Somebody talk me down...

[Nas]

I have to admit this thread is getting pretty funny.

 

I say it's pretty informative with some pretty good hooks from both sides... although I pointed out last night that this hatred for Gilbride has to stop... and I'm glad to see others agreeing with that notion.

[Nas]

Dude, you still in process?

 

No, Joe I'm done. The dude thought I was stupid and sent me another document that looked nothing like the "good faith estimate".. even the rate was nowhere near what was promised. I ended up refinancing with BOA for 4.375%.. I lowered my monthly payment by $75 and two years. Now I will continue to pay the same amount I used to pay CitiMortgage so that I can pay it off faster...

 

 

[Nesta]

I say it's pretty informative with some pretty good hooks from both sides... although I pointed out last night that this hatred for Gilbride has to stop... and I'm glad to see others agreeing with that notion.

 

 

I hope I don't come off as a hater. I know I've given others that impression before.

 

I've said it several times before, I wouldn't fire the man, but if he left us it wouldn't worry me.

 

He's good for most of the year, and due for about 3-5 bad games per year. I can live with that.

I can't stand it when one of those games is a playoff game, but you can't argue with the production throughout the season, so I can live with that once and a while too.

 

Even his strongest supporters have to admit he has his moments.

[Nas]

I hope I don't come off as a hater. I know I've given others that impression before.

 

I've said it several times before, I wouldn't fire the man, but if he left us it wouldn't worry me.

 

He's good for most of the year, and due for about 3-5 bad games per year. I can live with that.

I can't stand it when one of those games is a playoff game, but you can't argue with the production throughout the season, so I can live with that once and a while too.

Even his strongest supporters have to admit he has his moments.

 

And who doesn't? Nevertheless you're forgiven

[BronxRik]

Somebody talk me down...

 

Simply put, the Gmen are DOOMED........DOOMED, I tell ya, DOOMED.

[RandolphScott]

When the wind gets up, the Giants struggle. Minnesota (2007)...Washington (2007)....Philly (2008).....three good examples of the wheels falling off our offense whenever the Meadowlands gets breezy.

 

A great deal of that is the responsbility of Manning to handle...but surely, Gilbride has a responsibility to ensure that his gameplan gives the team the best chance to succeed, and that involves accounting for his players, his opponents, and the conditions on the field. Stuff like short passes, rollouts, screens, play-action....all things that could have been used more effectively. Tighter spirals, lower trajectories, shorter distances...it's a matter of physics.

 

I'll take Gilbride and Manning anyday.....in Arizona.

 

The Meadowlands in January?....not so much.

 

 

Dude, I was at the Carolina game this past year and it was windy and it was fucking cold. Eli and Co.

Did a great job that game, the playcalling was excellent. They hit Hixon deep for a pass, which forced

the Panthers to play back a little.

 

If anything, the defense played like total shit that game.

[Virginia Giant]

Gillbride sucks, anyone who does not agree is wrong. End of thread.

[Money]

The run was the only thing working at all. And if you break the game into quarters you'll see we weren't over-committed.

But that's the problem. Why force balance just for the sake of calling your offense balanced. Manning was slinging well under 50% up until the last 2 drives. The passing game gave up the ball with 3 turnovers, one netting 7 pts for philly. It wasn't there, and KG does nothing to adjust. He's been that guy for many many years. The guy that won the superbowl for us is the exception, not the rule.

 

And yeah they stopped our run at some key moments, and Gilbride stopped our run in key moments by completely ignoring it. 4 straight passes with 2 minutes left, inside the Philly 26, leaving enough time for a 68 yard Philly drive and fg. Inside the 17 and a drive killed by two straight incompletions following 16 yards on 2 carries by BJ.

 

To me, it doesn't matter how many times we passed. We passed at least 3 times too many wouldn't you say?

You witness what is happening on the field, not only with the defense but your own players, and give them every advantage to win. I honestly don't think he did that, as Manning was struggling early on, no recievers were stepping up, and the running game was steadily getting better over the course of the game. To me you can hang 10 points solely on Gilbride, then 6 on Carney. That's the difference in the game.

 

I don't know if the balance was forced, and the power entrusted in the QB to audible clouds the OC's thought process from our perspective. The concept of balance isn't so much an unassailable doctrine but rather a guiding philosophy. If the Eagles are going to crowd the LOS, then we have to make some plays through the air eventually, otherwise it will be busy afternoon for Jeff Feagles. Like I mentioned earlier, in this much ballyhoed 1st and 5 sequence, Eli admitted to checking out of a running play and into a passing play.

 

It's also a bit misleading to say that the "passing game" was responsible for three turnovers (within the context that we lost the game because of those turnovers) when the final two turnovers occurred after the game was decided, including a play where Steve Smith managed to fumble without being touched by a defender. The first INT was obviously costly, but again we arrive at a situation where an ill-advised throw/decision can't reasonably be attributed to Gilbride. For those who forget, it was a play-action designed rollout (which Joemorrisr4prez mentioned as a sound play in incliment weather conditions) where Boss was the primary receiver underneath. He was covered and Eli forced a pass to Hixon that was intercepted by Asante Samuel.

 

What happened on the field included several sequences where our running game was stopped on 1st and 2nd down, and we were left in challenging 3rd and longs. At that point, it doesn't matter who are OC is. It's losing football, and it starts with the players on the field.

 

Truth be told, this ongoing history lesson is pretty futile. We were a terrible, undermanned offense without Plax. The Eagles would have beaten us 9 out of 10 times that day, just as they did, decisively, several weeks earlier. And, regretably, I'm not convinced this year will be much different.

[Nesta]

I don't know if the balance was forced, and the power entrusted in the QB to audible clouds the OC's thought process from our perspective. The concept of balance isn't so much an unassailable doctrine but rather a guiding philosophy. If the Eagles are going to crowd the LOS, then we have to make some plays through the air eventually, otherwise it will be busy afternoon for Jeff Feagles. Like I mentioned earlier, in this much ballyhoed 1st and 5 sequence, Eli admitted to checking out of a running play and into a passing play.

 

That's exactly my point. When someone makes the argument that we 'ran enough' because our offense was 'balanced' or because we were a 'little run heavy', I guess I should say The concept of balance isn't so much an unassailable doctrine but rather a guiding philosophy. Meaning, if it doesn't guide you to a WIN, one should deviate from said philosophy.

 

 

It's also a bit misleading to say that the "passing game" was responsible for three turnovers (within the context that we lost the game because of those turnovers) when the final two turnovers occurred after the game was decided, including a play where Steve Smith managed to fumble without being touched by a defender. The first INT was obviously costly, but again we arrive at a situation where an ill-advised throw/decision can't reasonably be attributed to Gilbride. For those who forget, it was a play-action designed rollout (which Joemorrisr4prez mentioned as a sound play in incliment weather conditions) where Boss was the primary receiver underneath. He was covered and Eli forced a pass to Hixon that was intercepted by Asante Samuel.

 

If you're saying the 2nd turnover, ended the game, I would agree, and again that's the point. If you're saying it was over before that, then I'd be interested to know when it was 'decided'. Personally, I thought we were still in it with 1st and 10 at midfield and three and half minutes left. Two scores would win it, not tie, and I've seen bigger comebacks than that one. Even with the last turnover, there was that dim chance for the miracle td, onside kick and hail mary.

Certainly no possibility AFTER it though, and that is the point. Regardless, the first was the most costly. We all know who threw it, and I think we can all agree he gets his share of heat for that and other erratic plays. What's puzzling, however, is that KG gets much of the accolades for our offensive success throughout the season (from myself as well as you and others), yet you don't believe he deserves any criticism. If for no other reason, he deserves criticism because his squad came out and played like amateurs for 90% of the game.

 

 

What happened on the field included several sequences where our running game was stopped on 1st and 2nd down, and we were left in challenging 3rd and longs. At that point, it doesn't matter who are OC is. It's losing football, and it starts with the players on the field.

 

You have a point, if you're talking about the first half. We only had one series in the 2nd half that started with two runs that left a 3rd and long, and that was a manageable 3 and 5. Like I said, the run game was getting better over the course of the game.

 

Truth be told, this ongoing history lesson is pretty futile. We were a terrible, undermanned offense without Plax. The Eagles would have beaten us 9 out of 10 times that day, just as they did, decisively, several weeks earlier. And, regretably, I'm not convinced this year will be much different.

 

:worshippy: Thank you so much for the lesson. We were a terrible, undermanned offense when we beat up the Panthers too. I disagree about next season.

[Nas]

I don't know if the balance was forced, and the power entrusted in the QB to audible clouds the OC's thought process from our perspective. The concept of balance isn't so much an unassailable doctrine but rather a guiding philosophy. If the Eagles are going to crowd the LOS, then we have to make some plays through the air eventually, otherwise it will be busy afternoon for Jeff Feagles. Like I mentioned earlier, in this much ballyhoed 1st and 5 sequence, Eli admitted to checking out of a running play and into a passing play.

 

It's also a bit misleading to say that the "passing game" was responsible for three turnovers (within the context that we lost the game because of those turnovers) when the final two turnovers occurred after the game was decided, including a play where Steve Smith managed to fumble without being touched by a defender. The first INT was obviously costly, but again we arrive at a situation where an ill-advised throw/decision can't reasonably be attributed to Gilbride. For those who forget, it was a play-action designed rollout (which Joemorrisr4prez mentioned as a sound play in incliment weather conditions) where Boss was the primary receiver underneath. He was covered and Eli forced a pass to Hixon that was intercepted by Asante Samuel.

 

What happened on the field included several sequences where our running game was stopped on 1st and 2nd down, and we were left in challenging 3rd and longs. At that point, it doesn't matter who are OC is. It's losing football, and it starts with the players on the field.

 

Truth be told, this ongoing history lesson is pretty futile. We were a terrible, undermanned offense without Plax. The Eagles would have beaten us 9 out of 10 times that day, just as they did, decisively, several weeks earlier. And, regretably, I'm not convinced this year will be much different.

 

Dude, your analysis is amazing, I sure hoping you're writing for some newspaper.. I'd love to see your articles all over ESPN and NFL.com :worshippy:

 

[NightFire]

And, as the above sequences show, the Eagles stopped our running game at the most critical times. You all wanted Gilbride to run the ball and he did ... and we lost because they stopped us.

 

This is my assertion also; I posted basically the same sequence on the Gilbride hate posts after the loss. When it mattered most the Eagles rose to the occasion and the Giants did not. Unfortunately football is a very unforgiving sport for mistakes because it's one and done. Hopefully this year will have a better outcome but the Eagles are looking good again.

[JMFP]

It's also a bit misleading to say that the "passing game" was responsible for three turnovers (within the context that we lost the game because of those turnovers) when the final two turnovers occurred after the game was decided, including a play where Steve Smith managed to fumble without being touched by a defender. The first INT was obviously costly, but again we arrive at a situation where an ill-advised throw/decision can't reasonably be attributed to Gilbride. For those who forget, it was a play-action designed rollout (which Joemorrisr4prez mentioned as a sound play in incliment weather conditions) where Boss was the primary receiver underneath. He was covered and Eli forced a pass to Hixon that was intercepted by Asante Samuel.

 

Frankly, I wouldn't have called a pass play in that situation, but if the ball is going to put into the wind, a rollout was the best option. Unfortunately, Eli's decision was ill-advised. You mentioned the rollout, but conveniently fail to mention that the pass was to medium/long route receiver, and that the INT occurred because the pass sailed (it must have been some sort of voodoo curse from the Eagles sideline, since according to you, the wind didn't impact passing that day).

 

Considering everything else that went wrong on offense that day - in particular, the passing game - for you to take that as some sort of vindication of Gilbride's overall gameplan is mysterious, to put it mildly.

 

I've been a steady defender of Eli, Gilbride, and Coughlin in the past, but that loss was a disappointing. We lost because of mistakes in the passing game, missed field goals, and poor clock management by both offense and defense at the end of the first half. In addition, Coughlin's decision to take the ball in the 1st instead of the wind in the 4th was a grave tactical error....that's not 2nd guessing either - I felt that was a mistake as soon as the game began. And the decision not to employ Bradshaw in the offensive gameplan was a waste of talent....there is no other player on the field that is as dangerous as Bradshaw....he could have been very useful as a short-passing option, and would have been more effective running outside than either Ward or Jacobs.

 

Gilbride deserves criticism for his performance that day, along with others on the field and on the sidelines. When you hold the other team to less than 60 yards on the ground, while rolling up 160+ against them, the notion that we lost because we weren't physical enough just doesn't hold up. Again, the stats tell me that the Eagles passed because they had to, whereas we passed because we wanted to.

 

This was a game that we could have won by a score of 12-9, if we didn't shoot ourselves in the foot.

[ksm7]

Frankly, I wouldn't have called a pass play in that situation, but if the ball is going to put into the wind, a rollout was the best option. Unfortunately, Eli's decision was ill-advised. You mentioned the rollout, but conveniently fail to mention that the pass was to medium/long route receiver, and that the INT occurred because the pass sailed (it must have been some sort of voodoo curse that was thrown from the Eagles sideline that caused the pass to sail, since according to you, the wind wasn't an issue that day).

 

Considering everything else that went wrong on offense that day - in particular, the passing game - for you to take that as some sort of vindication of Gilbride's overall gameplan is mysterious, to put it mildly.

 

We lost because of mistakes in the passing game, missed field goals, and poor clock management by both offense and defense at the end of the first half. In addition, Coughlin's decision to take the ball in the 1st instead of the wind in the 4th was a grave tactical error....that's not 2nd guessing either - I felt that was a mistake as soon as the game began. And the decision not to employ Bradshaw in the offensive gameplan was a waste of talent....there is no other player on the field that is as dangerous as Bradshaw....he could have been very useful as a short-passing option.

 

Gilbride deserves criticism for his performance that day, along with others on the field and on the sidelines. When you hold the other team to less than 60 yards on the ground, while rolling up 160+ against them, the notion that we lost because we weren't physical enough just doesn't hold up. Again, the stats tell me that the Eagles passed because they had to, whereas we passed because we wanted to.

 

This was a game that we could have won by a score of 12-9, if we didn't shoot ourselves in the foot.

 

the eagles passed because, well, that is what the eagles offense does. the dog, despite your theory that it doesn't hold up, will stick to the fact that the giants were outplayed significantly on the field that game...the eagles were quicker off the ball, more physical, and they made plays when they had to...that is why the giants lost. it wasn't decided by keeping a running back who didn't touch the field all season out of the game plan...it wasn't decided by wind (sorry, elements impact all teams and all players...and it sure wasn't decided by the decision made at the coin toss...

[JMFP]

the eagles passed because, well, that is what the eagles offense does. the dog, despite your theory that it doesn't hold up, will stick to the fact that the giants were outplayed significantly on the field that game...the eagles were quicker off the ball, more physical, and they made plays when they had to...that is why the giants lost. it wasn't decided by keeping a running back who didn't touch the field all season out of the game plan...it wasn't decided by wind (sorry, elements impact all teams and all players...and it sure wasn't decided by the decision made at the coin toss...

 

The fact that you side with Money comforts me. Thank you.

[ksm7]

The fact that you side with Money comforts me. Thank you.

 

the dog isn't siding with anyone...just stating facts. when a team loses, everyone wants a scapegoat. in this case, the giants were outplayed, out hit, and beaten on the field. could some calls be better? yes...about the same percentage of calls that could be better in every game, except when the team wins, those aren't an issue to anyone...

[Money]

That's exactly my point. When someone makes the argument that we 'ran enough' because our offense was 'balanced' or because we were a 'little run heavy', I guess I should say The concept of balance isn't so much an unassailable doctrine but rather a guiding philosophy. Meaning, if it doesn't guide you to a WIN, one should deviate from said philosophy.

 

I only brought up balance when it was suggested that we ignored the running game. We ran just as much as we passed (which is pretty rare in the game's modern landscape), and a strong percentage of those running plays were on the 1st and 2nd down. You can argue that we didn't run enough, but it's untrue to say we didn't run at all or were pass-heavy.

 

 

If you're saying the 2nd turnover, ended the game, I would agree, and again that's the point. If you're saying it was over before that, then I'd be interested to know when it was 'decided'. Personally, I thought we were still in it with 1st and 10 at midfield and three and half minutes left. Two scores would win it, not tie, and I've seen bigger comebacks than that one. Even with the last turnover, there was that dim chance for the miracle td, onside kick and hail mary.

Certainly no possibility AFTER it though, and that is the point. Regardless, the first was the most costly. We all know who threw it, and I think we can all agree he gets his share of heat for that and other erratic plays. What's puzzling, however, is that KG gets much of the accolades for our offensive success throughout the season (from myself as well as you and others), yet you don't believe he deserves any criticism. If for no other reason, he deserves criticism because his squad came out and played like amateurs for 90% of the game.

 

We were actually on our own 30 (not midfield) when the INT was thrown. The point is that we were in desperation mode and had no choice but to throw.

 

It's funny how perceptions can be so different. You see Gilbride as someone who gets too many accolades; I see him as someone who gets too much criticism. Truthfully, I don't really give him accolades or criticism because, to me, it's incredibly difficult to accurately judge the performance of a coordinator since we are at such an information disadvantage. But I know we've won a lot of games with him and Coughlin seems to trust him, so that's all I can reasonably ask. Reading "Kildrive" and "Gilfuck" and other not-so-clever pejoratives gets tiresome...and I'm yet to the see the propagatation of complimentary nicknames like, oh I don't know, "Gilbrain" and "Thrillride" and "Kevin the smart dude."

 

:worshippy: Thank you so much for the lesson. We were a terrible, undermanned offense when we beat up the Panthers too. I disagree about next season.

 

That Panthers game was the aberration. We averaged something like 8.0 yards per carry against a team missing it's best interior run defender. In games where our running game wasn't historically unstoppable, we couldn't generate anything offensively. This isn't meant to be a strike at anyone; it's hard to win without your best player and that challenge extends into this season.

[Money]

Frankly, I wouldn't have called a pass play in that situation, but if the ball is going to put into the wind, a rollout was the best option. Unfortunately, Eli's decision was ill-advised. You mentioned the rollout, but conveniently fail to mention that the pass was to medium/long route receiver, and that the INT occurred because the pass sailed (it must have been some sort of voodoo curse from the Eagles sideline, since according to you, the wind didn't impact passing that day).

 

The play was designed to go to Boss, who shielded the DE inside before sliding parallel to the LOS. When the Eagles covered it, Eli forced a throw instead of throwing the ball away or taking a sack.

 

Considering everything else that went wrong on offense that day - in particular, the passing game - for you to take that as some sort of vindication of Gilbride's overall gameplan is mysterious, to put it mildly.

 

It demonstrates that the play design and the QB's decision are often quite different, which jeopardizes any criticism of the OC since it's so hard to isolate his influence.

 

And the decision not to employ Bradshaw in the offensive gameplan was a waste of talent....there is no other player on the field that is as dangerous as Bradshaw...

 

Dangerous to his own team, yes.

[Nas]

the eagles passed because, well, that is what the eagles offense does. the dog, despite your theory that it doesn't hold up, will stick to the fact that the giants were outplayed significantly on the field that game...the eagles were quicker off the ball, more physical, and they made plays when they had to...that is why the giants lost. it wasn't decided by keeping a running back who didn't touch the field all season out of the game plan...it wasn't decided by wind (sorry, elements impact all teams and all players...and it sure wasn't decided by the decision made at the coin toss...

 

Yes the eagles edged us slightly THAT DAY, I will give you that. Other than that, we're still the best team in the NFC.. hands down.

[Nesta]

I only brought up balance when it was suggested that we ignored the running game. We ran just as much as we passed (which is pretty rare in the game's modern landscape), and a strong percentage of those running plays were on the 1st and 2nd down. You can argue that we didn't run enough, but it's untrue to say we didn't run at all or were pass-heavy.

 

When it comes to this game, that's all we are arguing. We didn't run enough, because it was the only thing working. All the incompletions and turnovers are what ifs.

 

 

 

We were actually on our own 30 (not midfield) when the INT was thrown. The point is that we were in desperation mode and had no choice but to throw.

 

You're wrong about that. We were at the 50. Perhaps you don't remember the game as well as you think. You can watch the lowlights on nfl.com if you're still in doubt. Look for the 3:24 mark in the 4th.

You're right though, at that point, we had to throw, I shouldn't bitch about the throwing at the end of the 4th, but about the lack of preparation and execution from the offense. The 4th also happened to be the best quarter passing that manning had in the whole game.

 

 

 

It's funny how perceptions can be so different. You see Gilbride as someone who gets too many accolades; I see him as someone who gets too much criticism. Truthfully, I don't really give him accolades or criticism because, to me, it's incredibly difficult to accurately judge the performance of a coordinator since we are at such an information disadvantage. But I know we've won a lot of games with him and Coughlin seems to trust him, so that's all I can reasonably ask. Reading "Kildrive" and "Gilfuck" and other not-so-clever pejoratives gets tiresome...and I'm yet to the see the propagatation of complimentary nicknames like, oh I don't know, "Gilbrain" and "Thrillride" and "Kevin the smart dude."

 

Actually I said we give him 'much' of the accolades, not 'too much'. He deserves his share, though I think he gets too much credit for the running game's success. I'm just saying that he is deserving of some of the criticism as well when we lay an egg like we did in the playoffs. I'm not sure I can empathize with you about reading 'gilfuck'. You're well aware of the strong opinions here about football. It's part of what makes this place great.

Kevin the smart dude is the worst idea for a nickname I have ever heard.

 

That Panthers game was the aberration. We averaged something like 8.0 yards per carry against a team missing it's best interior run defender. In games where our running game wasn't historically unstoppable, we couldn't generate anything offensively. This isn't meant to be a strike at anyone; it's hard to win without your best player and that challenge extends into this season.

 

KG came out dedicated to run the ball in that game, and it payed off. He didn't give it the same chance in the Philly game.

[ksm7]

Yes the eagles edged us slightly THAT DAY, I will give you that. Other than that, we're still the best team in the NFC.. hands down.

 

it's funny to the dog that two years ago when the giants edged the cowboys "slightly" that day, nobody here wanted to say that the cowboys were still the best team in the NFC...

[Guest TheMachine27]

it's funny to the dog that two years ago when the giants edged the cowboys "slightly" that day, nobody here wanted to say that the cowboys were still the best team in the NFC...

The Cowboys were and still are garbage. What exactly does "Slightly" mean when the Giants got the "W"?

[Nesta]

it's funny to the dog that two years ago when the giants edged the cowboys "slightly" that day, nobody here wanted to say that the cowboys were still the best team in the NFC...

 

Because this site is populated with Giants fans. Remember where you are dum-dum.

[Virginia Giant]

Reading "Kildrive" and "Gilfuck" and other not-so-clever pejoratives gets tiresome...and I'm yet to the see the propagatation of complimentary nicknames like, oh I don't know, "Gilbrain" and "Thrillride" and "Kevin the smart dude."

Link

[Nas]

it's funny to the dog that two years ago when the giants edged the cowboys "slightly" that day, nobody here wanted to say that the cowboys were still the best team in the NFC...

 

That's because they weren't. The cowboys have no character... half of their roster was on parole. Jones went out of his way to sign morons...

[Nas]

Link

 

You know we've come along way when we're referencing our own Sportswrath to prove a point :worshippy: