was just who we were beating.

OK sorry for the paranoia guys. It's just that everyone hates me in real life so I assumed the same here.

Was a very different team...........notably due to Strahan and Plaxico.

We also had Shockey for most of the regular season.

We also had Gibril Wilson who was very good and didn't get the credit he deserved.

I never said he was clearly far from a top 10 guy. I said he's probably somewhere between 8-20. But if he's the 14th best WR in the league he's not really elite imo.

AND we pray.

happy new years guys.

This year's team is more talented than that team.

Today is pretty depressing. I am completely resigned to the missing of the playoffs and refuse to put any hope into our very small chance of making it. I'll be watching of course, but it has quite the dreary feel to it.

I also officially reached that point of the year where the joy of football has been effectively soured on thanks to the Giants.

/karak

+1

Still on the fence about TC, obv if we sneak into the playoffs he comes back next year, but if not I'm not sold that bringing someone else on fixes our problems. Assuming he stays, what is consensus on our coordinators? I'd like to see Perry come back, but I think Couglin has to bring in someone new to replace Gilbride.

lol fail

EDIT: And it's not as if the 2007 team was super talented either. Just because we were a mediocre team that got hot/lucky in the playoffs and won it all doesn't mean you should expect it to happen again. There's a reason we were dogs in all 4 playoff games we played that year. We might have been underrated some, but we certainly weren't as good as the playoff run would've suggested and you all know it. We were 10-6 that season, a record very likely to be matched this season! The team has only declined since then and it's shown, albeit in a very unnecessarily frustrating way.

I like how the guy who thinks the statement that 2010 Giants are more talented than 2007 Giants is a fail also feels the need to lecture us on how the 2007 Giants weren't even "super talented." Thanks teach.

You are like bizarro unbearable homer.