William Ridley asks: One of the bigger questions or topics for the Giants over the next few months is obviously the head coach job. I have read about the low number of interim coaches that got a full-time gig (25%?) which got me thinking… Do you know of any situations, or do you think there is any possibility in, Kafka getting a 1-year ‘prove it’ extension as interim head coach?
My theory is that he hasn’t really had a fair shot at truly implementing his strategies, processes and assistant coaches etc, so it is unfair to label him a good or bad head coach at this season’s end. I would hate to see him leave and be a good head coach somewhere else just because we didn’t give him a proper shot.
Ed says: William, I don’t think that is a realistic scenario. A one-year contract makes Mike Kafka, or any head coach, a lame duck. Are players really going to fully sell out to follow a guy they know might be replaced at the end of the year? If you are going to make him the head coach, give him the standard four- or five-year contract head coaches get and make him the HEAD COACH.
I understand the idea that it wouldn’t be great to see him succeed somewhere else. It’s true that an interim opportunity doesn’t give you a chance to build your own roster and all of that, but for Kafka it is a two-month window into the kind of coach he is and would be. It is a pretty good barometer of what you would get. We have already seen Kafka have to make a lot of difficult decisions.
Bill Schollenberger asks: I thought helmet to helmet hits were illegal in the NFL. Looking at replays of Dart’s foolish choice to get an extra yard on the sideline, there was clearly helmet to helmet contact on the hit. And the hit on Gunner O was obviously helmet to helmet. Why were no penalties called? Is this a case of the refs calling penalties on bad teams, but not on good ones?
Ed says: Bill, there is nuance to the rule. Not every helmet-to-helmet hit is going to draw a penalty flag, nor should it. Here is what the rule book says:
ARTICLE 10. IMPERMISSIBLE USE OF THE HELMET
It is a foul if a player:
These provisions do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or the helmet in the course of a conventional tackle or block on an opponent.
I had this discussion earlier in the week with Doug Mollin. It was an ugly hit. I would have like to have seen a flag. I could see the possibility of a fine. But, I can see why there wasn’t a flag and I would understand if there isn’t a fine.
Watch the play:
You see Gunner Olszewski hit first by Marte Mapu of New England. That changed the angle of Olszewski’s body and put his head/helmet in a different place. I don’t think Christian Elliss of the Patriots intended to lead with his helmet. You see him try to get into position to throw a shoulder. He is also trying to avoid a block by Tomon Fox.
It is clear that Elliss slams into Olszewski’s helmet. Hard. Because of the variables, though, you can make the case that contact — no matter how violent — was incidental.
Jeffrey Jacobs asks: So yesterday’s news conference seems to be a complete bust – maybe not a disaster on the Joe Judge level, but certainly not anyone’s idea of successful. That being said, how much damage do you think Schoen did to his chances of keeping his job? Were you present for the news conference, and did you think it was as bad as it seems to have been?
Ed says: Jeff, I was not present for the news conference. We had our first big snowstorm of the year on Tuesday, and there is no way I was driving 290 miles round trip in bad weather. I did watch the live stream.
I think Joe Schoen is getting picked on for the ridiculous number of times he said “I understand the question.” I don’t know what people were expecting him to say. Was he supposed to sit up there and say “ownership should have fired me, too?”
He admitted mistakes. He said he was part of it. He did not insist, as he did a year ago, that the Giants were close to being a good team. A lot of what he said was standard fare, the kind of stuff he says every year. Honestly, there was nothing other than “I am stepping down as GM effective immediately” Schoen could have said that would assuaged the feelings of an angry fan base.
As for what he said Tuesday damaging his chance of keeping the job I honestly think that’s ridiculous. He didn’t embarrass the franchise the way Joe Judge did a few years ago with an 11-minute answer to a question.
What ownership will look at is whether or not the overall body of work is good enough. Is the talent base improving? Do they trust his ability to evaluate personnel? Do they believe has assembled a good front office and scouting staff? Do they believe the franchise needs to be torn down to the studs again and rebuilt?
Those are the things that will matter. Not a press conference where there was never any chance that he would have answers that were going to make anyone happy.
Seth Weissman asks: We know Dexter Lawrence is not the same player he was (Carl Banks was right) and it seems like Okereke isn’t, either. So with that in mind, do you think the Giants’ rushing defense has been poor because of the coaching or because they now simply lack players who are good at stopping the run? If you were the GM, what would you do to fix the problem?
Ed says: Seth, I think both things can be true.
Dexter Lawrence having a typical Lawrence year would have helped. The Giants, though, need to continue adding talent on the defensive line and inside linebacker. Coaching is a part of the problem, too, because mistakes were not corrected while Shane Bowen was defensive coordinator. I won’t paint Charlie Bullen with that brush yet. When you see the same run fit mistakes, failure to set the edge, and failure to take good angles and make good tackles in the secondary that’s coaching. Either players are not being or corrected properly, or they aren’t on board with the message they are getting from the coach and are doing their own thing.
If you are the GM, all you can do is honestly evaluate the personnel you have and do the best you can with the resources you have to upgrade it. The coaching part is not up to the GM.
Chris Chianese asks: I’m not saying Schoen should stay or go, but Mara said Schoen will lead the HC search and has brought their systems up to the others in the league. But people are still saying Schoen will be fired. Is that really a possibility after what Mara said? I could see a scenario like Jax last year where they kept their GM and then the owner wanted to hire Coen who said he wouldn’t work with the GM so they axed him. But short of that, I am inclined to take Mara for his word. How do you see it?
Ed says: Chris, yes it is a possibility Schoen will be fired at the end of the season. The natural assumption is that because ownership said Schoen will lead the head-coaching search that he is safe for 2026. Ownership, though, did not say that.
Someone had to start the search. Schoen is tasked with finding out who is and is not interested, and beginning the vetting process. If ownership looks at the roster at the end of the season and concludes that the roster is not as good as they thought and Schoen is not the right GM to fix it, then Schoen could be sent packing. I don’t think that is a direction the Giants currently want to go because I believe ownership does not see a complete teardown as necessary. That could change.
Alan Backman asks: Here are two points that are arguably true. Can you reconcile or explain this?
Point #1 – BBV has long stated that Mara and Giants ownership want more than anything to field a winning team.
Point # 2 – Schoen has been asked to lead the search for next HC. This strongly suggests that Schoen is staying and is supported by ownership.
How do you put those together ? We’re 4 years into Schoen’s hire. Just got embarrassed by the Pats. We’re 2-11. 2nd worst record in the NFL. Are we really saying that this is a coaching issue to such an extent, that even after Daboll and Bowen leave, its just not enough time for Kafka to right the ship ? Or that another HC is going to come here and work magic ? I’m just asking. Is that the argument?
Ed says: Alan, “we” are not saying anything. When ownership says it believes the GM has built a good nucleus of talent that needs to be developed, then fires the coach they are saying they don’t think the coach maximized the talent he had at his disposal.
Schoen made the same argument the other day when he said, and I’m paraphrasing, that the organization needs to figure out why the talent isn’t being maximized.
As I said earlier, though, there is no guarantee Schoen returns next season. We may have all read that into Schoen staying for now while Daboll was ousted, but that doesn’t mean it is an iron clad decision. How is Schoen going to argue there is enough talent if the Giants don’t win, probably, two of the next three games against teams with a combined record of 9-27 this season.
The full story isn’t written yet. Let’s see where the chips fall.
Ronald Buchheim asks: Ed, what is with Jaxson Dart? I read that many people have told him to curb his reckless running. But not only did he fail to avoid a sideline hit right after returning from a concussion, but he made the most senseless comments in defense of that. He said anyone who has followed him knows he rarely avoided contact in college, implying that he’s not willing to change, and that football is not soccer. Does he not understand that players are much bigger and stronger in the pros? Does he not care about his team, by risking injury again? Does he not care about himself, by risking a lifetime of dementia if the concussions continue? Frankly his comments make him sound stubborn at best, ignorant at worst. Daboll said he doesn’t want to dampen Dart’s aggressiveness too much, which may have been one reason why he was fired. But Kafka said much the same thing after the game, absurdly defending Dart by claiming he was trying to get out of bounds when obviously he could have stepped out before the hit. Is there no one in the Giants organization who can lay down the law to this immature young man? Slide or go out of bounds every single time you run, unless you’re at the goal line or the game is on the line at the very end–and maybe not even then, because once you’ve had a concussion and been evaluated for three others, your career and future health are seriously at risk.
What do you think?
Ed says: Ronald, Dart is a 22-year-old kid. I don’t know how old you are, but how many 22-year-olds do you know who don’t think they have the answers, who believe they are invincible and nothing bad will happen to them, who sometimes have to learn lessons the hard way?
No quarterback ever comes out of college as a finished product. There is always a learning curve in terms of processing what he sees, making decisions, etc. Part of that in Dart’s case is learning what he can and can’t get away with while carrying the ball to make that he stays as healthy as possible and available as often as possible while still making plays and using his athleticism to help his team the best way he can.
The kid wants desperately to win. He wants to be great. He wants to make every play, obviously sometimes to his detriment. No one can snap their fingers and give Dart perfect judgment in any phase of playing quarterback in the NFL, including when to be willing to take a big hit and when to try to avoid one. That’s going to take time.
By the way, was anybody crushing Cam Skattebo for trying to run through and over defenders the way he has since he began playing football as a little kid? I know that quarterback is different and Dart will have to learn when and when not to take risks, but you also don’t want to turn Dart into a guy who becomes afraid to try to make a play because of the backlash it might get.
Adam Jacobs asks: After watching the game on Monday, I have a draft question for you. If the Giants have a top 5 pick in next year’s draft, should the team seriously consider drafting another QB? Dart continues to put himself in danger, with little regard for his safety. I love Jameis, but if Dart continues to get concussions going forward, doesn’t the team owe itself the best possible protection for Dart causing himself permanent (from a football sense) damage by having a second potential QB of the future on the team?
Not sure if this is something the team is considering, but I think it is something they should think about. What do you think?
Ed says: No, no, no, no, no.
Adam, is that answer clear enough? Jaxson Dart had one concussion when he took an awkward hit trying to make a play against the Bears. He took a massive hit Monday night against the Patriots. He says he still wants to continue to play aggressively.
Yes, I think he needs to temper some of that. But, I think people need to stop jumping off the cliff and freaking out. The kid wants to win games. He wants to be part of the solution for a franchise he knows has been struggling. He is willing, and able, to take it on himself to try and make plays to help that happen.
The idea of using a top 5 pick on a quarterback is, in my view, absurd. What do you with Dart? Trade him? If not, you have two top 5 quarterbacks on the roster, and one is not going to play. You instantly have a quarterback controversy and a mess.
You build around Dart. You improve the team. You add more game-changing players on BOTH sides of the ball so that Dart doesn’t feel like he has to try to do so much on his own. You upgrade the coaching staff.
You don’t cut the knees out from under the kid before he has a full chance to show you if he can be what it looks like he can be.
Michael Glenn asks: I read your article on the position by position review of Joe Schoen. A miss in your review is not talking about lack of player development by Daboll and staff. When players are drafted they don’t come into the NFL fully baked. Other than Dart, I am hard pressed to identify any players Daboll did a good job developing. Daboll came in being recognized as a good developer of QBs, but I think it is now obvious he did not set a culture of development and discipline. Schoen’s evaluation of how good a team he has drafted will be better determined if the Giants get the next HC hire right. If they are lucky enough to get Harbaugh, O’Connell, or Stefanski, we will see how good the players really are. Don’t you think how good a coaching staff is at developing players is a critical part of a team’s success?
Ed says: Michael, obviously a coaching staff’s ability or lack of ability to develop players is a key part of a team’s success or failure. The post you are referencing was not the place for a deep dive into player development. I am well aware of that, though, and the post did touch on needing to establish whether players underperformed because of coaching or whether the draft evaluations were incorrect to begin with before making a decision on Schoen’s future.
Walker Joyce asks: Just read your analysis of Schoen, which ended just barely better than a wash. That may be the best anyone could do in evaluating Joe; his goofs do seem to outweigh his hits. Not to mention burning roster spots on busts like Hyatt, Banks and Neal, and retreads like Gano.
There is one more question I’d like to answer, and it carries at least as much consequence as any other. In fact, it’s a potential deal-breaker. I’ve asked it before too.
Who picked Dart? Daboll or Schoen?
We’ve heard rumors since the draft that the coach wanted Jax, while Joe and his vaunted staff preferred Shedeur. If true, Dabes’ judgement of QB flesh remains stellar, while the GM can’t be trusted any longer.
So…can you rule on this, or don’t you know?
Ed says: Walker, I can’t tell you with 100% certainty that I know the answer. I can tell you how I “think” it went down based on my reading of events leading to the draft.
I believe the Giants knew last fall, after missing out on Jayden Daniels and Drake Maye, that they had to select a quarterback in the 2025 draft. I think that became even more urgent when, in pitching to keep their jobs, Schoen and Brian Daboll basically blamed everything on Daniel Jones. John Mara came away from all of that saying that getting the quarterback of the future was the biggest priority of the offseason.
If you go back to the fall and look at the tidbits of information that were coming out, it is clear there was a high level of interest from the scouting staff and front office in Shedeur Sanders. That does not mean he was their guy. It just means he was on the radar and the front office knew there was a lot they needed to figure out about the kid.
Remember, coaches and GMs don’t get to talk to draft prospects until the postseason All-Star games are held. That’s when they really got to know these kids as people, and when the Giants made the decision to prioritize Dart. Schoen has called choosing Dart an “organizational decision.” I am not buying the idea that Schoen wanted Sanders and Daboll wanted Dart.
I think that when all was said and done, Dart was the quarterback most people in the organization favored. I think Daboll’s stamp of approval, his saying basically “I want to coach that guy,” is what put the choice over the finish line. As much as the Giants needed to draft a quarterback, Schoen has always had respect for Daboll’s ability to assess the position and was not going to saddle Daboll with a quarterback he was not excited about.
Ed Metzendorf asks: I think we may need to pump the brakes a little on the Jaxson Dart excitement. I’m actually a Daniel Jones believer, but the point here isn’t DJ vs. Dart—it’s context. Both QBs started their careers 2–5 in their first seven starts, and DJ posted 15 TDs and 8 INTs in that stretch. Those numbers aren’t drastically different, and he was throwing to guys like Golden Tate, not exactly a loaded WR room and Barkley missed a few of those games so Wayne Gallman was lead runner.
I hope it works out for Dart—like every Giants fan, I want stability and a long-term answer—but it feels like the hype might be getting a bit overblown simply because this fan base is desperate for any sign of hope. Things can change quickly, especially if the Giants rein him in and try to manage him conservatively especially in running game
Do you think the hype machine is getting ahead of itself at this point?
Ed says: Ed, I actually think the hype train has slowed down a bit. The losing streak, the concussion Dart suffered, and the hysteria over the idea that he actually likes playing a physical game physically has slowed it somewhat.
Jones excited fans when he was a rookie. And he should have, because he was good. Dart, though, has some things Jones didn’t have and that both teammates and fans connect with.
He has swag, personality, and outright leadership. Teammates respected Jones’ toughness and work ethic, but I don’t think they looked at him and said “I need to follow that guy.”
There are hints of a little bit of magic in Dart’s play sometimes. I don’t know that Jones was ever capable of some of the off-script things we have seen from Dart.
Yes, I think the fan base is desperate for hope. I think they should have hope when they look at Dart.
Kölnerbigblue asks: Hearing about Carter not starting 2 out of 3 weeks, can you talk to your scouting contacts to find out how they assess the likelihood a play could develop into a head case. I’ve been willing to give Schoen some more time but between Toney and now what we are seeing from Carter, I’m not so sure I can support him any more. It has to be a tough to assess character but I’m getting tired of this.
Ed says: Kolner, please don’t lump Carter in with Kadarius Toney. That’s a bridge too far. Toney was a head case on an entirely different level.
The people I have talked to from the scouting community about Carter have said there were signs of “immaturity” and “entitlement” from Carter before the draft. The Giants were certainly aware of that. They spent two years paying attention to the kid while he was at Penn State.
This comes back to culture and accountability, which we have talked about many times in recent weeks. If you don’t have a culture where missing things or being late for things is not going to be tolerated, if you don’t have a head coach or a locker room strong enough to hold a player accountable and make clear what will and will not be tolerated, stuff like this doesn’t get dealt with.
Albert Breer of Sports Illustrated confirmed something this week that we had suspected — there were multiple transgressions by Carter prior to his first benching by Mike Kafka that never became public. Brian Daboll chose to handle those in-house with fines. Let’s be honest, a small fine that nobody finds out about isn’t punishment for a 22-year-old millionaire. His playing time was never threatened. His mistakes never became scrutinized in public. He wasn’t held accountable.
Breer wrote, as I indicated above others have told me, that Carter “had a reputation coming out of Penn State, fair or not, for being selfish and entitled, and NFL teams were well aware of it.” The Giants’ job as an organization is to help the young man grow up and learn what it means to treat his job like a job. It’s on Daboll — and Joe Schoen — that they had not been doing that. Kafka is finally trying.
Hopefully, the message is received. Carter is a phenomenal talent. It would be a shame if he doesn’t maximize the gifts he possesses.
Dave Hollister asks: Hello Ed, my question is about Joe Schoen as it relates to this last game against New England. In my opinion this feels a bit like it did for Joe Judge when he felt pretty safe until he didn’t. The opinion around the Giants has been that Schoen would be back, how do you feel this game exposed the lack of talent he’s assembled and what are your thoughts on his return?
Ed says: Dave, I think it was one terrible game against what might be the best team in the AFC. How was the talent judged when the Giants beat the Chargers or Eagles? Or, when they took all those double-digit leads?
Schoen will not be judged on one game. He will be judged on four years worth of work. I think the next three games, against struggling, beatable teams with a 9-27 combined record, will be closely scrutinized.
I have said many times, and still feel this way, that you can make valid cases to both fire him and keep him.
Submit a question
Have a Giants-related question? E-mail it to [email protected] and it might be featured in our weekly mailbag.
See More:
