RandolphScott Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Anyone that knows anything about Tom Coughlin and his recipe for winning football knows its predicated on a long passing game and power run game. So no matter who the coordinator is this is what you are going to get. Its what they do its how they play and thus far its worked to the tune of 12-4 with a balanced attack that has proven it can beat you any way. Maybe its just me but I will take sucess. I think it sucks and your an idiot. Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Anyone that knows anything about Tom Coughlin and his recipe for winning football knows its predicated on a long passing game and power run game. So no matter who the coordinator is this is what you are going to get. Its what they do its how they play and thus far its worked to the tune of 12-4 with a balanced attack that has proven it can beat you any way. Maybe its just me but I will take sucess. A long passing game as in play-action setup by the run. Now tell me that Gilbride never gets away from that recipe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Ah the gilbride apologists are back. Tell me what good is balance when you lose? I guess you learned nothing from the Carolina game. All of them don't realize that when your star receiver goes out, you are no longer a threat as a passing team every down. Simply put, Gilbride did nothing to account for the fact that we no longer have the option to throw to Plaxico Burress as a bail out on those fades and high throws. What should have been done was allow Derrick Ward and Ahmad Bradshaw(because granted, Jacobs was beaten up for most of those games) to get the ball more...be it running the ball or passes out of the backfield. He did not do any of that and refused to change our gameplans, and therefore, we barely eeked out the number one seed. This was a 15-1 ballclub. He's not a good offensive coordinator and as was shown, was not a good head coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 The sarcasm aimed at Storm is unwarranted. The overall percentages mean squat, everyone knows there have been countless series throughout the year where Gillbride has abandoned the run in favor of the pass, and in situations where it made know sense to do so. I'd be willing to bet money that the reason the run vs throw percentages is so even is because we have been ahead in the game. There were a few games where we were behind, but the game was close, a lot of time left and the running game was working and Gillbride went into catch up mode. I cringe at the thought of being down 10 at half time to the Eagles next week, because i know full well Gillbride will be throwing the rest of the game. No VG but this idea of being 55% to 45% is assinine and makes no sense. Factoring in a 2nd and 6 holding penalty would alone make that number impossible because how many teams consistently run and pick up first downs via the run on a 2nd and 16 or 3rd and 20? The 50/50 number is IMO where one wants to be. Can we nitpcik certain series? sure every team can, but to trash the gameplan like people do here for a team that avareged 29 points/game and set an all time franchise rushing record is silly IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 I think it sucks and your an idiot. Idiot. See this I don't get. Why the need to put words in others mouths like this and "let's run on every down". If you guys felt strongly enough about your point, this wouldn't be necessary would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 A long passing game as in play-action setup by the run. Now tell me that Gilbride never gets away from that recipe. read Couglins book he speaks all about his recipe for winning football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 All of them don't realize that when your star receiver goes out, you are no longer a threat as a passing team every down. Simply put, Gilbride did nothing to account for the fact that we no longer have the option to throw to Plaxico Burress as a bail out on those fades and high throws. What should have been done was allow Derrick Ward and Ahmad Bradshaw(because granted, Jacobs was beaten up for most of those games). He's not a good offensive coordinator and as was shown, was not a good head coach. You are so right angry man, its not like not having Burress has allowed teams to inch that safety up to the line more often. I stand corrected lets run right at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 See this I don't get. Why the need to put words in others mouths like this and "let's run on every down". If you guys felt strongly enough about your point, this wouldn't be necessary would it? I was being sarcastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 You said you want to run the ball 55% of the time, which in todays NFL is as next to impossible as winning every game. Sure you can do that, but to get to that number you are going to have to run on every play and thus that would mean runs on third and long, thus you would most likely not convert them and have a conversion rate close to 20%. We ran the ball less the last 6 weeks huh? vs Zona 27 for 87 vs 33 throws - we still ran the ball despite a less than 3 yards/carry average vs Washington 35 runs vs 34 throws yup sure abandonded it there vs Philly 27 throws vs 24 runs in a game we were down 20-7 and had nothing working and no Jacobs vs Dallas the one game they got out of it and the game they missed their best guy who sets the tone vs Carolina , no use even posting these numbers as we all know your theory here is moot vs Vikes does it really matter? but it was 30 passes to 30 rushes Now lets go back the 10 weeks you spoke of shall we week 1 35 throws vs 32 rushes against the SKins week 2 31 rushes vs 28 throws against the Rams week 3 43 passes vs 25 runs vs the Bengals wow we pounded it that day week 5 25 runs vs 28 passes vs the Browns week 6 32 runs vs 31 passes vs the Niners week 7 35 runs vs 32 passes vs the Steelers - best run defense in the league at the time week 8 34 runs vs 27 passes vs the Cwoboys week 9 33 rushes vs 23 passes vs the Ravens in what was the best gameplan all year for the weather Looks about the same to me. Now go crawl under your angry little rock and come up with some more logic that makes about as much sense as speaking Spanish in China. "I can't even begin to tell you how frustrated I get whenever we don't run the ball on a series. With our running game, first down(or at least second down) should always be a good hard run." Sure sounds like running every down to me. Jackass. You stick with what worked for you the entire season. And how is my point moot in Carolina? They decided to run and they won the friggin game, asshole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 You are so right angry man, its not like not having Burress has allowed teams to inch that safety up to the line more often. I stand corrected lets run right at him. Hey you're right. That didn't work against Carolina or Arizona did it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 I was being sarcastic. To xxi, in jest of storm. I understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 "I can't even begin to tell you how frustrated I get whenever we don't run the ball on a series. With our running game, first down(or at least second down) should always be a good hard run." Sure sounds like running every down to me. Jackass. You stick with what worked for you the entire season. oh little angry man, I love it when you resort to name calling anyway your idea that we abonded the run the last 6 weeks as opposed to only won with the run the first 10 weeks is silly, it has been a balanced attack and with the exception of the Dallas game, with no Jacobs we h ave consistently been a 50/50 team. What should be more of a pertinent discussion is how important Jacobs is to setting the whole tone of this vaunted rushing attack as has been in seen in games vs the Eagles and Boys he missed and the Ravens and Panthers he played Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 See this I don't get. Why the need to put words in others mouths like this and "let's run on every down". If you guys felt strongly enough about your point, this wouldn't be necessary would it? Thank you! Or bring up past points of other posters that have nothing to do with the offensive side of the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Hey you're right. That didn't work against Carolina or Arizona did it? we threw for 300 yards vs the Cards and Carolina wore down and we did what the game called for. You want to run at Dawkins all day next week and at least not take a few shots to soften things up? Fine by me, don;t bitch when it does not work then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 oh little angry man, I love it when you resort to name calling anyway your idea that we abonded the run the last 6 weeks as opposed to only won with the run the first 10 weeks is silly, it has been a balanced attack and with the exception of the Dallas game, with no Jacobs we h ave consistently been a 50/50 team. What should be more of a pertinent discussion is how important Jacobs is to setting the whole tone of this vaunted rushing attack as has been in seen in games vs the Eagles and Boys he missed and the Ravens and Panthers he played Yah, but what I said was, "I can't even begin to tell you how frustrated I get whenever we don't run the ball on a series. With our running game, first down(or at least second down) should always be a good hard run. " As in pass three downs in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Thank you! Or bring up past points of other posters that have nothing to do with the offensive side of the ball. Its just fun to poke fun of angry losers thats all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 we threw for 300 yards vs the Cards and Carolina wore down and we did what the game called for. You want to run at Dawkins all day next week and at least not take a few shots to soften things up? Fine by me, don;t bitch when it does not work then. I'll bitch all day. Our running game with Jacobs in doesn't get stopped. Period. Run, playaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Yah, but what I said was, "I can't even begin to tell you how frustrated I get whenever we don't run the ball on a series. With our running game, first down(or at least second down) should always be a good hard run. " As in pass three downs in a row. Dear Lord I pity todays education system. Anyway here we go again. Its next to impossible to have that 55% number you so crave factoring in things like 10 yard penalties, 5 yard illegal motions, 15 yard chop blocks. I get it that you want to run on every 1st and 2nd down and want it all the time, but to be more than 50/50 with the dynamics of the game is impossible. Thats why you should be happy the Giants are 50/50. There is no doubt sometimes the Giants get away from the run from series to series, but ulitimately at the end of the day what they do best is run the ball and for the most part do it. Its why they set a franchise record for yards this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lughead Posted January 5, 2009 Author Share Posted January 5, 2009 "I can't even begin to tell you how frustrated I get whenever we don't run the ball on a series. With our running game, first down(or at least second down) should always be a good hard run." Sure sounds like running every down to me. Jackass. You stick with what worked for you the entire season. And how is my point moot in Carolina? They decided to run and they won the friggin game, asshole. alright we don't need to be calling each other names here :brooding: Some of us see the light and some of us don't. Eventually everyone will be in the bright. one way or the other. So, let's leave it at that and let's see what happens for the rest of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Its just fun to poke fun of angry losers thats all. No, you're a homer who won't admit when the offensive side isn't performing the way it should be and it's because of the offensive coordinator. And as long as we're here, you won't admit when players on the defensive side haven't had nearly the same effect they have had in the past (ya know, Kiwanuka being a MUCH better linebacker than defensive end...Tuck disappearing for games at a time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Dear Lord I pity todays education system. Anyway here we go again. Its next to impossible to have that 55% number you so crave factoring in things like 10 yard penalties, 5 yard illegal motions, 15 yard chop blocks. I get it that you want to run on every 1st and 2nd down and want it all the time, but to be more than 50/50 with the dynamics of the game is impossible. Thats why you should be happy the Giants are 50/50. There is no doubt sometimes the Giants get away from the run from series to series, but ulitimately at the end of the day what they do best is run the ball and for the most part do it. Its why they set a franchise record for yards this year. No, dumbass. I want to run on first down, if we pass on first down, I want to run on second down. You can't fucking read. And they set records for rushing DESPITE Kevin Gilbride. Again, he is not responsible for this team being a great rushing team. That goes to the running backs and offensive line, because his scheme is passing first on a rushing team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nesta Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 we threw for 300 yards vs the Cards and Carolina wore down and we did what the game called for. You want to run at Dawkins all day next week and at least not take a few shots to soften things up? Fine by me, don;t bitch when it does not work then. I meant Washington, but I'm pretty sure we didn't throw for 300 at the cards. Let's see we could try running at Dawkins with our biggest offensive threat (and soften him up for fresh legs), or we could force 'balance' and get the same results we got 4 weeks ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lughead Posted January 5, 2009 Author Share Posted January 5, 2009 No, dumbass. I want to run on first down, if we pass on first down, I want to run on second down. You can't fucking read. And they set records for rushing DESPITE Kevin Gilbride. Again, he is not responsible for this team being a great rushing team. That goes to the running backs and offensive line, because his scheme is passing first on a rushing team. Storm?????? the NAme Calling???? STOP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Storm?????? the NAme Calling???? STOP. No, dude, he's calling me names too. Plus, he can't read. Dumbasses can't read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 No, you're a homer who won't admit when the offensive side isn't performing the way it should be and it's because of the offensive coordinator. And as long as we're here, you won't admit when players on the defensive side haven't had nearly the same effect they have had in the past (ya know, Kiwanuka being a MUCH better linebacker than defensive end...Tuck disappearing for games at a time). I am certainly not a homer and anyone here paying attention knows that. Anyway what do you want the Giants to do with Kiwi? Move him back to LB and play Tollefson this late in the year? Kiwi has NEVER played a full season as a DE, he is hitting a wall its obvious. The guy lost 15 pounds to play LB and has been forced back to DE with 1 pre season game left. Now he is not as heavy as he would be if say HE PREPARED to play DE all year and in his third season he has NEVER played this many snaps. When Osi comes back he can move back to Lber and all will be right in your little angry world. As for Tuck, here is the deal with him. Last year he was 1 of 3 guys you had to always account for out there. This year he is for reasons I the genius spoke of in above paragraph about KIWI is 1 guy who have to always account for. He is getting double and triple teamed at times. Factor in the 2 game loss of Robbins and Tucks mysterious lower leg injury and you have a player that has not been as successful. He played well vs the Panthers but was clearly not himself. I think some other guys need to step up and I hipe that Kiwi getting 2 weeks rest does him some good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now