Jump to content
SportsWrath

2nd Guessing Coughlin....


JMFP
 Share

Recommended Posts

How about the decision to run the ball instead of kicking the field goal with 00:01?

 

Conventional wisdom says to take the knee, burn Chicago's final timeout, and then kick what is basically an extra point.

 

Hindsight is 20:20, but I have to say I understood where Coughlin was coming from - Tynes has missed several chip-shot FGs and PAT's this season, and I have to say I was more optimistic about putting the ballgame in the defense's hands than Tynes. I'm sure those O.B. kickoffs by Tynes had something to do with Coughlin's logic.

 

God forbid the Bears win on a Hail Mary....the NY Media would be out with torches and pitchforks this morning. Just goes to show how badly we need a dependable kicker.

 

It's a lot more fun to play coulda-woulda-shoulda when your team wins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking the same thing, though the logical approach with a time out in your pocket is to burn two downs and 1:10-1:15 off the clock, then take a run on third. You'd still have the FG option as back-up and you don't give them time to respond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking the same thing, though the logical approach with a time out in your pocket is to burn two downs and 1:10-1:15 off the clock, then take a run on third. You'd still have the FG option as back-up and you don't give them time to respond.

 

I think you're right. I suppose Coughlin was concerned about losing a down, given how generally-crappy our placekicking snaps are. The logic might have been to have an extra down available in case of a botched snap.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look how Droghans ran in, it was almost too easy. Chicago may have let him in to get the ball back. It almost worked.

 

Giants have to take the points as soon as the can get them. They were right to go for it. I understand the logic but with our kicking game, one bad snap, it's over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're right. I suppose Coughlin was concerned about losing a down, given how generally-crappy our placekicking snaps are. The logic might have been to have an extra down available in case of a botched snap.

True, but they still could have burned an extra 45s off the clock, gone for it on 2nd down and saved me a mild coronary at the end of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about the decision to run the ball instead of kicking the field goal with 00:01?

 

Conventional wisdom says to take the knee, burn Chicago's final timeout, and then kick what is basically an extra point.

 

Hindsight is 20:20, but I have to say I understood where Coughlin was coming from - Tynes has missed several chip-shot FGs and PAT's this season, and I have to say I was more optimistic about putting the ballgame in the defense's hands than Tynes. I'm sure those O.B. kickoffs by Tynes had something to do with Coughlin's logic.

 

God forbid the Bears win on a Hail Mary....the NY Media would be out with torches and pitchforks this morning. Just goes to show how badly we need a dependable kicker.

 

It's a lot more fun to play coulda-woulda-shoulda when your team wins

 

I agree with you. But I thought we could've wasted a down burning Chicago's last time out then run the ball into the end zone. I suspect Chicago let us score that final TD.. it looked too easy. My guess is they figured they have a better shot getting the ball back and going for a TD than us running the clock down on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see it both ways. NO WAY do I trust Tynes... but then again... how the fuck is he still on the team?

 

Because the league suffers from lack of decent place kickers. He's the best option out there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What he at the very least should have done is taken 1 knee on first down, force Chicago to use a timeout and then try 2 runs. If they let us score like it appears they did then thats fine, they just have no timeouts. Anyone that remembers the SF debacle should know that no kick is a gimmie. I think had the Giants done that, gone for the 18 yard FG(an extra point essentially, something Tynes has missed 3 of)and missed it would have bled the life out of the team to come back and lose in that fashion.

 

Here is the question you have to ask yourself. Was it more likely for the snap, spot, hold and kick by Tynes to get fucked up or At that point was it more likely for Rex Grossman to lead his team down the field in a spot that they HAD to have a TD?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What he at the very least should have done is taken 1 knee on first down, force Chicago to use a timeout and then try 2 runs. If they let us score like it appears they did then thats fine, they just have no timeouts. Anyone that remembers the SF debacle should know that no kick is a gimmie. I think had the Giants done that, gone for the 18 yard FG(an extra point essentially, something Tynes has missed 3 of)and missed it would have bled the life out of the team to come back and lose in that fashion.

 

Here is the question you have to ask yourself. Was it more likely for the snap, spot, hold and kick by Tynes to get fucked up or At that point was it more likely for Rex Grossman to lead his team down the field in a spot that they HAD to have a TD?

If it was anyone back there but Hester I'd agree but the fact that he was back there gives them an automatic start at the 40 with one time out and a minute thirty in the situation we put them in.

 

At the time I agreed with going for the TD as soon as we could, but then I realized, if TC can't trust this unit to make an extra point then the whole bunch of them should be cut.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was anyone back there but Hester I'd agree but the fact that he was back there gives them an automatic start at the 40 with one time out and a minute thirty in the situation we put them in.

 

At the time I agreed with going for the TD as soon as we could, but then I realized, if TC can't trust this unit to make an extra point then the whole bunch of them should be cut.

 

hence why I said they should have taken 1 knee.

 

Imagine had a botched snap lost the game? Coughlin would be crucified. He placed the game in the hands of his defense and it paid off.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hence why I said they should have taken 1 knee.

 

Imagine had a botched snap lost the game? Coughlin would be crucified. He placed the game in the hands of his defense and it paid off.

Yeah either way Coughlin would be killed if we wound up losing.

 

Spags is the man. He always has his troops fired up. It's so much better for a defender to have his coach on the field firing him up instead of a DC hiding in the press box like last year during games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah either way Coughlin would be killed if we wound up losing.

 

Spags is the man. He always has his troops fired up. It's so much better for a defender to have his coach on the field firing him up instead of a DC hiding in the press box like last year during games.

 

I just think on a whole that Coughlin has had a better finger on the pulse of the team this year then he has had in years past. Ironically, I think back to last year against Chicago where his defense let him down with a 3rd and 26 draw to Jones at the end of the 1st half and he seemed to lose a grip on that game from a coaching standpoint from that point on. I also remember it was his inability to see what was happening and could happen when he let Feely attempt that 50 yarder in the rain that Hester took back.

 

In actuality I think its a very ironic win all around for TC, defense does not let him down, holds Hester in check and makes the right calls when it comes to the kicking game. The antithesis of the 2006 game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just think on a whole that Coughlin has had a better finger on the pulse of the team this year then he has had in years past. Ironically, I think back to last year against Chicago where his defense let him down with a 3rd and 26 draw to Jones at the end of the 1st half and he seemed to lose a grip on that game from a coaching standpoint from that point on. I also remember it was his inability to see what was happening and could happen when he let Feely attempt that 50 yarder in the rain that Hester took back.

 

In actuality I think its a very ironic win all around for TC, defense does not let him down, holds Hester in check and makes the right calls when it comes to the kicking game. The antithesis of the 2006 game.

Except for the end of the first half, which was identical to 2006. Third and seven, and calls a time out. Gives them 3 free points, last year gave them 7 free points.

 

One thing that has always bothered me has been Coughlin's end of half managment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you. But I thought we could've wasted a down burning Chicago's last time out then run the ball into the end zone. I suspect Chicago let us score that final TD.. it looked too easy. My guess is they figured they have a better shot getting the ball back and going for a TD than us running the clock down on them.

 

I don't buy this one. The Giants do not have a good kicking team, bad snapper and kicker. If Smith intentionally let in the TD to rest his hopes on Grossman than he is an idiot. Also Hester's return TD percentage is only 13% so that is a major gamble also. Sure if the Giants had been stuffed a lot of time would have been wasted but the Bears O is hardly a juggernaut so that seems like a much bigger gamble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...