[ad_1]
Ralph Vacchiano | Facebook | Twitter | Archive
EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J. – The Giants have been virtually eliminated from the playoff race, but Pat Shurmur is still not ready to reveal his plans for the next quarter. All he did on Monday was that Eli Manning will start against the Chicago Bears on Sunday.
It would be logical for the Giants to give the rookie Kyle Lauletta a little play time after that. But what Shurmur said later was nonsense.
"Why are you jumping on (Alex) Tanney?" Shurmur asked.
Well, there are so many reasons. But let's start with this: because he is a 31-year-old companion who has played for the NFL for seven seasons, played for eight teams, played only one game and only 14 assists. He also has no chance of being the heir of Manning and the Giants quarterback.
So the best question is: why do not you jump on Tanney, coach?
"I think what you're trying to do is win every game," said Shurmur. "You make your decision based on the winner of the game. And you base your decisions on placing the best team on the field that gives you the best chance of winning the match."
Okay, that's a good explanation of why Shurmur is still with Manning, 37, at least for the first of Giants' last five games in this lost season. There is no doubt that Manning offers the Giants the best chance of winning quarterbacks in their lineup. And winning does not matter, believe it or not.
But there is no scenario where playing Tanney gives the Giants their best chance of winning, especially since he has never played in an NFL victory. The former star of Monmouth College (Ill.) Played a game – the last game of the 2015 season for the Tennessee Titans in Indianapolis. He scored 10 for 14 yards for 99 yards and one touchdown, but the Titans lost 30-24.
So let's be true, even if Shurmur prefers to be shy. The only reason to play another quarter in the bottom right is to see if the Giants' heirs have Manning's heir on the list. They will be shopping for their next franchise quarter this season, probably with what should be a top-10 pick. They do not want to commit the mistake of the old regime last season by never playing the rookie of then (and now to the ex-giant). Davis Webb.
Yet, if you believe in Shurmur, they might well repeat the disaster of last year. Remember that the worst part of what General Manager Jerry Reese and his coach Ben McAdoo did last season was not against Manning. He was Manning for Geno Smith. They turned to a quarterback whose Giants knew they would not be part of their future.
Why in the world would they do it again?
"Who knows?" Shurmur said, when asked if Tanney could possibly be the Giants' long-term answer to the quarterback. "Who knows, I think that's where it's bogged down Who knows?"
Who knows? Basically, everyone. The NFL sometimes makes scoring mistakes, but if Tanney was good enough to be the next quarterback of the Giants franchise, it would be one of the biggest defeats of all time. Does anyone really believe that seven previous franchises have all failed to spot something special in Tanney that the Giants suddenly discovered at age 31?
No. This should concern Lauletta, a 22-year-old man in which the giants have invested for the future – at least to a small extent. They granted Lauletta a four-year contract. They cut Webb because they liked Lauletta better. Maybe it will not be the future of the giants. But they recruited him because they thought he could be it.
So, if the Giants are going to look at anyone, is not it necessarily him?
"At one time or another, no matter where they are chosen, unless you are one of those top 4 picks, who cares where you are chosen?" Said Shurmur. "He's a giant, no?" He went to college, did not he? If you're third in your class, are we going to worry about the other two?
"We have recruited a lot of other players who play, some are not, we are just trying to put the best team on the field."
And that includes Tanney?
"If we had the impression that he was giving us the best chance of winning," said Shurmur. "It's the coach's point of view, since all this time he's been our number 2. He's doing what we think can help us win a game."
Honestly, it was hard to say if Shurmur was just trying to be deferential to Tanney or to argue with a media outlet that would go a bit after the Giants' 25-22 defeat in Philadelphia on Sunday. Or maybe it's really sincere to think that it's smart to play Tanney this season. But here's the thing: Playing Smith last season was widely perceived as a waste of time by everyone – including many members of the Giants organization.
Playing Tanney in Lauletta would also be a waste of time. There is simply nothing to gain from seeing a companion who will be absolutely no quarter of the giants of the future. Even if it lights up at its best moment, the Giants will still do their shopping for a quarter at the end of the season. Playing Lauletta at least lets them see a possible future, a young player with potential. Even do not play it and staying with Manning signals at least a refusal to give up.
But playing Tanney? Nothing can be won and nothing can be accomplished by doing this. That's why everyone was jumping over Tanney in conversation with Shurmur.
And that's why Shurmur should also jump right on it.
[ad_2]
Source link
