BigPete

I know there is dissatisfaction with our coaching staff. but a lot can be said for continuity as well. It is also worth remembering that every change is not necessarily an upgrade. I think Fewell will land finally land one of the Head Coaching jobs this year. I wouldn't be surprised if Gilbride landed in the mix as well (possibly with a college team). We are going to see a lot of turnover this year with teams like Detroit, Buffalo, San Diego, Kansas City, Jacksonville, Arizona, New York Jets and Philadelphia all but certain to fire their coaches and teams like Dallas, Carolina, Cincinnati, Tennessee, Oakland and Chicago possibilities for coaching changes I guess the real question is: if Fewell or Gilbride were to depart, who do you think the viable options are for offensive and defensive coordinators under Coughlin (and why)?

We could move to a 3-4 if we chose. Tuck can play DE similar to Darnell Dockett or Justin Smith. DE - Justin Tuck, Chris Canty, Barry Cofield, Rocky Bernard NT - Linval Joseph, ? OLB - Osi Umenyiora, Justin Tuck, Matthias Kiwanuka, Clint Sintim ILB - Jon Goff, Michael Boley, Chase Blackburn, Phillip Dillard, Gerris Wilkinson Looks to me like we have a very good core of players if we want to move to a 3-4, in fact the only position we really may need to upgrade is a backup NT (although Cofield and Canty can probably do ok).

Coughlin is a good coach, but I think this team needs a change to take it to the next level. I think we need an experienced Coach Cowher or Fisher would be very good, Gruden would be a close third. Fox and Kubiak could all be good options. I would add Charlie Weis in the mix, he has done well getting the KC offense on track despite limited talent. Russ Grim could also be decent. I guess a key area is whether we consider our offense or defense to be the biggest problems. I don't think Fewell is a good option, nor Gilbride this team needs a change of attitude (both could get head coaching gigs).

I actually like the pick up of Jamon Meredith, I think he could develop into a decent guard (if not tackle). here is what drew boylhart had on him before last year's draft http://thehuddlereport.com/Free/archive/2009DRAFT/PlayerProfiles/Jamon.Meredith.htm

I have mixed feelings about this news It is great attitude that Osi wants to play on, but I think perhaps he should look at getting it fixed now. I have no doubt that Osi would play to a decent standard, but I fear he won't be able to play to his full ability, it would be something like what Tuck, Jacobs, Bradshaw and Hedgecock faced last year. It may have been better to shut Osi down now and get him back over the latter part of the season (if possible), if not get him 100% healthy for next year. I suspect this could be a lingering injury that is going be an issue all year. I think I would rather have a healthy Tollefsen rather than carrying a wounded Osi all year (although even limited Osi is a much better player). But having said that, I do respect Osi's determination and fight. I am going to choose to believe that it isn't too major an issue - that it won't hurt Osi's performances too much this year and that Osi could return to somewhere near his best, but frankly I have serious reservations.

from http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2010/07/hip_surgery_recommended_for_gi.html

check out this article from espn http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/news/story?id=5407144

Perhaps, but Hedgecock doesn't have great hands, he doesn't have great speed and you are realistically looking at a 5yd to 7yd play. He certainly isn't a big play threat. whereas Beckum is a legit weapon as a receiver who is a genuine big play threat. heck, I would take a 10yd+ pass every time plus it means defenses have another legitimate weapon to cover in the passing game.

Here are my thoughts on a solution to the current labour situation and a new collective bargaining agreement. There will be a solution to a new CBA, there is simply too much money at stake. I think the solution will be a slight increase in player percentage, combined with a 17 or 18 game season, a rookie salary cap and a fund for retired NFL players. Both the owners and players will see more money. There will need to be increases in the roster size, perhaps to 60 instead of 53. How it would work the 2009 Salary cap was $128m, if 2010 was the under the old CBA, there would have been a salary cap of $135m for 2010. Under the old CBA, the salary cap for 2011 would have been around $142m and the per team share for owners would have been around $96.7m. (I will use these numbers as the basis of my projections) Under the old system the 59.5% of the total projected league revenue for the upcoming year. If this changed the player's share to perhaps 60% with 0.5% set aside for various players funds. This would increased the salary cap to $143.2m and decreasing the owner's income to $94.2m. The players funds would be $1.2m per team ($38m total) Now if the league also increases the regular season by two games at the expense of two preseason games, it will likely increase revenue by around 1/8. The salary cap increases to $161m per team and the owners share of the income becomes $103m per team. The players fund would be $1.3m (for a total of $43m). Minimum NFL salaries would increase by 1/8 This solution would mean that 1. Players are better off ($161m salary cap per team instead of $142m under the old CBA). 2. Owners are better off ($106m per team instead of $96.7m under the old CBA). 3. There is a rookie salary cap, meaning the veterans get a fairer share of cap money. 4. There is provision for players (and former) players funds ($43m per year) 5. Fans get more meaningful football. 6. Team rosters increase to 60 players instead of 53 players to better manage the longer regular season. 7. Minimum NFL salaries would increase by 1/8

I think there is a lot of potential The front office is very high on Beckum, perhaps he could develop into a Dallas Clark or Chris Cooley style player. I think the front office would ideally prefer to use a higher ratio of 2 TE sets instead of using a traditional full back. It certainly opens up a lot more possibilities in the passing game. The key will be how well Beckum improves his blocking this offseason.

Perhaps, but we already had those guys before we brought in Chad Jones. Have you noticed that we have added a ton of safeties heading into camp, yet are relatively thin at CB? Heading into training camp our roster has just 6 CBs (Corey Webster, Terrell Thomas, Aaron Ross, Bruce Johnson, DJ Johnson, Courtney Brown) and we have 8 safeties (Antrell Rolle, Kenny Phillips, Deon Grant, Chad Jones, Michael Johnson, Shareff Rashad, Seth Williams, Michael Greco) I expect we will go with 10 DBs on the final 53 man roster - 5 corners and 5 safeties. I also think with the focus we have on safeties on the roster, Fewell intends on using more nickle packages using three safeties (which has been confirmed by Deon Grant in his early interviews). As far as depth at safety goes, I don't think the front office is going to rely on Phillips this season (while being hopeful). He is coming back from a serious injury and it is still early in the recovery stage. Setbacks are a very real possibility, also it may take time (perhaps 12 months) for him to get back to playing how he was before injury. I think it is more likely that the front office will take a 'wait and see' approach with Phillips, they will be cautiously optimistic, but aren't going to rush things. If Phillips is more likely to contribute over the back half of the season. Bear in mind that Phillips' injury was potentially career threatening as well, we don't know how well he will come back. It is extremely doubtful that Jones will play much of a role this season (it is still if whether he will be able to resume his career). Even in the best case scenario, it is going to be 6 weeks + a lot of rehab before he can even start running, let alone start playing. I expect Jones will be shut down for this season in the near future. I do think there is room for another safety (pretty much insurance for Phillips). As it stands we have 3 healthy safeties, we are only 1 injury away from Michael Johnson being a starter. I also think the front office would ideally like to upgrade over Johnson, particularly someone with good ball skills and play-making ability. I could see someone like Page being a good (and cheap) option. He could certainly compete for playing time.

If they need a roster spot, I thought they would have put Chad Jones on either IR or the NFI list

On friday the Giants waived QB Riley Skinner. Whilst that it is not too surprising that he was cut, I wonder what future move is in the works that requires us to free up a roster spot? The Giants recently waived 5 players to make room for the Rookie signings. Is there a potential move on the cards? either a signing of a free agent, or perhaps a trade. It is obvious that the Giants want to upgrade our kick returners, and with Chad Jones injury, the secondary could be another position we want to upgrade. The timing of this (a day after Jones injury) seems to hint to me there could be something happening with our DB depth. I guess the next question is what players are our there (or could be realistic trade options) that could fill either of these roles? I am inclined to think it is more likely to be a trade as there aren't too many free agents available who would be an upgrade over the guys we have (or we would already have signed them). Perhaps the Giants could be interested in someone like Chiefs safety Jarrad Page Page is an RFA (hasn't signed his 2nd round tender) and has requested to be traded. Page has skipped offseason practices and is also unlikely to make the Chiefs final roster (The chief have Eric Berry and Kendrick Lewis as starters and John McGraw, Reshard Langford, and DaJuan Morgan for depth). Page is young (26) and coming off an average season last year (only played 5 games), but prior to that had 179 tackles, 10 int, 26 Pass Def, 4 Fumble Rec, 3 Forced Fumbles over 3 years. Page struggled last season before a torn calf muscle landed him on injured reserve prior to Week 7 of last season, but he was a play-maker in coverage in his first two years as a starter. It is also worth noting the Chiefs put a second round tender on him (worth $1.759m). Page could probably be available for a late round draft pick. With the uncertainty of how well Phillips will return from injury, safety depth is an issue (particularly as I think Fewell wants to use a lot of three safety sets). Page could add good young depth and also a valuable special teams role. Page didn't sign his tender by the deadline, which means he becomes an ERFA and the Chiefs can reduce his salary for 2010 from the tender amount to 110 percent of last year's base salary. It meanss if the Giants traded for Page, we could have him for a cheap 1 year deal (or maybe a cheap extension). He has played FS, but also has good size at 6'0", 225lbs. I think this is the kind of player Reese would consider trading for.

I think it is inevitable that this will be a problem down the track, it is just a matter of when. Even if Osi beats out Kiwanuka this year, there is still JPP waiting in the wings. Osi's attitude may be a reason we drafted JPP, the front office are looking at going in different directions sooner or later.

I suspect it depends on how you look at the comments by Osi. I think the beat writers are being cautious (rightly so) They are all saying that Osi is happy for now, but that he believes he is a better player than Kiwanuka and expects to be the starter. I think if you consider Osi's comments carefully there is a double-edged component to it. - If Osi isn't starting, and he believes he is playing well - that will be a big problem. Those comments about Kiwanuka's pedigree is just crap. No player should talk about a team mate like that. As others have said, it is time for Osi to shut up and prove on the field how good he is.

He is also disrespecting Kiwanuka. But based on last year's performance, Kiwanuka deserves the first shot at a starting gig; Umenyiora has to prove on the field that he is better. from http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/giants/2010/06/15/2010-06-15_osi_umenyiora_ok_with_backup_role_with_new_york_giants__for_now.html

I had assumed this issue had turned a corner and Osi was on the same page as the team. The problem is that Osi expects to be the starter. I guess he feels that he has paid his dues. He doesn't want to have to fight or earn a starting job based on performances. This is fundamentally contrary to Coughlin's and the team philosophy. It seems to me the situation with Osi hasn't changed all that much and won't change. There may also be the fact that he wants his big payday. Sad as I am to say this, it may be time to trade Osi. I don't see how this issue can be resolved long term.

Personally I think our Oline will be fine, but that doesn't mean it can't improve. Petrus can also reportedly play center, but he does have ability. Seubert looks to be a versatile backup at this point in his career. He is certainly an average starter at best. Don't overlook Whimper as an option at LG, he could really surprise after moving inside from LT. Having said that, probowl guards are not often available, if we could get Mankins for a decent price (a big if), it is at least worth looking at (albeit unlikely).

Osi recently expressed that he believes he is the starter and that if he had to genuinely fight for the starting spot "it's not going to be good for this team at all" signs the Osi drama isn't over? from kffl.com

Logan Mankins has asked to be traded and is going to be a hold out. This is largely hypothetical, but if the Patriots are willing to deal Mankins, should Jerry Reese consider making a trade offer? Left Guard is a position we are looking to upgrade from last year. (Guy Whimper has been taking reps with the 1st team at the OTAs). Mankins would be a huge upgrade On the flip side, Makins wants a top shelf deal (and deserves it) The Giants do have players that could be included in a potential trade at positions the Pats need (such as WR) and plenty of good young talent at these positions. For example, if Reese could work a deal something like: Logan Makins for Hixon/Moss and a 2011 2nd round pick, should we consider the deal?

How do you figure?. Firstly our DEs will be rushing the passer, not dropping back in coverage. They will be playing a little wider and get upfield more - great for getting pressure on the QB. Secondly we have that big anchor inside which we haven't had since Hamilton. It looks like we will still have the 4 aces style packages with Kiwanuka and probably Tuck playing inside in situations. Coverage wise we are going to mix it up a lot more, be more deceptive and make more plays for the ball. We will still have the physical element, but mix it in with different stuff. Plus we have all the stuff from spags to build on, including the various Blitz packages. We may not require it quite as much to get an effective pass rush, but it is definately in the bad of tricks that Fewell will use. You must remember every time you bring extra guys, that leaves an extra hole. Also the blitz heavy strategy was tried last year and didn't work. As far as the rotation goes, if a guy is getting the job done and consistently beating his guy, then leave him in there to do the job and just switch him when he needs a breather. I have no issue with that. By the same token if a starter isn't getting it done then the next guy gets his shot. Bottom line, if you want to get on the field you have to perform. eg: You can't say I am a 3rd down pass rusher and expect to get on the field. I don't have too much issue with that. After all rotation didn't work for us last year and the Oline seems to work well with the same group. It also lets a player set his guy up and exploit him later. It is way to early to make these kind of blanket statements, lets at least see how things shape up in camp. Personally I think these are positive signs (although it is early) and am happy to wait and see how things unfold on the field. Heck the system worked ok for Fewell in Buffalo and we have alot more talent, particularly on the Dline and an effective offense.

There has been a lot of conjecture about what schemes the Giants and Fewell will be running this year. While we won't know until training camp and the preseason, here is a little insight into the kind of things we can expect to see. Personally I find this encouraging and along the lines of what I expected to hear about the new schemes. What do you think? from an article by Mike Garafolo http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2010/06/giants_to_change_up_their_cove.html from an artcle by insidefootball.com from http://trainathought.insidefootball.com/2010/06/ota-9-practice-highlights-notes.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Train-aThought+%28Inside+Football%27s+%22Train-a+Thought%22%29 time to put to rest any talk of a Tampa 2 Also there is the comments a while back from Osi from http://www.metro.us/us/article/2010/03/26/17/0343-82/index.xml

I am not sure whether D'Qwell Jackson played in a 4-3 in college (he may have), but in the pro's he has mostly been in a 3-4. However, I think Jackson could be a similar kind of player to Curtis Lofton for the Falcons. Barrett Ruud would be a nice pickup, we would have to trade for him. Unless we include a player like Osi I don't see a deal happening. Considering they just got a pair of DTs in the draft. Other players it could be worth trading for include Derrick Johnson, AJ Hawk and Paul Pozlunzy; all of whom are off contract after the season. For example, I could see a deal like Derrick Johnson for Barry Cofield and a WR (perhaps Moss) being a possibility.

No worries, glad to help

It depends on who the front office had in mind to draft for that pick. I am no expert and the front office obviously had a plan of some kind. I suspect the majpor reason Cofield may be on the trade block is that it is very clear they want that big 2 gap DT up front to anchor the defense. That isn't a great fit for Cofield and Canty/Alford have much better ability as a 3 technique DT. I could still see Cofield traded, perhaps for a MLB such as D'Qwell Jackon, Derrick Johnson or AJ Hawk. I think he is a better fit as a 3-4 DE. Don't get me wrong, I think it is very possible Cofield could stick around; but I expect he is a better fit as a 3-technique DT rather than a NT for Fewell's system. But Henderson would be a great pickup and really fits what we want to do. It would very likely mean Bernard is gone. It would mean our possible depth chart would be something like: LDE: Tuck, Pierre-Paul UT: Canty, Alford, Cofield NT: Henderson, Joseph RDE: Umenyiora, Kiwanuka I could see us keeping 9 DL going into the season.