That's cool. And i mean this light hearted back. And this probably the last time i repeat my point. Because I think the making fun of my point, while is cool, has unintentionally presented a strawman argument,
Boone summed it well, there are good arguments for either approach in the pre season. I don't mind the counter argument. I get it. Be fresh. Avoid injuries. But the argument to play your starters more, isn't loony, no matter how much some want to poke fun at it.
My point wasn't about the preseason alone. That's the crux of my point which is that its multiple reasons. Like any game, its multiple factors not just that one. But again to explain the preseason. It's not that our starters didn't play much. It's the juxtaposition that the Giants starters played plenty. And its not about all the starters but specifically the QB and WRs -- especially the QB.
So the fact that Hurts for example didn't play in the preseason. And also Dak didn't play. it starts equal. Also as to the Eagles specifically with that team's talent, I'd bet on them coming in cold in week 5 against whomever and winning let alone not playing in the preseason. So the point isn't an all emcompassing one. Depends on the matchup. I don't think this team is that much better than the Giants, that little edges make no difference.
If it was purely about the preseason though, I'd be picking Washington. So if people want to make the argument that my point is just about the preseason. I am with you. I'd make fun of me on that, too. But I didn't say that. I said its that AND...
A. O line needing to gel. Conerly's first game. Coleman's first at LG. It takes time typically. And they are facing quite a test to gel quickly
B. The outside Wrs missing camp-preseason. Burrow talked about not having Chase in camp last year hindered their early season chemistry
C. The outside WRs likely on a pitch count -- who backs up the outside WRs? We got really backup slot Wrs who don't major in playing in X or Z
D. I wonder about this team's hunger (this is a pure guess based on interviews-clippings) playing a team that they should beat -- Bram saying it was a low energy camp, etc. Giants come off hungry. I got that same vibe before the infamous loss in 2016 season. I'd ironically feel better if they were playing a bigger team where the motivation would happen more organically.
E. Giants just seem to have our number more than they should. At a minimum they seem to believe that they can beat us. Dallas and Phlly for example just whip them every season, I'd gather when they play those teams they don't come with swagger. They tend to play us with swagger.
F. Wilson isn't hot but he can throw the deep ball. Love what i've read about Amos and what I've seen in camp. But rookie CBs (including Sainristill) tend to struggle early. And Lattimore is a wildcard.
ANY game win or lose as to the matchup, I am rarely focused on just one thing. It's multiple variable things. it's context. Rarely for me to feel that one variable applies to every team-every match up. I am talking specfically about this one. And none of this is a whit of criticism towards Quinn. I got no idea if this approach is good or not over the long haul of the season. Strong arguments for either side on it. But specifically to this game, I do feel its ONE of a number of variables. Any of these variables taken alone could be made fun of if its framed as my plotline of why I am worried about this game. But for me its the combination of all of them. Not just one of them.
And with all of that if Thomas doesn't play, I think Washington wins.
 }})
