Photo by Scott Winters/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images
It’s time to update the rules, and argue again about what they mean for the Giants
The 2025 NFL Draft is rapidly approaching. That means it’s time to update the “Big Blue View Rules for Draft Success.”
If you aren’t familiar with these rules, I created this guide to my draft philosophy several years ago. Each year the rules get tweaked with new examples and, on occasion, modified to reflect the changing realities of the NFL and my evolving beliefs. I also try to relate them to decisions currently faced by the
New York Giants as well as ones they have made in recent years. It’s not perfect, and there is plenty of room for debate. If I was a GM, though, these are the rules I would draft by.
1. Draft ‘value’ over perceived need
I always push back against the idea that the
Giants need to take position A in Round 1, position B in Round 2, position C in Round 3, etc. That is how you make mistakes — how you leave better players on the board while selecting lesser ones.
Truth is, you are never certain what your ‘needs’ are going to be in any given NFL season. You never know where injuries may strike, or where players already on your roster may underperform or overperform expectations.
One thing that is no doubt true when it comes to assessing ‘value’: A team’s perception of ‘value’ is impacted by its perception of its ‘needs.’ When it comes to ‘best player available,’ all 32 teams are likely to have a different idea who that might be at most spots in the draft. Teams undoubtedly set their draft boards based somewhat on perceived needs and fits for their systems. As one former scout told me, that is simply human nature.
My point is this. If you believe you need a wide receiver, but there is not one on the board who you believe should be drafted at that stage of the draft, you don’t grab a lower-ranked wide receiver. You take a player who, on your board, has a grade that makes him deserving of being picked in that spot. When grades are equal, then need and scheme fit come into play. At that point, take the player you feel gives you something you don’t already have — the player who fills a need. Trust your evaluation, try to match value and need whenever possible. Value trumps need, but need is the deciding factor when values are equal.
You take ‘value’ over perceived ‘need.’ You hope, of course, that the best players on the board happen to match areas where you believe you have needs. The draft is unpredictable, however, and available value does not always match perceived needs.
I recite this annually, but former
Minnesota Vikings GM Jeff Diamond once told me the story of why he chose Randy Moss in the first round of the 1998 NFL Draft despite already having two star wide receivers. Minnesota didn’t need a wide receiver — they already had Cris Carter and Jake Reed — but they knew Moss would be a difference-maker. So, they took him. That worked out pretty well.
How does that impact this draft?
This rule could easily be tested with the No. 3 overall pick. Travis Hunter, Abdul Carter and probably Mason Graham will probably have higher draft grades than Shedeur Sanders or Jaxson Dart. Quarterback, though, is the most important position in football. That increases the value of taking one and the need to have one.
The Giants also have needs on the offensive and defensive lines that might match up well with this draft class. So, in that sense this rule might not get a stiff test in the middle rounds.
2. If you don’t have a franchise quarterback, get one
The NFL is a quarterback-driven league. If you don’t have a top-tier one, you cannot have any type of sustained success. You can have a good year, or a good stretch within a year, but you simply can’t be competitive year after year without one. If you need a franchise quarterback, and you think there is one available when it is your turn to draft and pass on drafting him, shame on you.
This is why the
Sam Darnold vs.
Saquon Barkley debate took place. It’s why Pat Shurmur’s admission that had the Giants not drafted Barkley the quarterback he wanted was Josh Allen still stings. It’s why quarterbacks fly off the draft board year after year even though many of them are overdrafted. It’s why I supported the Giants’ decision to draft
Daniel Jones at No. 6 in 2018. The Giants had a need to replace
Eli Manning, thought he could be the guy, and went for it. As they should have. It didn’t work out.
Simply put, quarterback is more valuable than any other position on the field. Having, or not having, one does more to change the fortunes of your franchise than a player at another position possibly could.
The flip side of this rule is: Do not take a quarterback in the first round unless you are absolutely convinced he can be the face of your franchise for the next decade. You can’t pick a guy just to pick a quarterback or because Mel Kiper, Daniel Jeremiah, some other TV talking head, media member or the fan base says you should. You are marrying that player. You are putting the fortunes of the franchise in his hands. If you pick the wrong quarterback, you set your franchise back.
How does that impact this draft?
The Giants have a need at quarterback, that is obvious. Co-owner John Mara made it clear in January that finding the team’s quarterback of the future was the biggest offseason priority. That quarterback of the future is not going be one of the geriatric veterans the Giants are considering.
Will they end up loving Shedeur Sanders? Will they take him at No. 3 just because he’s there and they need to take a swing at the position? GM Joe Schoen said at the Combine that he doesn’t want to take a quarterback “just to say we checked the box.”
If the Giants commit to a young quarterback — whether that is Sanders, Jaxson Dart or someone else — they better do it because they are fully committed to the idea that quarterback is the right one to lead them into the future.
If there is any hesitation about that, they should pass.
3. Do not take running backs in Round 1 ... unless they are a finishing piece
I tinker with this rule more than any of the other five. That isn’t because my basic anti-Round 1 running back stance changes, but because the NFL changes, and my thinking about acceptable circumstances for taking running backs in the first round evolves.
In my view, you seek a running back early when you need a finishing piece on a ready to win roster. Not as a building block on a team trying to start a climb toward respectability. Running backs generally play their best football on their first contracts.
Dave Gettleman thought Saquon Barkley could be a franchise-changer, drafting him No. 2 overall in 2018. As wonderful as Barkley has been, he did not change the Giants’ franchise and is now a member of the Philadelphia Eagles.
Drafting Barkley at No. 2 was a mistake. That pick should have been used on a quarterback, or traded for a haul of draft picks that would likely have accelerated the massive rebuild the Giants needed. In all honesty, I believe part of the issue at the time was that Gettleman and co-owner John Mara did not want to face the reality that a full-scale rebuild was needed. My belief is they thought they could pair Manning, Barkley and Odell Beckham Jr. and give Manning one last shot at a playoff run while working to fix the rest of the roster.
NFL offenses no longer revolve around the running game. Offenses revolve around the quarterback, the offensive line and the wide receivers. Running backs share the load, with most teams employing two or three and very few dominating the percentage of rushing attempts for his team. Look at offenses, and most of your running backs play fewer snaps than anyone else.
I have been told that former Giants GM Ernie Accorsi’s rule was always that quarterback, left tackle and pass rusher were the most important positions, and that running back was near the bottom of the list. The way the game is now played, I would add pass coverage guys (cornerbacks) to the premium positions list. In fact, at every position I think you have to value players who impact the passing game over those who do not. Using the
Wins Above Replacement (WAR) measure, only the center position adds less value than running back.
Historically, there are always plenty of quality running backs available in the middle of the draft. Take one then, and use your first pick on an impact player at a more important position.
The Giants are a great example.
Tiki Barber, Joe Morris,
Ahmad Bradshaw,
Brandon Jacobs were not first-round picks.
David Wilson,
Ron Dayne,
Tyrone Wheatley, George Adams, Rocky Thompson and Tucker Fredrickson were first-round picks.
Denver’s
Terrell Davis might be the best example. A sixth-round pick in 1995, Davis and the
Denver Broncos proved you don’t need a first-round running back to be a great running team. Davis gained more than 1,700 yards in 1997 and more than 2000 in 1998.
The San Francisco 49ers got 963 rushing yards on 207 carries (4.7 yards per attempt) from sixth-round pick Elijah Mitchell in 2021. Jonathan Taylor, Nick Chubb and Miles Sanders were second-round picks. Tony Pollard was a fourth-round pick.
In recent years, we have seen teams looking for that finishing piece, for one more playmaker who might put them over the top, select running backs in the latter stages of Round 1. The Pittsburgh Steelers took Najee Harris at No. 24 in 2021, and the Jacksonville Jaguars took Travis Etienne at No. 25. Granted, the Jaguars were not a contender, but the pick was their second in Round 1, which made it more palatable. In 2020, the Kansas City Chiefs took Clyde Edwards-Helaire with the final pick of Round 1. Seventh-round pick Isaiah Pacheco is a better player.
How does that impact this draft?
What Barkley did in Philadelphia in 2024 is evidence of what I have been saying for years — running backs are finishing, not starting, pieces.
I don’t think this rule comes into play for the Giants this time around. Running back likely isn’t on the table until the middle or late parts of the draft.
4. When in doubt, draft a lineman
This applies to both the offensive and defensive lines.
I don’t care how pass-happy the NFL gets or how much the rules change, the game is still won and lost along the front lines. On offense, you have to be able to block for your quarterback and open holes for your running backs. On defense, you have to be able to rush the passer and you have to be stout against the run in the middle. You never want to be caught without enough players who can do those things, so when in doubt, draft a lineman. The Giants have learned these lessons the hard way in recent seasons.
You should be able to find quality linemen in the middle to late rounds, especially on the offensive side.
David Diehl, a fifth-round pick, was a great example.
Rich Seubert was not drafted at all and still had a long, productive career for the Giants. Elite linemen, especially tackles, are usually only available in the very early stages of the draft.
My rule? After you get your quarterback, or if you already believe you have him, you build from the inside out. Some even say build your team until it’s ready to sustain a young quarterback. I just think it’s about how you feel about the quarterback(s) available.
Year after year, though, I advocate for the Giants to select an offensive lineman high in the draft.
On the defensive side, you should be able to get run pluggers in the middle to late portions of the draft. If you can get a defensive lineman you believe can impact the run and the pass it’s hard to argue with that.
How does that impact this draft?
The Giants did not draft an offensive or defensive lineman last year. They paid dearly for the lack of depth that decision led to. That has to change. Philosophically, not continually reinforcing both lines with players on rookie contracts you can try to develop is unforgivable.
Once upon a time, the Giants were masters of keeping young talent in the pipeline on both lines. They need to return to that.
5. Trade down, not up
There are very few times when any player is worth trading up for, thus causing a team to mortgage valuable draft picks. You need depth in the NFL, and you can’t accumulate it by trading away your draft choices -- which is what you have to do to move up. Generally, it is better to move down and accumulate more draft choices than to move up and wind up with less. Your mistakes hurt less when you have more choices, more chances to get it right. You can take risks on occasion when you have more choices, and — if the situation is right — you can actually use some of those ‘extra’ picks to move up when you feel it is warranted.
When is it OK to move up? First and foremost, if you are moving for a guy you believe will be a franchise quarterback. If you are moving for a player at another position you believe is a franchise-changer or the one piece you need to put you over the top and into
the Super Bowl, that is OK. Also, if you have accumulated extra picks via trading down or accumulating compensatory picks perhaps then you can use that flexibility to target a player or two in the middle rounds.
Normally, though, move down instead of up. Give yourself more swings.
One caveat: I do happen to agree with the theory that you can move down too far. Wherever you move down to, you need to be understand the caliber of players you are passing up and be comfortable with whoever you believe will be available. You don’t want to outsmart yourself and lose out on a player or group of players you really wanted. Schoen talks about being able to sleep at night regardless of whatever decision you make.
How does that impact this draft?
For me, quarterback is always the position I support trading up for. It might be the single most important position in sports. If you don’t have a guy you think you can win big with and believe there is a guy within your reach who could do that for your franchise, you go get that player. If you turn out to be right, nobody cares about the cost. If you’re wrong? You get fired and cleaning up the mess is somebody else’s problem.
The draft is a crap shoot. There are no guarantees. Teams put all kinds of money and man hours into studying and dissecting these young men, and no matter how much work they do they still get it wrong at a fairly high rate. More swings, then, are better than fewer swings.
If the Giants love Cam Ward they should make the biggest offer they are comfortable with to go up and get him. If not, and they aren’t sold on Sanders as being deserving at No. 3, there is no harm seeing if any of the other teams in the top 10 might want to move up.
6. Don’t ignore your strengths
I can think of two obvious areas in years gone by where the Giants ignored strengths and turned them into weaknesses.
During the early part of Tom Coughlin’s tenure the Giants had a tremendous offensive line. They ignored supplementing it for too long, and have been chasing the fix now for nearly a decade. Defensively, the Giants used to be built with multiple top-tier pass rushers. For a long time they ignored that strength and their pass rush became a liability. That isn’t really the case now.
Truth is, you never know in April exactly what your needs will be during the season. Talent wins in the NFL. Take the best players who you believe fit what you are trying to do. Along the way, hope that value meets need and your decisions are correct often enough that you don’t enter the season with too many glaring deficiencies.
How does that impact this draft?
It really doesn’t. There isn’t an obvious position you can look at and be completely comfortable that the Giants have everything they need at that spot.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25901267/Screenshot_2025_03_07_at_10.02.35_AM.png)
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25922511/Omarion_Hampton_RAS.png)
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25923641/Screenshot_2025_03_23_at_7.55.27_AM.png)
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25924778/Screenshot_2025_03_24_at_9.59.47_AM.png)
