Today, the NY Giants formally end the brief-but-spectacularly horrible era of Daniel Jones, while the Jets visit the sad conclusion of Aaron Rodgers, The Catastrophe.
Bad Broadway shows lasted longer. As a Giants fan who - long ago, as a peach-fuzzed, adorable cherub - thought they'd be the '61 Yankees of football, I believe it's particularly painful. Consider the last 12 years.
So, today, the failing NY Times asks the ultimate question:
Is this finally it?
Is this the moment of transition, when things get so bad that they cannot, by the sheer math of the universe, worsen?
Of course, the answer is no. Today's teams possess bottomless qualities that cannot be defined by their QBs, or even their coaches. They are the direct offshoots of the owners, the true villains in any losing season.
The Giants are run by old money scions of country club Connecticut, who sought a big, white, lumbering, pocket QB, the type who leads children in the Cub Scout pledge. The Jets are owned by a third-generation political oil can, who preferred as QB a slow, old, self-indulgent blatherer of bullshit, better suited for hosting Jeopardy. Both fit the owners' dreams.
Today, the Giants start Tommy Devito, the hometown fave, in a meaningless game against the Bucs. God knows what the Jets will do. This year was over before it began. Have NY teams finally hit rock bottom? Oh, if only it were so...
Posts
10 comments:
The NY Times is worrying a little too much. NYFC and the Red Bulls have plenty left to play for.
If either or both have arrived at Rock Bottom, they should immediately schedule an interview with Sponge Bob Square Pants as the next coach/GM.
Is Tom Coughlin still available? Daboll sucks and is a jerk.
I think Jones will end up with a playoff team and lead them to glory. There's something toxic going on in the Meadowlands. Besides the Mafia burial fields.
Like Hal, Tisch and Mara hire the cheapest coaches they can find in order to keep more of their annual king's ransom revenue. Winning games or championships is secondary. Even when they hired Coughlin, they got him for less than market value due to his perception of being a hard-assed prick that most free agent players sought to avoid.
At some point, they need to be honest with themselves. Firing coaches and GMs is no longer an effective cover for their own complacency and incompetence.
More Nepo Nonsense, here in Loser City.
"Firing coaches and GMs is no longer an effective cover for their own complacency and incompetence."
Carl this is true for our football teams but I sure would love Yankee ownership to give it a shot. :)
Excellent point, Doug!
Both teams have alot more ineptness to presnet to us.
The existential question is: can a nadir be worsened? But a chicken ( or veal ) parm on a bun can't be beat. Lady Huskies on Flohoops tomorrow.
Sunday is Cutlets Day at Carvel.
I finally just caught up to yesterday's Doug and Hoss posts. They both have their points.
I've gone on record as saying that if we could sign a guy who can hit, can hit for power, can hit in the clutch, can play above average defense, and be an above average baserunner, that guy would be worth 50 or 60 million a year for life.
With Soto, the hitting is not a problem, although he's not yet as good a hitter as Judge (postseason excepted). But at 26, maybe he will be. Then again, there's no guarantee of that. So I think you have to pay him for what he is now, not for what you hope he becomes.
The best thing you can say about his defense is that he's better than the Martian. He's not fast, either, nor an exemplary baserunner, which you don't have to be a speedster to be.
All of which is moot, of course, since the Yanks won't pay him what Boras wants. And they won't spend 50 or 60 million on other impact players.
So basically, regardless of the chatter, we won't really be better next year. If we do sign Soto--hell by then being a slab of black ice--we still won't be better than this year.
It's the Yankee way.
Post a Comment