fishgutmartyr

 

http://www.bigblueinteractive.com/2014/01/27/new-york-giants-officially-hire-danny-langsdorf-quarterbacks-coach-reassign-sean-ryan-kevin-m-gilbride/

Good spot for Ryan.

Gilbride? Wow. That looks like he's being set up to fail.

 

Langsdorf was the OC at Oregon State, not 9th ranked Oregon.

You're right. my mistake. Let's chalk that up to a combination of not wearing my glasses and wishful thinking.

They were the 18th ranked offense this year.

Still very good, though.

 

 

So wouldn't that mean that our linebackers coach is actually pretty good but he had substandard talent to work with. I'm sure Fewell is happy to have a talented legitimate MLB for the first time since he started coaching here.

I would take it to mean that Beason had to show the young linebackers how to play their positions at this level.

Gilly was on the grassy knoll.

 

You're right about the OL fish, I'll pay that, but I can't reconcile letting the TE and RB guys go while the two positions that showed major regression in the last few years (QB and WR) are kept on. And we still have Quinn, the handsome sumbitch.

Hey, I won't argue about Quinn, I wanted him gone a few years ago. Or our LB coach--hell, our linebackers showed more improvement in a few games with Beason than with multiple seasons with that fraud. And I'm still not sold on Fewell.

I'm not even saying you're wrong about Ryan and Gilbride, since we don't know what those guys will ultimately be doing. And Ryan did ok with the WRs before he went to QB coach...so maybe it was a matter of putting him in the wrong spot. I just want to see what happens before judging. I don't even know if there is a right or wrong here.

Ingram--early on, he was awesome: got Tiki out of his fumbling habit, brought up Jacobs, Bradshaw, and Ward. But he's also screwed the pooch on a 1st-rounder.

Pope--71, got his pick with Adrien Robinson, who has done nothing. It might just be time for a change here.

Not unreasonable to get your own guys in here. Maybe he should have wiped the slate. We'll see.

Gilly was on the grassy knoll.

I knew it.

You guys are too much. You're holding a guy's donating a kidney against him? That's the important connection? Not that McAdoo and Langsdorf coached together? Or that Langsdorf was the OC at 9th-ranked Oregon?

And how do you blame an offensive line coach who was stuck with 3 beat-up guys on an 8-man squad in September? Seriously, who the fuck was Dallas Reynolds? We started him...We started at least 3 centers...including the guy that was supposed to be our starting left guard. Show me any line coach that could overcome that with the weak backups we had. Then keep him in his lamp so you can rub it and ask him for a pot of gold--because he won't be human.

We don't even know what Ryan and Gilbride Jr. will be doing. We do know it probably won't be what they were doing last year. McAdoo already said as much.

We have a new OC with no ties to Gilbride. The only thing we know for sure is his former head coach (who ran a completely different offense) and the last guy he coached (one of the best at his position in the league) raved about him. He hasn't even finished forming his staff yet. Not a single Giants player has taken the field in any practice, let alone game, under him. Can we wait until that happens before proclaiming an NFL/NCAA-wide conspiracy to keep Gilbride's offense in place?

I'm not even suggesting you need to love the guy--for all I know, McAdoo might be terrible. Just give him a chance.

All the best--great player for us, and it was appreciated.

I can understand the grief Nicks is getting for 2013, but 2012? He played hurt that entire season. Yeah, the numbers aren't good, but you can't fault the player for that.

I think his game will improve next year. I don't think it will be with our team, though--something went wrong last off season, and I think it showed. Probably felt slighted with the Cruz signing.

 

Jacobs was a really good blocker, one of the best.

Ward and Barber were good at it, too.

The real wildcard is the OC. Who knows how the pieces will fit until this next season? We might actually be better off with two slot-types.

(I'm probably just kidding myself.)

Good point but then again, Ross' name has been in the rumor mill the last few off seasons, so they must have somebody in place, shadowing him, ready to step in.

Believe me, I hope you're right.

Exactly. No GM can fix/upgrade every position anytime they want. Reese knew he was rolling the dice on getting one more year out of an aging OL but all those factors you mention - mostly the cap - made that the best option. It blew up in his face but it's not like he passed on a bunch of better options.

 

Fish, looks like you could get your wish with Ross:

 

http://www.sportsmedia101.com/newyorkgiants/2014/01/14/new-york-giants-vp-of-player-evaluation-marc-ross-to-have-second-interview-with-buccaneers/

Actually, this is exactly what I don't want. The more time Tampa takes to make up its mind, the later in the FA/draft season it will be if we have to replace him. And how much energy is he spending on our draft at the moment?

If I were Reese, I'd be furious right now.

Joe, agree with about all of this, except that as things stand there's no way we keep Snee. He costs too much for too little.

I think more will be put into linebacker. Haven't given up hope with Paysinger, I think playing alongside Beason helped a lot. But it is a great chance to revive that squad, and they should take it. I'm not sure how they'll do it, though.

I don't think it would be too bad if we got the 2012 Beatty back--the question is: will we? We won't know until it's too late, and we can't risk it. The interior line is a must with a pocket-passer.

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2014/01/ben_mcadoo_a_look_at_packers_offensive_free_agents_and_how_they_may_fit_giants.html

Evan Dietrich-Smith might be the best choice at center. Knows a good chunk of the offense, a vet. If we go drafting guards, he's got to be the guy to hold it together. The time to draft a center was 3 years ago--when we had vet guards that needed less guidance. It isn't now.

 

I disagree there....I imagine there are scouts looking at players, and the GM pulling the trigger based upon his assessment of team needs as well as his own judgment on the players available.

 

And like you said, free agency is entirely his bag.

 

But, if some scout looked at James Brewer and saw some sort of dominant guard, I'd like to try whatever they were smoking, and yeah, that scout should be fired.

Actually, i don't think we're disagreeing at all. Honestly, I don't.

That scout should definitely be fired. I agree.

But I would like you to keep in mind that in my opinion, 2005 was one of the best off-seasons I've ever seen. No matter how it ended, Pierce, MacKenzie and Burress gave us a ton of value for the money. Accorsi was masterful in free agency. The draft was impeccable:4 picks resulting in 3 multi-year starters/core players--with Moore ending up a starter elsewhere. And the guy who was giving him the information he needed for the draft was Reese. Accorsi made the final calls, but it was based on information Reese gave him.

Reese, like Accorsi before him, has to concern himself with contracts for the active roster, the practice squad, and the guys on IR. He's got to look at potential free agents, draft choices, and picking players from other practice squads. And do it all under the cap. There's no way Reese can invest the time in the draft that he did when he was the head of scouting.

The GM has to rely on his head of scouting to compile the information he needs. Bad information results in bad picks. The GM might have an idea of positions that need to be selected, but if the scouting says there's better value at that draft spot outside of those positions, it's difficult to overrule it.

Reese hasn't had his 2005 free agency yet--he's been hit or miss, although the Canty/Rolle deals weren't as bad as people say. And god knows Accorsi had his stinkers, too. And after many more years of experience.

Reese will get better. But he needs to ditch Ross. We're both waaayyy over our depth here, but that's what it looks like to me.

 

 

I think the problem is our GM, not our scouts.

 

For example, here is James Brewer's Scouting Report.

 

Pros: He's an extremely large man.

 

Cons: Has problems against speed rushers. Has problems against bull rushers, despite his huge size. Has trouble run blocking.

 

Seriously, that was the fucking scouting report. If you don't believe me, go to CBS Sports.com or any other resource that a complete fucking amateur like myself had access to when I was scouting players for my fantasy football draft.

 

The problem we have, in my opinion, is a GM that is still living off the 2007 draft. Reese hasn't done any heavy lifting since he's been here, and even now, he has an easier job than most of the GMs in the NFL.

 

Teams are looking to replace head coaches, and find QBs capable of winning Super Bowls. When Reese stepped into the job, that was already there, along with a young, talented offensive line, and a dominant defensive line, plus a solid running attack with Brandon Jacobs.

 

Yeah, Reese had a great draft 7 years ago......since then, every year I feel like I'm watching Jack and the Magic Beanstalk.......except the Magic Beans don't work for Reese.

That's the draft--you're actually blaming Reese for Mark Ross' responsibility. 2007 was the last draft that Reese was primarily in charge of. Say Mark Ross is Reese's responsibility, and the argument ends; but it's the draft scouting that really needs to be looked at.

Although with time, I'm beginning to appreciate Accorsi's ability to find decent free agents.

The only stat I know of, is that Pugh is the first rookie on the Giants to start every game his first year since Lawrence Taylor. And that was 1981, so that was 32 years without a rookie being put in the lineup like a regular. And the Giants have changed hands (or at least passed it down to the next generation), gone through three general managers; and have gone through six head coaches (Perkins, Parcells, Handley, Reeves, Fassell, and Coughlin) and untold sub-coaches.

 

So I don't think it's Coughlin that started the idea of letting rookies get seasoned and allowed to grow into a position.

And the guy who started every game his rookie season 32 years ago proved to be a HOF'er. On a pretty weak team. I'm fond of Kelly, Lloyd, Carson and Van Pelt, but come on, now...that was a no-brainer.

Frankly, a team that has had the records the Giants have had over the past 8 years shouldn't need to play rookies as starters from game one. If they did, we should be shitting all over Reese & Co. Which, of course, is what is happening now.

 

 

Does anyone have any actual stats or proof to show that other teams play their rookies sooner and more often than the giants?

 

I believe it's a myth.

Agree. Even the notorious benching of Wilson happened his rookie year, so obviously the original plan was to get him into games. I see nothing wrong with letting rookies watch for a while before putting them into games, if the team can afford to. And if Randle was having as much difficulty as he did his second season, how bad would he have been in 2012?

 

I don't think they keep those stats, Pdub... but we've seen Coughlin go with a gimpy washed up veteran over a young energetic rookie or 2nd year man... Hankin was wreaking havoc in the very limited time he got... Moore didn't play much though JPP was invisible out there... Nassib.. even in a game that didn't matter.. they risked an injury to Eli instead of getting this guy on the field even for the 2nd half of a meaningless game... I've seen other teams play their rookies.. if I recall correctly the catch that broke our season was made by a Dallas rookie.... and Rolle was running in circles for some reason.

To be fair:

Hankins: DTs did just fine all season--there was no need to rush him out there. He still had playing time.

Moore: He was drafted with the idea that he wouldn't be playing much at all this year. This coming year will probably be a different story, especially with a year in the weight room under his belt.

Nassib: We had a line that was letting our starter get mauled. Why would you bring in a guy with no experience at this level and let him lose whatever confidence he has? I would have let Painter take the beating, too.

I think our interior o-line is in more need of fixing than the tackles.

 

 

Yes Beatty sucked, but the interior was just terrible which I think was more of a problem, if the interior is strong but the tackle is weak, he can usually at least still step up into the pocket.

Very true. Is there a guard worthy of the 12th pick, though? I'm all for trading down and getting a guard later on, but it's been 8 years since we did something like that.

We don't have a whole lot behind Beatty and Pugh. Beatty comes with a LOT of questions next season. If he comes back at the same level he played this year, or if one of them becomes injured, we're screwed. It makes sense to get a tackle when we have a chance.

That's good news for him, but I don't know if that translates to going back on the field. A running back has to take a lot of punishment.

When is the best time to replace scouts?

I guess you could try to replace Ross now, but what if the entire structure is falling apart? Aren't we in the middle of things for the upcoming draft, and we would be limiting what we would know of the players come April?

I'm not defending anyone, I'm curious. It might be easier to get good personnel after the draft. A good scout probably wouldn't want to jump ship for a lateral move right now--and if he did, would you want him?

They might be biting the bullet on this draft, and be planning an overhaul in April/May. This isn't the same thing as a team dumping a GM/coach, where you are starting exactly at zero.

I'm not quite at the same spot some of you guys are, since a ton of players we drafted were good and wound up out of the league due to injuries, but I see where you are coming from, and understand how bad these drafts appear when we look at what's left outside of the injuries. There's definitely a failure in the system. I'm just not sure what it is, or where.

Right now, changing up the front office might be the same as changing coaches mid-season. At least it seems that way to me.

 

Might be waiting to see what McAdoo wants. Perhaps McAdoo wanted someone else until he realized Flaherty was a possibility. I don't think any offensive coach with the Giants should feel safe after Pope was let go.

True, and maybe that was the point of the move. I assume McAdoo would have a level of comfort in finding a TE coach, knowing through experience what's needed.

Kind of interesting that Flaherty is still here, considering the state of the oline.

Most of our picks have been busts. McCants get cut and becomes a starter for the Raiders. Beatty fell off. And other than Pugh, the only other player he developed that played a reasonable level this year is Boothe. Maybe Cordle.

Not that I think he's a bad coach, but based on the measuring stick for Pope and Ingram, I would have thought he would be gone, too.

And fuck Ingram can go too

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2014/01/giants_rb_coach_jerald_ingram_will_not_be_retained.html

Apparently, he is.

i think it's more of mara stepping in and telling coughlin the party's over

 

maybe it's early but it's kinda weird that there's no extension for him yet

http://www.giants.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Ben-McAdoo-named-Offensive-Coordinator/75fcdfe8-a926-4598-ab5a-43d53602ae1a

 

“Think about what they overcame this year in Green Bay,” Coughlin said, with Rodgers getting hurt and three other quarterbacks playing. "One of them (Flynn) wasn’t even on their roster to start the season. And they still got in the playoffs. We beat them when Tolzien was in there. Then Flynn came in and they won a critical, critical game with him at quarterback in Dallas. They lost to the Steelers when they could have cushioned their opportunity a little bit. The ball was down in close and it just got away from them. But then they beat Chicago (in Week 17 in a winner-take-all game in which Rodgers returned).

 

“(McAdoo) is a detailed, very, very meticulous coach who has been greatly influenced by Mike McCarthy. He has a great relationship with him. The thing I was impressed by is, he’s been in San Francisco, he’s been in Green Bay, now he has an opportunity to come to the New York Giants. He thinks these clubs represent the NFL. He feels privileged to be here. He’s looking forward in a very humble way to becoming a New York Giant.”

 

Manning has played in the same offensive system throughout his career, which is entering its 11^th season. Now he and other offensive players must learn new terminology and plays, which Coughlin suggested should energize everyone.

 

“Here’s what I expect,” Coughlin said. “I think the players will respond to this. We’re going to try to compromise the system with what we have here. However, there will be change. And that change will be very positive and very well-received by our team and our players. And if our players are scrambling around to learn a new system – good. That’s another fire in their rear end.”

...

 

He’s a western Pennsylvania guy who has earned everything and he’s earned it the hard way,” Coughlin said. “He’s a smart guy. He’s done it the right way. He’s not a flashy guy. He’s a smart, intelligent guy to work with. He works very, very hard. He’s got the dirt under his fingernails. He’s my kind of guy. He’s got the blue-collar work ethic.”

 

Coughlin interviewed McAdoo yesterday at the Giants’ headquarters in the Quest Diagnostics Training Center.

 

“He’s a very detail-oriented, meticulous teacher, a fundamentalist, first and foremost,” Coughlin said. “I was very, very impressed by the presentation that he made, in terms of the fundamental details of his presentation, whether it is quarterback fundamentals, offensive philosophy. I was just very, very impressed with that.

 

“Whether he was the tight ends or the quarterbacks coach, he has prepared for this type of an interview for a long time. He comes with two notebooks, all the things he’s put together and thought about and when given the opportunity, wanted to present.”

For what it's worth, it sounds like Coughlin is into the hire. So who knows? I don't think you can ignore your coach--you either accept his feedback, or fire him.

From the way Coughlin described the guy, they're very similar.

Sounds good. Just have to see how it translates. We'll see.

Wonder how bad Sullivan interviewed? He was supposed to be a shoo-in.