I dont really want G. Bradbury back...

I don't either. Upgrade the damn position. 

I don't want any of our free agents back and Bradbury is certainly included in that. He just can't hold up in pass protection and I'm not paying a center who can't anchor. There are some pretty good centers in this draft and I'd look there for a replacement. 

I've got no issues with Bradbury as many do. He played much better this year, although unfortunately the most recent image in most fans' minds would make them think otherwise. Missing 5 games and then going against a beast like Dexter Lawrence can do that.

Prior to the injury he played quite well, and that's playing in between two guards who finished in the bottom three in the league for pressures allowed. I doubt anyone would break the bank for him during FA so for continuity's sake I'd keep him. Now you hope Ingram improves in his sophomore year and that Ezra turns those flashes into consistency.

I think it's borderline, I really do. One thing I do know is that you can't just declare you're going to upgrade the position and have it be so.

Couple things arguing for Bradbury is that his arrow is pointing up. Another is the continuity factor. We're constantly shifting that line when the thing they need the most is time together. It's still the youngest OL in the NFL. This is the first time we've had the opportunity to bring back the same five in about a decade or two. I wouldn't discount that. 

Arguing against re-signing him is the money obviously. That and the fact that the biggest problem this year wasn't getting beaten physically, although that happened at times. It was mostly an inability to recognize and manage looping and stunting DTs and blitzes. That became all too easy for teams, especially the Giants. And I think that's Bradbury's responsibility more than anyone else. 

If there's a smart, experienced journeyman center out there somewhere I'd be interested. 

@"MaroonBells" said: I think it's borderline, I really do. One thing I do know is that you can't just declare you're going to upgrade the position and have it be so.

Couple things arguing for Bradbury is that his arrow is pointing up. Another is the continuity factor. We're constantly shifting that line when the thing they need the most is time together. It's still the youngest OL in the NFL. This is the first time we've had the opportunity to bring back the same five in about a decade or two. I wouldn't discount that. 

Arguing against re-signing him is the money obviously. That and the fact that the biggest problem this year wasn't getting beaten physically, although that happened at times. It was mostly an inability to recognize and manage looping and stunting DTs and blitzes. That became all too easy for teams, especially the Giants. And I think that's Bradbury's responsibility more than anyone else. 

If there's a smart, experienced journeyman center out there somewhere I'd be interested. 

I saw the Bengals start 3 new OL against the Ravens and then @ Buffalo the last 2 weeks. They beat em both and literally kicked the Bills butts. I get the value of continuity and I see instances where it meant a hill of beans. 

Continuity with Bradbury/Ingram/Cleveland may actually be a bad thing. 

Unfortunately there are more pressing needs elsewhere. But I am on board with looking for an upgrade in free agency or later in the draft. GB has everything he needs except adequate strength. Size and technique aren't going to make up for that flaw; or it would have already.

It comes down to cost and the availability of a replacement. 
Obviously if there is someone better, go get him. But, if you’re just swapping out one guy for another and the relative play and cost are the same. Why do it? 
We all would like upgrades at every position, but sometimes there aren’t any upgrades. So then, continuity comes into the equation.
Just drafting a guy who may or may not be better, isn’t the best idea. Is there a FA available that is as good? 

I just wonder with Bradbury if a move to guard might not be the best thing for him? Take snapping the ball completely off the table, and just let him concentrate on his footwork and anchor without these huge nose guards lining up right over his face mask and putting him on skates. Regardless, I just have no interest in bringing him back 

With both guard spots looking like they have guys to fill those spots going forward, they should have worked Kyle Hinton more at center but too late now.

@"supafreak84" said: I just wonder with Bradbury if a move to guard might not be the best thing for him? Take snapping the ball completely off the table, and just let him concentrate on his footwork and anchor without these huge nose guards lining up right over his face mask and putting him on skates. Regardless, I just have no interest in bringing him back 

my 2 cents,  if kirk is a 35 million dollar a year guy,  but needs better protection to play at the level of a 35 million dollar guy due to his unwillingness to move around and occasionally run to keep defenses honest... then either KC needs to go,  or the team needs to spend the money to protect kirk.  anybody see kirk going anywhere this offseason?  me neither,  so with that I guess we really need to emphasize improving the play of the 3 IOL positions,  however that may be,  however expensive that may be,  because we arent going to get value from our QB investment if he is under constant duress when we play quality defenses,  or even moderate pressure when we face average defenses.  and if we arent going to have at least an average defense,  then we need a top 3 to 5 offense that can hang 40+ a game when the situation calls for it.  I think its to late to fix the D for next year,  so if we are running with KC,  then at least fix that side of the ball and hope to win in shootout fashion.

@"purplefaithful" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I think it's borderline, I really do. One thing I do know is that you can't just declare you're going to upgrade the position and have it be so.

Couple things arguing for Bradbury is that his arrow is pointing up. Another is the continuity factor. We're constantly shifting that line when the thing they need the most is time together. It's still the youngest OL in the NFL. This is the first time we've had the opportunity to bring back the same five in about a decade or two. I wouldn't discount that. 

Arguing against re-signing him is the money obviously. That and the fact that the biggest problem this year wasn't getting beaten physically, although that happened at times. It was mostly an inability to recognize and manage looping and stunting DTs and blitzes. That became all too easy for teams, especially the Giants. And I think that's Bradbury's responsibility more than anyone else. 

If there's a smart, experienced journeyman center out there somewhere I'd be interested. 

Yah, it makes you wonder if he doesnt have the right processing chip to handle things in real time. And/or if this offense put too much on his plate. 

I saw the Bengals start 3 new OL against the Ravens and then @ Buffalo the last 2 weeks. They beat em both and literally kicked the Bills butts. I get the value of continuity and I see instances where it meant a hill of beans. 

Continuity with Bradbury/Ingram/Cleveland may actually be a bad thing. 

@"MaroonBells" said: I think it's borderline, I really do. One thing I do know is that you can't just declare you're going to upgrade the position and have it be so.

Couple things arguing for Bradbury is that his arrow is pointing up. Another is the continuity factor. We're constantly shifting that line when the thing they need the most is time together. It's still the youngest OL in the NFL. This is the first time we've had the opportunity to bring back the same five in about a decade or two. I wouldn't discount that. 

Arguing against re-signing him is the money obviously. That and the fact that the biggest problem this year wasn't getting beaten physically, although that happened at times. It was mostly an inability to recognize and manage looping and stunting DTs and blitzes. That became all too easy for teams, especially the Giants. And I think that's Bradbury's responsibility more than anyone else. 

If there's a smart, experienced journeyman center out there somewhere I'd be interested. 

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I think it's borderline, I really do. One thing I do know is that you can't just declare you're going to upgrade the position and have it be so.

Couple things arguing for Bradbury is that his arrow is pointing up. Another is the continuity factor. We're constantly shifting that line when the thing they need the most is time together. It's still the youngest OL in the NFL. This is the first time we've had the opportunity to bring back the same five in about a decade or two. I wouldn't discount that. 

Arguing against re-signing him is the money obviously. That and the fact that the biggest problem this year wasn't getting beaten physically, although that happened at times. It was mostly an inability to recognize and manage looping and stunting DTs and blitzes. That became all too easy for teams, especially the Giants. And I think that's Bradbury's responsibility more than anyone else. 

If there's a smart, experienced journeyman center out there somewhere I'd be interested. 

Its borderline but recency-bias may end up being the nail is his coffin as it relates to MN. He had a great season compared to prior years, but in the playoffs we has straight-up abused by Dexter Lawrence. Yes, an all-pro player who does this to quite a few interior lineman. But does that give you an urge to offer $10-12M annually? 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I think it's borderline, I really do. One thing I do know is that you can't just declare you're going to upgrade the position and have it be so.

Couple things arguing for Bradbury is that his arrow is pointing up. Another is the continuity factor. We're constantly shifting that line when the thing they need the most is time together. It's still the youngest OL in the NFL. This is the first time we've had the opportunity to bring back the same five in about a decade or two. I wouldn't discount that. 

Arguing against re-signing him is the money obviously. That and the fact that the biggest problem this year wasn't getting beaten physically, although that happened at times. It was mostly an inability to recognize and manage looping and stunting DTs and blitzes. That became all too easy for teams, especially the Giants. And I think that's Bradbury's responsibility more than anyone else. 

If there's a smart, experienced journeyman center out there somewhere I'd be interested. 

Its borderline but recency-bias may end up being the nail is his coffin as it relates to MN. He had a great season compared to prior years, but in the playoffs we has straight-up abused by Dexter Lawrence. Yes, an all-pro player who does this to quite a few interior lineman. But does that give you an urge to offer $10-12M annually? 

Yes, I've seen Lawrence abuse All Pro centers. But my lasting impression was the many times Dexter started on Bradbury's right shoulder but ended up looping around and going over Cleveland's left shoulder. There was a lot of that. The Giants defense knew what we struggled with. I think many defenses did. 

Bottom line is that the IOL has to improve. I'm just not certain if that's more likely to happen with another year together for the five, or bringing in a new center from God knows where, who might even be worse. 

I keep thinking of Ethan Pocic, who was steaming-pile putrid his first three years, but is probably the top free agent center this year. Did he really improve that much? Or was it going from Seattle's crap line to lining up next to Joel Bitonio and the rest of Cleveland's very good line? 

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I think it's borderline, I really do. One thing I do know is that you can't just declare you're going to upgrade the position and have it be so.

Couple things arguing for Bradbury is that his arrow is pointing up. Another is the continuity factor. We're constantly shifting that line when the thing they need the most is time together. It's still the youngest OL in the NFL. This is the first time we've had the opportunity to bring back the same five in about a decade or two. I wouldn't discount that. 

Arguing against re-signing him is the money obviously. That and the fact that the biggest problem this year wasn't getting beaten physically, although that happened at times. It was mostly an inability to recognize and manage looping and stunting DTs and blitzes. That became all too easy for teams, especially the Giants. And I think that's Bradbury's responsibility more than anyone else. 

If there's a smart, experienced journeyman center out there somewhere I'd be interested. 

Its borderline but recency-bias may end up being the nail is his coffin as it relates to MN. He had a great season compared to prior years, but in the playoffs we has straight-up abused by Dexter Lawrence. Yes, an all-pro player who does this to quite a few interior lineman. But does that give you an urge to offer $10-12M annually? 

Yes, I've seen Lawrence abuse All Pro centers. But my lasting impression was the many times Dexter started on Bradbury's right shoulder but ended up looping around and going over Cleveland's left shoulder. There was a lot of that. The Giants defense knew what we struggled with. I think many defenses did. 

Bottom line is that the IOL has to improve. I'm just not certain if that's more likely to happen with another year together for the five, or bringing in a new center from God knows where, who might even be worse. 

I keep thinking of Ethan Pocic, who was steaming-pile putrid his first three years, but is probably the top free agent center this year. Did he really improve that much? Or was it going from Seattle's crap line to lining up next to Joel Bitonio and the rest of Cleveland's very good line? 

I agree with Geoff here, all we can go on is the track record, which is he's been terrible before this season where his play was improved, but when we got to the playoffs the same old Bradbury showed up and got dominated. I tend to believe he will always struggle holding up against bigger, stronger players in pass protection. Not someone I'd pay to extend and would rather take my chances in free agency or the draft to address the position. 

@"MaroonBells" said:  That and the fact that the biggest problem this year wasn't getting beaten physically, although that happened at times. It was mostly an inability to recognize and manage looping and stunting DTs and blitzes. That became all too easy for teams, especially the Giants. And I think that's Bradbury's responsibility more than anyone else. 

If there's a smart, experienced journeyman center out there somewhere I'd be interested. 

People really forget that your two starting guards are in the bottom three in the entire NFL in pressures given up, and your starting Center was out for 5 weeks before coming back to face Lawrence in his first game back.

@"PurpleCrush" said: People really forget that your two starting guards are in the bottom three in the entire NFL in pressures given up, and your starting Center was out for 5 weeks before coming back to face Lawrence in his first game back.

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I think it's borderline, I really do. One thing I do know is that you can't just declare you're going to upgrade the position and have it be so.

Couple things arguing for Bradbury is that his arrow is pointing up. Another is the continuity factor. We're constantly shifting that line when the thing they need the most is time together. It's still the youngest OL in the NFL. This is the first time we've had the opportunity to bring back the same five in about a decade or two. I wouldn't discount that. 

Arguing against re-signing him is the money obviously. That and the fact that the biggest problem this year wasn't getting beaten physically, although that happened at times. It was mostly an inability to recognize and manage looping and stunting DTs and blitzes. That became all too easy for teams, especially the Giants. And I think that's Bradbury's responsibility more than anyone else. 

If there's a smart, experienced journeyman center out there somewhere I'd be interested. 

Its borderline but recency-bias may end up being the nail is his coffin as it relates to MN. He had a great season compared to prior years, but in the playoffs we has straight-up abused by Dexter Lawrence. Yes, an all-pro player who does this to quite a few interior lineman. But does that give you an urge to offer $10-12M annually? 

Yes, I've seen Lawrence abuse All Pro centers. But my lasting impression was the many times Dexter started on Bradbury's right shoulder but ended up looping around and going over Cleveland's left shoulder. There was a lot of that. The Giants defense knew what we struggled with. I think many defenses did. 

Bottom line is that the IOL has to improve. I'm just not certain if that's more likely to happen with another year together for the five, or bringing in a new center from God knows where, who might even be worse. 

I keep thinking of Ethan Pocic, who was steaming-pile putrid his first three years, but is probably the top free agent center this year. Did he really improve that much? Or was it going from Seattle's crap line to lining up next to Joel Bitonio and the rest of Cleveland's very good line? 

I agree with Geoff here, all we can go on is the track record, which is he's been terrible before this season where his play was improved, but when we got to the playoffs the same old Bradbury showed up and got dominated. I tend to believe he will always struggle holding up against bigger, stronger players in pass protection. Not someone I'd pay to extend and would rather take my chances in free agency or the draft to address the position. 

Its a good draft class for centers, could be a consideration as well if you look at resource allocation. 

Our OLine can't continue to let Kirk get hit as much as he did.  Our OLine needs to do more to be able to rush when we need to.  I'm skeptical that you are going to bring back all 5 OL as starters and get a dramatically different result.  Bradbury's the obvious choice to change as he's been here the longest and you can't pay a ton for mediocrity.  I think if you're not going to get better at the center position, it better be cheap.  I do think you have to bring in competition for Ingram also as a minimum.