Jump to content
SportsWrath

WHAT WAS CONFIRMED BY NY vs. NE


BadEgg
 Share

Recommended Posts

BOTTOM LINE: The Giants do not have the defensive backfield to compete with the top tier offenses.

 

This is illustrated best by the two Dallas losses as well as the NE loss. And, to some extent, the GB loss as well. What this means is that the Giants, while competitive, will most likely not be able to defeat a healthy:

 

1) Dallas team

2) Greenbay team

3) Seattle team

 

And they certainly will not be able to win consecutive games againts any two of these teams, provided they are fortunate enough to survive an underrated TB team (which is a big if) and win the following week in Dallas or GB should the Skins upset the Seahawks. All of the teams above have the weapons to mitigate any pass rush the Giants may muster and, with the exception of maybe Seattle, have the ability to run the ball.

 

Despite this, it was a decent run by the Gmen... :clap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what will make it even sweeter when the Cowgirls lose, I really think they will. Its exactly what I tell cowgirl fans here in AZ, DONT RUN YOUR MOUTH BEFORE IT HAPPENS. Cowgirl fans are already putting thier team in th SB. You have to be blind to think that any team is that much of a lock besides NE, and Im wondering about thier cheatin asses too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what will make it even sweeter when the Cowgirls lose, I really think they will. Its exactly what I tell cowgirl fans here in AZ, DONT RUN YOUR MOUTH BEFORE IT HAPPENS. Cowgirl fans are already putting thier team in th SB. You have to be blind to think that any team is that much of a lock besides NE, and Im wondering about thier cheatin asses too.

 

I'll agree with you here. I don't believe either the Cowboys or NE are a lock. But I know the Giants d-backs are going to be a trouble spot for them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what will make it even sweeter when the Cowgirls lose, I really think they will. Its exactly what I tell cowgirl fans here in AZ, DONT RUN YOUR MOUTH BEFORE IT HAPPENS. Cowgirl fans are already putting thier team in th SB. You have to be blind to think that any team is that much of a lock besides NE, and Im wondering about thier cheatin asses too.

 

 

Whats up BigBlue? I disagree about the Pats being a lock. I Got the feeling Mannings going to have there number this time around. The Colts were pretty beat up the last time they played, and it still came down to the forth quarter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll agree with you here. I don't believe either the Cowboys or NE are a lock. But I know the Giants d-backs are going to be a trouble spot for them.

 

Sad but true. We can win though. Power run game will help keep there offense off the field. If we were smart we would be playing that rook safty, he seemed to bring some speed to the secondary. Ross is getting better, so thats a plus. If we could have stopped one of there scoring drives, instead of them scoring (which we did, but got straight robbed, a COUPLE times <_< ) then we win the game. If we can keep the level of play we have over the last couple weeks, we have just as good a shot as anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats up BigBlue? I disagree about the Pats being a lock. I Got the feeling Mannings going to have there number this time around. The Colts were pretty beat up the last time they played, and it still came down to the forth quarter.

 

Hey JayD, how ya doin?

 

I just think if you had to put a lock on someone, it would be the Pats. But youre absolutley right, I think the Colts stop them in the AFC Champ game. Bob Sanders, man would I love that guy in our secondary!

 

I also agree with you too egg, I know our secondary is a concern, esp. since we might have Corey Webster starting..... :o:cwy: But watch out for Michael Johnson, thats an upcoming stud.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BOTTOM LINE: The Giants do not have the defensive backfield to compete with the top tier offenses.

 

This is illustrated best by the two Dallas losses as well as the NE loss. And, to some extent, the GB loss as well. What this means is that the Giants, while competitive, will most likely not be able to defeat a healthy:

 

1) Dallas team

2) Greenbay team

3) Seattle team

 

And they certainly will not be able to win consecutive games againts any two of these teams, provided they are fortunate enough to survive an underrated TB team (which is a big if) and win the following week in Dallas or GB should the Skins upset the Seahawks. All of the teams above have the weapons to mitigate any pass rush the Giants may muster and, with the exception of maybe Seattle, have the ability to run the ball.

 

Despite this, it was a decent run by the Gmen... :clap:

 

Badegg, I would love to hear your theory about how if the Giants beat one of those teams listed, that they won't beat the other. Is it a rule?. Will they not be allowed to beat another team?. Perhaps Goodell will place a call to Coughlin, telling him that it's not fair to beat Dallas now that you've beaten Green Bay, so stop it.

 

And based on this theory it would seem we only have a defense. I'll tell Jacobs he needn't bother showing up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll beat Dallas and then you'll see a remarkable dropoff in this shitstick's postings.

 

I'm looking forward to it. I'm really more scared of Green Bay and Lambeau

 

My greatest fear is Washington getting to the Championship game against the Giants and were are forced to play at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Badegg, I would love to hear your theory about how if the Giants beat one of those teams listed, that they won't beat the other. Is it a rule?. Will they not be allowed to beat another team?. Perhaps Goodell will place a call to Coughlin, telling him that it's not fair to beat Dallas now that you've beaten Green Bay, so stop it.

 

And based on this theory it would seem we only have a defense. I'll tell Jacobs he needn't bother showing up.

 

My theory is simple: The Giants are 0-3 against GB and Dallas this year and, if I am not mistaken, maybe beat 1 or 2 teams with a winning record. Even more damning is the fact that one of the teams that the Giants beat with a winning record is Washington. But when Washington got hot and the Giants played them at home with a chance to clinch a playoff birth, they got owned.

 

Do you really think that the Giants can go into TB and win, and then win back to back games against a combo of GB/Dall/Seattle, provided these team are fairly healthy?

 

All on the road?

 

With what we know about the Giants secondary and QB?

 

Do you REALLY believe that? :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll agree with you here. I don't believe either the Cowboys or NE are a lock. But I know the Giants d-backs are going to be a trouble spot for them.

Did you wake up in the middle of last night for that epiphany? They've only been a problem since 2004...although they're starting to get better.

 

Hey, if you play us this playoff season, that would mean Eli will have won a playoff game before Romo...or Dallas since the 1990s...just wanted to point it out--a little fun-fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you wake up in the middle of last night for that epiphany? They've only been a problem since 2004...although they're starting to get better.

 

Hey, if you play us this playoff season, that would mean Eli will have won a playoff game before Romo...or Dallas since the 1990s...just wanted to point it out--a little fun-fact.

 

Very good point, indeed. And if the Giants lose this weekend and Eli plays like he did in at least half of the 2007 regular season games, Eli will be one step closer to legitimizing what his legacy will ultimately be:

 

B-U-S-T

 

Just wanted to remind you of that fun fact. Chew on that while you watch the Chargers advance further than the Giants thanks, in large part, to the theft they committed during the draft several years ago.

 

I am still waiting for the league to punish the Chargers as some rule must have been broken that day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BOTTOM LINE: The Giants do not have the defensive backfield to compete with the top tier offenses.

 

This is illustrated best by the two Dallas losses as well as the NE loss. And, to some extent, the GB loss as well. What this means is that the Giants, while competitive, will most likely not be able to defeat a healthy:

 

1) Dallas team2) Greenbay team

3) Seattle team

 

And they certainly will not be able to win consecutive games againts any two of these teams, provided they are fortunate enough to survive an underrated TB team (which is a big if) and win the following week in Dallas or GB should the Skins upset the Seahawks. All of the teams above have the weapons to mitigate any pass rush the Giants may muster and, with the exception of maybe Seattle, have the ability to run the ball.

 

Despite this, it was a decent run by the Gmen... :clap:

 

Pre-emptive excuse because he knows the Dallas offense is sputtering into the playoffs and questions about the health of T.O., Romo's thumb and brain haunt the Cowboys right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My theory is simple: The Giants are 0-3 against GB and Dallas this year and, if I am not mistaken, maybe beat 1 or 2 teams with a winning record. Even more damning is the fact that one of the teams that the Giants beat with a winning record is Washington. But when Washington got hot and the Giants played them at home with a chance to clinch a playoff birth, they got owned.

 

Do you really think that the Giants can go into TB and win, and then win back to back games against a combo of GB/Dall/Seattle, provided these team are fairly healthy?

 

All on the road?

 

With what we know about the Giants secondary and QB?

 

Do you REALLY believe that? :huh:

 

 

Tampa Bay: Yes

Seattle: Absolutely

Green Bay: Yes.

Dallas: Perhaps, especially if it's the same Dallas team that's being playing the last few weeks.

 

It doesn't matter about winning or losing records, on the road is on the road, Giants are 7-0 on the road since the Dallas game. You cannot discount that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pre-emptive excuse because he knows the Dallas offense is sputtering into the playoffs and questions about the health of T.O., Romo's thumb and brain haunt the Cowboys right now.

 

Not a pre-emptive excuse, just a fact. You take TO away and Dallas is a different team, just like the Giants would be if they lost Burress. Just like the Pats would be if Brady had bad thumb and they lost either Moss or Welker.

 

However, I suspect both Romo and TO will be healthy, and they will be too much for a stingy but outmanned TB defense. So this debate is moot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a pre-emptive excuse, just a fact. You take TO away and Dallas is a different team, just like the Giants would be if they lost Burress. Just like the Pats would be if Brady had bad thumb and they lost either Moss or Welker.

 

However, I suspect both Romo and TO will be healthy, and they will be too much for a stingy but outmanned TB defense. So this debate is moot.

 

Fact: Burress has been hobbled all year, so with your logic, the Giants are much better than their record indicates, so beware, as he seems to be getting healthy again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tampa Bay: Yes

Seattle: Absolutely

Green Bay: Yes.

Dallas: Perhaps, especially if it's the same Dallas team that's being playing the last few weeks.

 

It doesn't matter about winning or losing records, on the road is on the road, Giants are 7-0 on the road since the Dallas game. You cannot discount that.

 

I'm not saying that the Giants are a bad team, but I can discount their road victories after Dallas. The teams they played are as follows:

 

Redskins

Eagles

Falcons

Dolphines

Lions

Bears

Bills

 

I don't know the exact records of these teams, but I think it's safe to say that the one thing that they all have in common, with the exception of the Skins and maybe the Eagles, is that they SUCKED!

 

And I can't discount that the Giants got owned at home against the Skins with a playoff birth on the line. It is amazing that a win against a sloppy, lack-luster Bills team followed by another home loss erases memories of that skins game.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fact: Burress has been hobbled all year, so with your logic, the Giants are much better than their record indicates, so beware, as he seems to be getting healthy again.

 

Yet Burress was well enough to play. Owens may not be. But if Ownes has the same injury as Burress and the severity is the same, I'm sure that the Cowboys will be fine. Remember, Burress is the poor-man's Owens...

 

The Giants are much better than their records indicates? Tell me, what does getting spanked three times by the two best teams in the conference indicate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that the Giants are a bad team, but I can discount their road victories after Dallas. The teams they played are as follows:

 

Redskins

Eagles

Falcons

Dolphines

Lions

Bears

Bills

 

I don't know the exact records of these teams, but I think it's safe to say that the one thing that they all have in common, with the exception of the Skins and maybe the Eagles, is that they SUCKED!

 

And I can't discount that the Giants got owned at home against the Skins with a playoff birth on the line. It is amazing that a win against a sloppy, lack-luster Bills team followed by another home loss erases memories of that skins game.

 

 

Bad Egg, if you think that Giant fans, looking at how they played the Pats, sat there and discounted the Skins and Vikings losses this year, then so be it, continue to think I'm that ignorant. If nothing else it showed what they could and should have done.

 

And the funny thing is that every one of those teams you listed as sucked, Dallas played also. You lost at home to the Eagles, you scraped by Buffalo up there, you scraped by Detroit also. You want to keep nitpicking at prior results?.

 

Let's face it Bad, a Giants team playing to the level it should play at, can beat Seattle/ Tampa. For crying out loud think about it for one second, consider the shitty divisions that both of those teams played in and they come out of them 9-7 and 10-6. Whoop de fucking doo. The NFC East teams were no lower than 7-9, clearly the strongest division and there's 3 teams in the playoffs. Now think for one second why the Giants (who clearly play better on the road) should fear Seattle or Tampa?. Let me but it to you another way. Do you think Green Bay or Dallas would prefer to play those 2, or the Skins and the Giants in the next round?. If you think the latter, you're a fool. Green Bay don't want the Giants and the Cowboys certainly don't want the Skins right now.

 

I like our chances with Green Bay, why shouldn't I, if we even improve 50% over our earlier meeting it'll be a close game. And to beat, yes, we will have to play at a level we haven't reached this season, but I truly believe we'll be better than the other 2 games.

 

By the way, you have said the Giants are a bad team, so let's stay off the fence here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that the Giants are a bad team, but I can discount their road victories after Dallas. The teams they played are as follows:

 

Redskins

Eagles

Falcons

Dolphines

Lions

Bears

Bills

 

I don't know the exact records of these teams, but I think it's safe to say that the one thing that they all have in common, with the exception of the Skins and maybe the Eagles, is that they SUCKED!

 

And I can't discount that the Giants got owned at home against the Skins with a playoff birth on the line. It is amazing that a win against a sloppy, lack-luster Bills team followed by another home loss erases memories of that skins game.

Am I missing something? Dallas played against these same team, except for the Falcons, which they played against the unbeatable Carolina Pathers team instead. Who by-the-way, were 1-7 at home this year. Oh yeah, I keep forgetting how dominating the Cowboys looked against the Bills and Detroit. :rolleyes:

 

I can't discount how the Cowboys got owned by the Redskins either. And don't give me 'they didn't play most of their players' crap. Because through out the week, before the redskins game, all the Dallas offensive players could talked about was playing well before going into the playoff. Mission failed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bad Egg, if you think that Giant fans, looking at how they played the Pats, sat there and discounted the Skins and Vikings losses this year, then so be it, continue to think I'm that ignorant. If nothing else it showed what they could and should have done.

 

And the funny thing is that every one of those teams you listed as sucked, Dallas played also. You lost at home to the Eagles, you scraped by Buffalo up there, you scraped by Detroit also. You want to keep nitpicking at prior results?.

 

Let's face it Bad, a Giants team playing to the level it should play at, can beat Seattle/ Tampa. For crying out loud think about it for one second, consider the shitty divisions that both of those teams played in and they come out of them 9-7 and 10-6. Whoop de fucking doo. The NFC East teams were no lower than 7-9, clearly the strongest division and there's 3 teams in the playoffs. Now think for one second why the Giants (who clearly play better on the road) should fear Seattle or Tampa?. Let me but it to you another way. Do you think Green Bay or Dallas would prefer to play those 2, or the Skins and the Giants in the next round?. If you think the latter, you're a fool. Green Bay don't want the Giants and the Cowboys certainly don't want the Skins right now.

 

I like our chances with Green Bay, why shouldn't I, if we even improve 50% over our earlier meeting it'll be a close game. And to beat, yes, we will have to play at a level we haven't reached this season, but I truly believe we'll be better than the other 2 games.

 

By the way, you have said the Giants are a bad team, so let's stay off the fence here.

 

That's the great Giants excuse:

 

If the defense played at a better level against Dallas the first game...

If Manning played at a higher level against Dallas the second game...

If the Giants played at the same level as they did against NE they would have beaten GB or will beat GB.

If the Giants played to the proper level against the Vikings...

If the Giants play at the same level as they did against NE they would have beaten the Skins...

If the Giants played at a higher level against Detroit it would not have been so close...

 

IF THE DOLPHINS HAD PLAYED AT A HIGHER LEVEL ALL SEASON MAYBE THEY WOULD BE IN THE PLAYOFFS

 

The bottom line is that the Giants have not played at a high level against good teams. And most of the teams in the playoffs, while not great, are good.

 

Nothing in the Giants recent history says they are capable of running the table.

 

Nothing.

 

Winning in TB will be a huge challenge.

 

But, anything is possible, if the Giants defense plays at a high level and if the weather is at a high level and if Manning performs at a high level and if____ plays at a high level, and if _____ plays at a high level...

 

You get the picture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I missing something? Dallas played against these same team, except for the Falcons, which they played against the unbeatable Carolina Pathers team instead. Who by-the-way, were 1-7 at home this year. Oh yeah, I keep forgetting how dominating the Cowboys looked against the Bills and Detroit. :rolleyes:

 

I can't discount how the Cowboys got owned by the Redskins either. And don't give me 'they didn't play most of their players' crap. Because through out the week, before the redskins game, all the Dallas offensive players could talked about was playing well before going into the playoff. Mission failed...

 

Yup. And the league listens when Miles Austin, Sam Hurd, and Patrick Crayton speak. Not the bottom of the barrel, but not the exactly the cream of the crop. Let's send Eli with this trio into Washington and see if he completes a pass. I think he had one of the worst statistical performances in NFL history against the Redskins at home several weeks ago with his starting receiving core.

 

But thanks for letting me know that those three have been running their mouths. I hadn't even noticed.

 

But all of this nonsense aside, one of the reasons I am being so tough on the Giants is that I don't see them running the table, without the benefit of a week off. If Dallas was in the same predicament, having to go to TB and then win two straight against a combo of GB, Seattle, and NY, I probably would be saying the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup. And the league listens when Miles Austin, Sam Hurd, and Patrick Crayton speak. Not the bottom of the barrel, but not the exactly the cream of the crop.

Yup, I forgot, Jason Whitten didn't play, Tony Romo didn't play, Marion Barber didn't play, none of the starting offensive line played either...

 

Let's send Eli with this trio into Washington and see if he completes a pass. I think he had one of the worst statistical performances in NFL history against the Redskins at home several weeks ago with his starting receiving core.
Yes, of course, I keep forget how dominating our recieving corps is... You are right. If you take away a hobbling Burress, an aging Amani Toomer, Sinorice Moss, and Rookies Steve Smith and Boss. Eli wouldn't be the player he is today.

 

Speeking of "the worse statistical performance in NFL history", How was your running game against the Redskins? Or are you going to sit there and tell me that Pro-Bowler Marion Barber didn't play either?

But thanks for letting me know that those three have been running their mouths. I hadn't even noticed.

 

But all of this nonsense aside, one of the reasons I am being so tough on the Giants is that I don't see them running the table, without the benefit of a week off. If Dallas was in the same predicament, having to go to TB and then win two straight against a combo of GB, Seattle, and NY, I probably would be saying the same thing.

Well, of course...You're pretty much stating the obvios. Not having a first round bye will make thing harder on The Giants, as well as any other team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In games vs the same team, the Boys and Giants have given up similar points. Both teams have lost 2 of the last 3 and barely won in week 14. At this point, I'd say the Giants and Cowboys are a lot more simlar than you should want them to be headed to the playoffs.

 

 

 

 

Our big hurdle is Tampa, a good team with a tough D. I'm not about to look past that team at this point, but i will say Dallas had better hope they don't face the Giants again, because its mighty hard to take 3 from a team in one year.

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...