Big Blue View mailbag: Old friends, new questions as training camp arrives

We have made it, good people! This is the final Big Blue View mailbag before training camp starts. Let’s get to it.

Doug Mollin asks: On Monday, you had a story on [Andrew] Thomas being in ESPN’s top 10 tackles.

Got me thinking back to that 2020 OT draft class — four top-ranked tackles with many experts having their own favorites and rankings.

Six years later ….

• Wirfs is #1. Not many people would argue against that.
• Thomas is #2. Injuries have been the main culprit reducing his value.
• Becton is a distant #3, even coming off of an Eagle make-over.
• Wills is #4, also derailed by injuries and The Browns. Currently a free agent and may take the season off.

Who were you pounding the table for back in that draft? I remember personally being fine with any of them other than Becton.

Ed says: Doug, I’m almost ashamed to admit that I was a Becton guy. In my final mock draft of that year, I took Becton for the Giants over the other three tackles.

Here is some of what I wrote:

I am fully aware, of course, that Becton is probably the riskiest of what is considered the Big 4 offensive tackles.

I don’t know if Becton is the best offensive tackle in this class … I know this — he’s my favorite. Potential gets GMs fired, but what I know is that the 6-foot-7, 364-pound Becton has the highest ceiling of any tackle in this class. If there is a Hall of Fame offensive lineman in this draft class, odds are he is it.

I’m going for broke. The Giants have won 12 games in three years. Solid is for later. Drafting scared is for someone else. Safe is for the next GM. The Giants will probably take Jedrick Wills of Alabama, and that would be just fine. So would Tristan Wirfs or Andrew Thomas. I’m going for the home run.

I would have been wrong. That much is clear. There were reports before the draft that GM Dave Gettleman loved Wirfs. Offensive coordinator Jason Garrett pounded the table for Thomas. Gettleman gave him Thomas. Both ended up being better choices than the guy I would taken a swing on.

---

Gregg Wanlass asks: Another year of optimism and yet concerns. We seem to have stacked our offensive line with bodies, yet it seems the final alignment is TBD. Given that experience playing together is really important for effective line play how do we use the relatively short period of time to 1) choose the starting unit; 2) select who makes the team; and 3) give players reps in different positions to achieve the flexibility needed once injuries occur.

While the coaches will use training camp to set the lineup I would imagine going in they have a desired composition —which to me would have Neal at LG. Just seems logical for them to hopefully get some ROI from that draft pick and determine his value going forward. But regardless if that is the outcome my question to you if you were coach Ed, is how would use the time in preseason games, joint practices, intra squad practices to get a starting five set who have played together on more than a series or two before the real snaps count. It seems to me this should be a priority and an area where we have shown that we don’t seem as prepared as we should be when the season opens. Is it worth the risk of injury to get the starters more reps?

Ed says: Gregg, the reality is that I think you are worrying about something that is not a real issue with this group. The starting five entering training camp is Andrew Thomas (LT), Jon Runyan Jr. (LG), John Michael Schmitz (C), Greg Van Roten (RG), Jermaine Eluemunor (RT). That is the same group that started last season, and there were a lot of snaps played/practice reps taken by that group before injuries struck.

The only question this year is whether Evan Neal will take a starting job away from Van Roten. If you are the Giants you want to make that decision as quickly as you can to, as you pointed out, let them practice together as much as possible.

The Giants made that mistake in 2023 when they did not settle on a starting combination until just days before the season opener.

As for whether it is worth the risk of injury to get starters more reps, I think the answer to that is a qualified “yes.”

I hate, hate, hate starters not playing in the final preseason game. The Giants play their final preseason game on August 21. They open the regular season on September 7, 17 days later. If starters don’t play at least some in that game, the last competitive snaps they will take are on Aug. 16 against the New York Jets. That is a gap of 22 days — more than three weeks without competition.

I think that’s ridiculous, and it’s no wonder that the quality of play is generally terrible the first couple of regular season games.

If it was up to me, starters would play in that game. Perhaps that should even be the game where the starters play an extended period of time.

---

William Broderick asks: Ed, the term “blocking tight end” makes me cringe. Hey defense, look who’s on the field, guess what we are about to do. If your blocking tight end has 5 receptions on the year for 35 yards, what’s the point? (Our blocking tight end had less than that in 329 snaps). No defense will respect that. Use an extra offensive lineman, what’s the difference? The defense knows it’s a run heavy set. Keep the tight ends on the roster that can actually run routes and catch the ball.

Ed says: William, there is more to playing tight end than running routes and catching the ball. Blocking is a big part of the job. It’s why Chris Manhertz, a college basketball player, in entering his 10th NFL season.

What’s the difference? I know that teams sometimes use an offensive lineman as a “jumbo” tight end. Guess when they do that? When they don’t have a player like Manhertz who is athletic enough and powerful enough to block players on the edge, and to at least run a pass route and occupy a defender.

Per Pro Football Focus, Manhertz played 343 offensive snaps. The Giants ran the ball on 203 of those (59.2%). That, to me, is not a giveaway that the Giants are going to run the ball.

---

Topher asks: Instead of a blocking TE, why don’t teams create a receiving OT? He should block better and if taught to catch the ball, possibly a more inconspicuous option to receive the ball. In blocking situations it gives them 3 OTs playing at once.

Ed says: Geez, a second blocking tight end question/complaint. A record!! Maybe the first two blocking tight end questions in mailbag history!!

Topher, what’s the difference if you call the position blocking tight end or receiving offensive tackle? A guy like Manhertz really is an extra offensive tackle, and he is accustomed to lining up on the end of the line, playing in space and releasing off the line of scrimmage when called to do so. A 320-pound offensive tackle probably doesn’t have the athleticism teams want in a player lined up as an eligible receiver, even if he rarely gets the ball thrown to him.

---

Anthony Cantore asks: Ed, do you have any confidence that Brian Daboll will have the Giants ready to play to start the season? He hasn’t had them ready the last 2 seasons.

Do have any confidence that players will improve under Brian Daboll’s coaching? Most players have regressed (Banks, Thibodeaux, Okereke) or never developed (Hyatt, Schmitz, plus a handful of other players).

Ed says: Anthony, were the Giants not ready or were they just not good? I have my issues with the way Daboll does things. In particular, I wish someone would convince him to give his key players more preseason snaps. But, hey, the Giants started 7-1 in 2022 with Daboll running training camp.

I thought Daboll ran a more competitive camp last summer, a lot more competitive 11-on-11 that he had used in 2023. It didn’t matter once the season started.

As far as players improving, it is important to remember that Daboll isn’t the guy running their position drills, running their meetings, working with them individually. That is what the position coaches are for.

I would disagree that Kayvon Thibodeaux has regressed. The guy was hurt last year. John Michael Schmitz improved in Year 2. Jalin Hyatt has an excellent position coach in Mike Groh. Quarterback issues have been part of the problem for Hyatt, but the young man has to take some of the responsibility for his own failings, as well.

---

Jim Schmiedeberg asks: Lots of speculation on Daboll’s seat being hot. I don’t see it. I think it would take an unmitigated disaster of a season for Daboll to lose his job. I don’t see how you draft a QB who the coach wanted, and who the player wanted to play for, only to fire the coach after this season. I don’t think there is an X amount of games they need to win this year, I just think the Giants need to put a product on the field that shows growth. 6 or 7 wins sounds about right.

I know you’ve spoken in broad strokes on this, but how “hot” do you think Daboll’s seat really is?

Ed says: Hey, Jim! It’s a blast from the past! For those of you who have not been around Big Blue View since the beginning in February of 2007, Jim Schmiedeberg was the first contributor ever added to Big Blue View. That was waaaay back in May of 2008. So, nice to hear from an old friend of the site.

As for Brian Daboll’s seat, I vacillate on this one. In the end, I am not sure it is as hot as many in the national media think it is. A 9-25 record over the last two seasons is, obviously, awful. You would think a much better record would be required for Daboll to get a fifth season as head coach. Because of the drafting of Jaxson Dart, Daboll’s reputation as a quarterback developer, and the Giants’ failed experience with Daniel Jones after making him go through constant upheaval, I’m not sure the record will matter all that much.

I believe the Giants will be looking for reasons to keep Daboll, not reasons to get rid of him. The team playing respectably is part of that. The bigger part, though, is whether we get to the end of the year and ownership feels like there is enough promise in the Daboll-Dart pairing that they don’t want to break it up.

---

Peter Smyth asks: Way too early Pollyanna question for you. If we are in fact building a winning team, capable of going all the way, is our “championship window” the next 4-5 years?

I’m wondering this as our recent high draft picks (Carter, Nabers, Dart) are all on rookie contracts with fifth-year options. If they turn out to be “great” players, isn’t our window, like, now?

Or in a year or two maximum?

Look at Cincinnati, they had a lot of great players on rookie deals and now they are paying the piper. They are not as good as they were a few years back. In today’s NFL, it seems like it’s waaay easier to win when your best players are on rookie deals. Thoughts?

Ed says: Well, Polly, I mean, Peter I think it is ridiculous to talk about being in a “championship window” when a team is coming off a 3-14 season and has gone 9-25 the last two years.

That said, I understand your point. It is always easier to stack your roster with talent when you have a quarterback on a rookie contract who has established himself as the guy you want to build around. If Jaxson Dart is what the Giants hope he will be, the time will come when they have to pay him a massive chunk of change. The same applies to Malik Nabers and Abdul Carter.

The Giants need to start showing progress. Not just one good year followed by a bunch of awful ones. Consistent progress that makes them a consistently competitive team. If they can’t do that in the next few years that will mean a) Dart isn’t the guy and they will be back in the market and b) Carter and Nabers won’t stick around, so the Giants won’t have to worry about paying them.

If those things happen, you are back to square one rebuilding again.

---

John Churchill asks: My question concerns injuries, which seems to plague the Giant players. I know we have FieldTurf Core HD, which has drawn complaints from some players. Is the turf the problem or something else?

Ed says: John, I know that players want to play on grass and that research shows that is a safer surface than any type of FieldTurf. But, this complaining about the turf at MetLife Stadium has got to stop.

Yes, there used to be a lot of complaints about the surface at MetLife Stadium. The FieldTurf Core system was installed there in 2023, and it has not been an issue. Any complaining has been just players who want nothing to do with turf, or fans still looking to blame someone/something for injuries.

It’s football and guys get hurt. Something else that happens when teams are bad is that guys end up on IR the last few weeks because whatever injury they have just won’t heal quickly enough to make it worth keeping them on the roster. If there were playoffs involved, some of those guys would not land on IR. I think that skews the numbers.

Incidentally, using Adjusted Games Lost from FTN, the Giants were 13th in the NFL last year with 70.3 Adjusted Games Lost. There were 19 teams with more AGL than the Giants.

---

ctscan asks: With all the talk around the surplus of mouths to feed at the edge position, I feel like Chauncey Golston has been lost in the shuffle a bit. We were all very excited by his potential as a rotational piece when we signed him, but now it’s hard to see how he’s ever gonna step foot on the field behind the big three edges. even using him inside is less attractive now with the hope that Alexander takes those snaps. I actually don’t know what his presumed utility at DT is. can he stop the run inside?

At this point, do you see him as excellent flexible depth or maybe as a resource that is destined to be under utilized? Prior to signing the extension, there was plenty of chatter around Moving Thibodeaux based on the projected number of snaps that might be available to him. Does it make sense to think about trying to trade Golston for the same reason but even more so? What might we get for him? Maybe try to trade him for and up and coming run stuffing defensive tackle with a similar salary and pedigree?

Ed says: CT, you are right to wonder exactly where Golston will fit into the defense. It seems like the Giants signed him with a specific role in mind, and then drafted Abdul Carter No. 3 overall for a similar role. There were times when Golston was working with the third team during spring practices.

Thing is, Golston is a good player. He can play just about anywhere on the defensive line except nose tackle. He can play on the edge. His versatility brings options, and opportunities for him to get on the field.

I don’t know exactly how defensive coordinator Shane Bowen will employ Golston, or any of the myriad chess pieces he has. But, having options is a good thing.

Having depth is a good thing, too. How come as soon as it even looks like the Giants might have some depth there are questions about trading it away? You are also not the first one to mention adding help on the defensive line, which is something I don’t get, either. What are Golston, Darius Alexander and Roy Robertson-Harris? Someone among a group of good players — Jeremiah Ledbetter, Rakeem Nunez-Roches, Elijah Chatman — might not make the roster. No, the Giants don’t have a second bonafide superstar next to Dexter Lawrence, but what they have looks pretty good to me.

---

Submit a question

Have a Giants-related question? E-mail it to [email protected] and it might be featured in our weekly mailbag.