Lessons from Eli Manning situation

Eli should have a much better overall record than he does. And if the Giants were managed remotely close to decent, then it would be different.


And, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter how loyal you are to them. That doesn't impact their loyalty to you.

Bear in mind too that with the NFL, draft order and positioning becomes a reason for some teams to "tank" so to speak. I find it rare when a situation from pro football can be applied to high school and this is one of those things. It's in its own spectrum, so I honestly don't think there is much any of us can get from it in terms of applying it to our coaching situations.

I don't think there are many lessons from this for coaches outside the NFL. You don't have situations where tanking for draft capital, evaluating the second round draft pick for your owner/GM, having probably lame duck owner/GMs, and a situation where you have a QB who has started for 14 years and 200 consecutive games that deserves a measure of "loyalty." It's just very strange, and the whole "we'll start you to keep your streak alive but we'll put in Geno Smith after a series" just adds to how bizarre it is.

The only analogy I can think of is a senior QB who has done a great job for the program but, for reasons out of his control, the last season doesn't go well and you want to see the young QB in there some. And that actually happens all the time, though the stakes are different and the considerations there include things like does the young man have a chance to play at the next level and would this hurt his chances/send a bad signal, etc. But unlikely any such decision will show up on the front page of the NY Post the next day.

In any event, while there are defensible reasons for this, it seems like the Giants went out of their way to make this as uncomfortable as possible -- including telling Manning right before he had to give a tearful locker room interview. If there's any lesson for HS/college coaches it's to think about what message decisions like these send to your other players. (And look, decisions on whether you play the senior who has "earned the right" or the younger kid, especially in a situation where the year hasn't gone well and you're building for next year, come up with some regularity.)

The only parallel I see is if your season is going in the tank, think about sticking with the seniors if they have done their part and have been loyal to the program. You can work the new talent in but don't cast off the seniors. For the players the lesson can be be willing to put the team first. I had a senior QB one year who was struggling. When it become obvious we needed to make a change he volunteered to give up playing QB and move to TB/FL. He came to us and said it was the right move. To this day I have not had a senior say "move me from this more glorious position" because somebody else is better at it than me. I have had other teams where they should have learned a lesson from this kid.

He took a step back and it helped the team.

Similarly to what groundchuck said, but not exactly - I've read the comment on here before about if you're going to lose, lose with your kids so they get experience. I can't disagree with that comment strongly enough. To me, the lesson here is that if you're going to lose, lose with the guys who have been most loyal to you for the longest period of time. They've earned that consideration.

But it doesn't completely apply to the Giants, since they are losing on purpose now, and they aren't getting a kid in the game, they're recycling a guy who's proven he can't do it.

If only the Giants coaching staff had spent a larger portion of the past off-season changing the culture of their program this would not have been an issue.
Perhaps if they'd have taught the Giant players how to tie a tie or change a tire, this problem could have been avoided.
So many cultures to change, so little time....

Keep riding that joke, it will eventually be funny.

Lesson in Karma perhaps. Remember the draft when he refused to play for a team in San Diego? Now they are refusing to play him. Perhaps they feel a running QB will be able to stress a defense more when you have no offensive weapons. I agree, no lessons for HS coaches.