After getting walloped by the Falcons 34-7 in Atlanta rookie quarterback Michael Penix's first career start, the Giants then watched the Raiders defeat the equally hapless Jaguars, 19-14.
The twin results left the Giants in sole possession of the worst record in the NFL at 2-13, meaning that all the Giants need to do is lose both of their last two games — against the Colts at home on Sunday, then at Philadelphia on January 5, and a franchise quarterback via the 2025 draft will be theirs — most likely Colorado's Shedeur Sanders, son of Deion Sanders, an inductee of both the NFL Hall of Fame and the College Football Hall of Fame, having been enshrined into both in 2011.
Of course there is a chance that the Giants could upset the Colts, given that Indianapolis is 17-31 since 2017 outdoors, and also 10-16 since 2012 "as a visitor in cold weather;" i.e., when a warm-weather or indoor team has to play at a northern, outdoor venue in November or later.
Even though the Giants are one of the oldest of the "old money" teams, apparently they are not "old school" like Raiders head coach Antonio Pierce, whose win over Jacksonville likely cost his team a shot at either Sanders or Miami of Florida's Cam Ward — and according to most observers at least, there is a huge break between this top pair and the rest of the 2025 draft class at the position, leaving Pierce the sad choice of "reaching" and selecting like the 40th best player in the draft with the sixth overall pick (Las Vegas is tied with four other teams at 3-12, but has played the toughest schedule of the five) or waiting until 2026 (or even beyond) to bring a quality quarterback into the fold.
This situation cries out for the implementation of a lottery, like the NBA has used for 40 years. It will keep everyone honest, and will eliminate the practice of teams "tanking" games so they can draft a franchise player — usually a quarterback — that will keep them in playoff contention for a dozen years or more.
But why won't the NFL do it? Do they naively believe that the team that just happens to finish with the worst record in the league is always the team with the least talent?
And what about injuries? Surely a team that loses their starting quarterback for most of the season is going to draft a lot higher the following spring than if such an injury had not occurred.
But should teams get rewarded for injuries, especially if the injured player is expected to return the following season — like Dak Prescott?
Or maybe the league secretly believes, without having the courage to admit it publicly, that a Shedeur Sanders should end up playing in New York — just like, back in 1983, when Herschel Walker was asked why he chose the USFL over the NFL, his response was, "I wasn't sure that I wanted to play in the NFL unless it was for the two New York teams or the Dallas Cowboys."
Obviously, a lottery would rob the NFL of determining where a Shedeur Sanders plays.
And despite its hypocritical bleating about "parity," the NFL has a vested interest in seeing to it that teams like the Giants and Jets, the Rams and Chargers, the Bears — and most of all, the Cowboys — succeed.
It's all about what Washington Irving called "The almighty dollar ... that great object of universal devotion throughout our land" — which is why it is not wise to bet against either more games (in the regular season) or more teams, within the very near future.
Leave a Comment