The New York Giants have put themselves in a desperate quarterback situation. They whiffed on Matthew Stafford, missed out on Justin Fields and Sam Darnols, and now find themselves in a bizarre limbo, waiting to see if Aaron Rodgers or Russell Wilson want to grace them with their presence. It’s not exactly a great spot to be in.
Rodgers is dragging his feet while deciding between the Giants and Pittsburgh Steelers, and now Cleveland has entered the mix for Wilson, throwing another wrench into the plan. At this point, it’s anyone’s guess who will be under center for the Giants in 2025, but what’s clear is they need to figure it out fast.
In the middle of this madness, former New York Jets GM Mike Tannenbaum has somehow managed to make himself the most confusing part of the Giants’ quarterback conversation. Two weeks ago, he was practically begging the team to trade for Stafford. Now, he’s calling them a “professional graveyard” for quarterbacks. So which is it, Mike?
Former Jets GM Mike Tannenbaum completely contradicts himself
Let’s take a quick trip down memory lane to two weeks ago when Tannenbaum was on ESPN’s Get Up, passionately arguing that the Giants needed to trade for Stafford. His reasoning? Stafford would “transform the narrative” and give the Giants the stability they’ve lacked.
“1,000%,” said Tannenbaum. “If I’m Joe Schoen and I get (Les Snead), the GM of the Rams, on the phone, I am not getting off the phone until Matt Stafford is a Giant. He would absolutely transform the narrative from Daniel Jones this, Saquon Barkley that.”
Seems pretty definitive, right? According to Tannenbaum, Stafford was the missing piece. He even mocked the idea of the Giants running it back with Daniel Jones.
But just when you thought his opinion was set in stone, just two weeks later, with Wilson weighing his options, suddenly Tannenbaum went back on Get Up, spewing a different narrative. Out here telling him to run away from New York like it’s some kind of quarterback wasteland.
“If you [Russell Wilson] walk out of this door, which you have the right to do, we are signing Jameis Winston. And if you go to the New York Giants, it will be the professional grave because when was the last time since Eli Manning a quarterback went to the Giants and he had a good story to tell?”
Oh, so now the Giants are a professional grave for quarterbacks? What happened to the franchise Stafford was supposed to “transform”? Also, interesting to call the Giants a quarterback graveyard when the team he was pushing Russ to go to was the Cleveland Browns.
I think context is key here: The G-Men have had 14 quarterbacks to start a game since 2000... the Browns have had 40. Let me repeat that. The Cleveland Browns have had 40 quarterbacks start at least one game since 2000. But New York is the graveyard. Riiiiight.
Listen, we all know the Giants’ recent track record with quarterbacks hasn’t exactly been stellar. But aside from Daniel Jones, who was supposed to be starting-caliber? Drew Lock? Tommy DeVito? Tim Boyle? Let's relax a bit with the horror movie takes.
Still, the question remains: If the Giants were so bad that Wilson should avoid them at all costs, why was Tannenbaum advocating for them to do whatever it took to get Stafford there just two weeks ago?
The truth is that Tannenbaum’s argument is as flimsy as the Giants’ quarterback plan right now. He went from demanding they land Stafford to warning Wilson that playing in New York would be a career-ender. If one of those takes was correct, the other one can’t be.
So which is it, Mike? You tell us.