Somebody talk me down...

[Nesta]

um, the dog is now wondering what it is in fact that you are arguing...is it that they should have the run the ball more often earlier in the game (which is what you were originally saying, only now you are argiung that they had similar success in both games...and as the dog pointed out, the number of rushes in the first half of both games was basically the same)...are you arguing that it didn't matter how often they ran, only who got to carry the ball?...or are you arguing something inane about running before the last two minutes of the half, because that is just a bizzare statement...

 

turnovers happen...you and the dog both know that had mcnabb threw an interception at his own 3 yard line, you would be talking about the giants defense making plays when they had to, and the offense capitalizing on turnovers when they have to...of course, you may pull a little razzle-dazzle in their and say something about the giants success running the ball after a turnover when the oppossing team wears green uniforms in the first 26 official minutes of a game...but then, that's you.

 

either way, none of this takes away from the fact that the giants were beaten on the field, and you can't put this on gilbride...

 

oh doggie. this is why people rarely respond to you. Everything I just put in that post, I've already said at least once in this thread.

 

In the Carolina game, we didn't come out avergaging 7.3 ypc. We ran 12 times in the 1st for 4ypc vs only 6 passes.

We avgerage around the same up until Ward broke the 34 yarder with under 2 minutes in the 1st half.

It payed off, as it was the Carolina Defense that got tired and battered.

 

Frequently, as in more often than we usually do, sure. Frequently, as in as much as we did in the Carolina game, no.

 

We ran more often early in the game vs Carolina.

 

 

We kept feeding the run early on against Carolina. It wasn't paying off in the first half until inside the 2min mark. In fact, we did have similar success with the run in that first half vs. both teams. Just over 4 ypc. More runs early on, may have given a different result in the Philly game, but we'll never know.

 

 

In the Carolina game, only 6 or 7 of the first 20 plays were passes. The first 9 attempts all went to Jacobs, who only avg. 3.6 ypc.

 

 

 

turnovers happen...you and the dog both know that had mcnabb threw an interception at his own 3 yard line, you would be talking about the giants defense making plays when they had to, and the offense capitalizing on turnovers when they have to...of course, you may pull a little razzle-dazzle in their and say something about the giants success running the ball after a turnover when the oppossing team wears green uniforms in the first 26 official minutes of a game...but then, that's you.

 

Sure turnovers happen. That has nothing to do with getting the ball in from the 3 with 2 first downs.

And razzle dazzle yep that's me. I'll talk all day about how the giants are great and they're gonna do this or that, and they've accomplished so much, but remember one important thing here little doggy.....I'm doing it on a GIANTS FAN FORUM! Wow. How long does it take for that to sink in to the old noggin there bub.

 

either way, none of this takes away from the fact that the giants were beaten on the field, and you can't put this on gilbride...

 

Again, read everything or don't even bother responding. I never put the loss on just Gilbride, I've never said he should be fired. We are Giant's fans discussing how we lost the game, and the might have been. Why this topic would even interest a closet football fan like yourself is beyond me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[fishgutmartyr]

Fish, I'm not ragging on the Offense, I'm ragging on Gillbride. I think the players did more to overcome some bad calls throughout the season. I know that may sound like I'm just bitching for a the sake of bitching, but there were games I was simply mistified at the play calling. We won the Washington game at their house, but why were we so pass happy in the rain? Albeit we passed well, but thats not an ideal game to throw the ball around.

 

VG, it sounds like if Gilbride calls a game you don't like and they win, the Giants won because of the players not Gilbride. Even though it was his game plan, and the players did nothing but execute it. If they lose, it's all on Gilbride. How do I debate that?

 

I agree to disagree.

[Virginia Giant]

VG, it sounds like if Gilbride calls a game you don't like and they win, the Giants won because of the players not Gilbride. Even though it was his game plan, and the players did nothing but execute it. If they lose, it's all on Gilbride. How do I debate that?

 

I agree to disagree.

My problem is he goes stretches in a game where he simply won't run the ball, no matter if the passing game is effective or not, especially when the passing game is not working. He seems to have this philosophy where he tries to force Eli to throw his way out of a bad game. IMO, if you have a stable full of ponies, you run them till they drop.

 

Atn the end of any given game, we'll likely have 25 to 30 rushes, but it's never as consistant as that, we'll rush real early and real late and end with a nice number of carries, but in between we've thrown the ball 30 times and Eli might be having a shitty game and has tossed a couple INT's, the receivers can't catch a cold and Eli's on his back after every pass.

 

His situational play calling is shit, the first 15 to 20 plays are usually a good mix of run vs pass with a nice assortment of plays, but after that he gets in to pass happy mode.

 

Going back to the decision to pass 1st and 5 on the igglesd 21.....In the Carolina game, we were in OT in a game where we had already rushed for well over 200 yards and on 2-4 and 3-4 he called running plays on our 25, in a game where Eli was so-so, nothing special but didn't hurt us, and after a 1st down play where Ward had just gained 6 yards.

 

It's hard headedness, the best runningback tandem in the league and he doesn't have the sense to use them when (imho) they should be used.

 

 

But, I'll agree to disagree with you, and i pray I'm wrong about him and I eat a whole stew pot of crow. But we don't have a Plaxico to completely take over like in GB....we don't have Toomer to make the huge catches like in Dallas, and we can't depend on miracle plays like in the SB.

[Money]

Do your research then we'll talk about it.

 

No one gets a break just because they're part of the team. If that were the case, we'd become stagnant with the same players year after year, good or bad. Every year, every player has to earn their roster spot, so what's a little criticism or name-calling going to hurt an OC?

 

You're not listening here. We kept feeding the run early on against Carolina. It wasn't paying off in the first half until inside the 2min mark. In fact, we did have similar success with the run in that first half vs. both teams. Just over 4 ypc. More runs early on, may have given a different result in the Philly game, but we'll never know. We do know, thanks to Giltard (how's you like that one?) that 14 incompletions, including 3 turnovers, will not help us beat the Eagles, but we don't know that 14 more runs wouldn't have helped in anyway.

 

About Gil's replacement:

 

That's a dumb question, and not one I'm interested in. There are hundreds of candidates, many of which I've never heard of. I'll stick to giving criticism to whoever is ON the team. Remember, I didn't say anything about firing the man, but if you think he deserves no criticism, you're high.

 

In the regular season, our offense averaged 26.7 ppg (3rd in the league) while our defense allowed 18.4 ppg (5th). The standard deviation for offensive ppg was 10.7 (9.88 in games 1-11, while Plax was still with the team), whereas the standard deviation for defensive points allowed was 9.0.

 

By comparison, the highest scoring team in football was the New Orleans Saints at 28.9/g. Their standard deviation was 9.94. Meanwhile, the best defensive scoring team in football was the Pittsburgh Steelers at 13.9/g. Their standard deviation was 7.95.

 

According to this data segmentation, the defense was slightly more consistent than the offense in 2008. It's a small difference, especially when the data accounts for Plax's absence. Furthermore, the offense was similarly consistent to the highest scoring unit in the NFL (9.88 vs. 9.94) whereas the defense was 1-pt higher than the Steelers (9.0 vs. 7.95).

 

Altogether, both units appear to be impressively consistent by this measure (with an edge to the D), and there's nothing to suggest the offense suffered from multi-week lull periods.

 

---

 

I don't suggest anyone is above criticism, and I stated as much earlier in the thread. Nobody is above reproach. I think the guys on our team deserve respect, and a lot of vitriol directed at Gilbride has been disrespectful. There's a big difference between informed criticisms and childish name-calling, the latter of which has been far too prevelant throughout the fan community.

---

 

I'm not asking you or anyone to name his replacement. I'm asking who, in your opinion, is a good offensive coordinator? Booyah listed Marty Morningwheg. Who is a good play-caller in you estimation?

[Money]

Bradshaw busts a 65 yarder, and you're critical about it...unbelievable. Akers had a good angle on him, and credit him with being a sound tackler for a kicker. You make it sound like Akers pulled a Leon Lett on Bradshaw.

 

Come on, Money, admit it was a good play. And for the game, he finished with 180 return yards. As for his career, he's already 4th all-time in Giants kickoff return yards.

 

And Bradshaw led the Giants in rushing in the prior postseason ....one more reason why his lack of touches this time around mystifies me. I'm not saying he deserved to bump Jacobs aside, but he should have been mixed in to the gameplan, especially given our struggles in the passing game.

 

Since he's been drafted, no other running back is a bigger threat to take it to the house. Again, that's a fact - he owns the biggest rushing plays each of the last two seasons.

 

http://www.giants.com/team/player305.html

 

Applauding Bradshaw for being 4th all-time in kickoff return yards is like complimenting Vinny Testaverde for accumulating 40,000 career passing yards. If Reuben Droughns had 77 kick returns over the past two years, he would rank 7th.

 

Bradshaw ranked 29th last year in KR avg (22.2). The year before, he ranked 17th (24.2). Any way you slice it, he is a below average kick returner, if not bad altogether. Conversly, Domenik Hixon has put up a KR avg. of 36.5 in 11 career kick returns for us.

 

I don't see what's so mystifying about his dearth of playing time. You don't secure the ball, you don't pass protect, you don't play. It's a pretty simple formula. They aren't keeping him out of the game to spite him, and it's a decision that involves Coughlin, Gilbride, and Bradshaw's position coach, Jerald Ingram.

[Money]

I'm in agreement with Joe on this one. Bradshaw is a gamebreaker and should've had more touches this season.

If TC gave up on fumblers, Tiki wouldn't have retired a giant. Fumbling issues are fixable, you can't teach speed, agility, and field vision, all of which Bradshaw has in abundance.

 

You just explained the difference between a willing student and an unwilling student. Tiki redefined his game, while Bradshaw has failed to make the necessary strides. Entering him into the game last season simply carried a lot of risk, which is why most of his playing time happened when we were comfortably ahead.

 

The team hasn't given up on him by any stretch of the imagination, but I can tell you that the negative whispers about his work ethic aren't completely unfounded.

[xxi-xxv]

You just explained the difference between a willing student and an unwilling student. Tiki redefined his game, while Bradshaw has failed to make the necessary strides. Entering him into the game last season simply carried a lot of risk, which is why most of his playing time happened when we were comfortably ahead.

 

The team hasn't given up on him by any stretch of the imagination, but I can tell you that the negative whispers about his work ethic aren't completely unfounded.

 

Lets not forget when Tiki became a good RB he was in his 4th year and when he became a great RB and made the adjustments to become great he was in his 8th year.

[boohyah]

I think he's good, too, and they seem to stay afloat even when McNabb or Westbrook miss time with injury. I also think if you go to an Eagles message board or listen to Philly area radio, you'd see tons of heat directed at him and Reid.

 

I'm curious who some of Gilbride's more vocal critics are have in mind.

 

TCBV, VG, nesta, jm4pz ... ?

 

 

Eagles fans are mainly passionate and high emotional, (mainly irrationally). But in terms of football smarts, generally they are pretty clueless. That's not me being a homer, these guys have been down on McNabb and can't wait for him to fuck up, so they can go get their great white hope..............like a Bobby Hoying.

[Nesta]

In the regular season, our offense averaged 26.7 ppg (3rd in the league) while our defense allowed 18.4 ppg (5th). The standard deviation for offensive ppg was 10.7 (9.88 in games 1-11, while Plax was still with the team), whereas the standard deviation for defensive points allowed was 9.0.

 

By comparison, the highest scoring team in football was the New Orleans Saints at 28.9/g. Their standard deviation was 9.94. Meanwhile, the best defensive scoring team in football was the Pittsburgh Steelers at 13.9/g. Their standard deviation was 7.95.

 

According to this data segmentation, the defense was slightly more consistent than the offense in 2008. It's a small difference, especially when the data accounts for Plax's absence. Furthermore, the offense was similarly consistent to the highest scoring unit in the NFL (9.88 vs. 9.94) whereas the defense was 1-pt higher than the Steelers (9.0 vs. 7.95).

 

Altogether, both units appear to be impressively consistent by this measure (with an edge to the D), and there's nothing to suggest the offense suffered from multi-week lull periods.

 

 

That sounds about like what I expected for 2008. Remember it was Spags 2nd year, and without Osi vs. a career year for Gilbride. I'd wager there's more seperation from '07. It doesn't disprove the point that Spags has given the fans less to bitch about than Gilbride. Kind of seems like you're missing the forest because of the trees. If you can't see the multi-week lull without these numbers..... how bout the whole month of December and January. The Carolina game was the standard deviation in that month.

 

 

 

 

I don't suggest anyone is above criticism, and I stated as much earlier in the thread. Nobody is above reproach. I think the guys on our team deserve respect, and a lot of vitriol directed at Gilbride has been disrespectful. There's a big difference between informed criticisms and childish name-calling, the latter of which has been far too prevelant throughout the fan community.

 

lmao really?

 

 

I'm not asking you or anyone to name his replacement. I'm asking who, in your opinion, is a good offensive coordinator? Booyah listed Marty Morningwheg. Who is a good play-caller in you estimation?

 

Oh, sorry. I thought it was the standard 'if you wanna bitch about gilbride you have to name his replacement' schtick.

Honestly, in my opinion, Gilbride is a good coordinator. That doesn't mean he's ALWAYS good.

[Nesta]

You just explained the difference between a willing student and an unwilling student. Tiki redefined his game, while Bradshaw has failed to make the necessary strides. Entering him into the game last season simply carried a lot of risk, which is why most of his playing time happened when we were comfortably ahead.

 

The team hasn't given up on him by any stretch of the imagination, but I can tell you that the negative whispers about his work ethic aren't completely unfounded.

 

If it's his work ethic then I guess I'm behind the coaching staff on this one. You have any proof about that?

[Money]

That sounds about like what I expected for 2008. Remember it was Spags 2nd year, and without Osi vs. a career year for Gilbride. I'd wager there's more seperation from '07. It doesn't disprove the point that Spags has given the fans less to bitch about than Gilbride. Kind of seems like you're missing the forest because of the trees. If you can't see the multi-week lull without these numbers..... how bout the whole month of December and January. The Carolina game was the standard deviation in that month.

 

Even a naked eye review of the week-to-week scores suggests a decent amount of consistency from the offense. It's hard to effectively analyze our performance post-Plax; we basically fell apart. The defense lost Osi, but that happened in the preseason (giving us time to adjust) and we had a capable replacement in Kiwanuka. Conversly, we lost Plax late in the season and really had no one to step in and replace his impact (especially as Toomer seemingly fell off overnight). That's why I think the post-Plax games are not a fair measure of our offensive coordinator. When we had 17, we were as consistently dangerous as any offense in the league.

 

I suspect you're right about '07, although that season was clouded by an especially inconsistent QB play and serious injuries to Jacobs and then Ward, which makes it all the much hard to objectively evaluate Gilbride's performance.

[Nesta]

Even a naked eye review of the week-to-week scores suggests a decent amount of consistency from the offense. It's hard to effectively analyze our performance post-Plax; we basically fell apart. The defense lost Osi, but that happened in the preseason (giving us time to adjust) and we had a capable replacement in Kiwanuka. Conversly, we lost Plax late in the season and really had no one to step in and replace his impact (especially as Toomer seemingly fell off overnight). That's why I think the post-Plax games are not a fair measure of our offensive coordinator. When we had 17, we were as consistently dangerous as any offense in the league.

 

I suspect you're right about '07, although that season was clouded by an especially inconsistent QB play and serious injuries to Jacobs and then Ward, which makes it all the much hard to objectively evaluate Gilbride's performance.

 

True, Plax made a huge difference, even when he was only catching 2 or 3 balls a game, but you can't excuse the OC for losing ONE guy, it's part of the game. We did lose Osi in the preseason, but that's worse than losing a guy for 7 games last time I checked. Yeah we had time to adjust, but Kiwi wasn't ready to play de, and it showed. Couldn't agree more about Toomer though. That got ugly fast.

It may not be fair to measure with the post-plax games, but such is life. Gilbride has produced points without Plax before, our running game was best in the league, and our defense was top 5. That's a hell of a lot more than some teams have to work with so, no pass.

 

I'm almost certain I am. Especially inconsistent play? Yes. Can some of the blame for that be put on KG as well? Yes.

[Treehugger]

In the regular season, our offense averaged 26.7 ppg (3rd in the league) while our defense allowed 18.4 ppg (5th). The standard deviation for offensive ppg was 10.7 (9.88 in games 1-11, while Plax was still with the team), whereas the standard deviation for defensive points allowed was 9.0.

 

By comparison, the highest scoring team in football was the New Orleans Saints at 28.9/g. Their standard deviation was 9.94. Meanwhile, the best defensive scoring team in football was the Pittsburgh Steelers at 13.9/g. Their standard deviation was 7.95.

 

According to this data segmentation, the defense was slightly more consistent than the offense in 2008. It's a small difference, especially when the data accounts for Plax's absence. Furthermore, the offense was similarly consistent to the highest scoring unit in the NFL (9.88 vs. 9.94) whereas the defense was 1-pt higher than the Steelers (9.0 vs. 7.95).

 

Altogether, both units appear to be impressively consistent by this measure (with an edge to the D), and there's nothing to suggest the offense suffered from multi-week lull periods.

That's incorrect. Offensive SD was 40% of the mean, Defensive was 49%. Not that you can compare them anyway; they didn't fact the same competition. You'd have to normalise for the SD of the opposition somehow.

[Money]

That's incorrect. Offensive SD was 40% of the mean, Defensive was 49%. Not that you can compare them anyway; they didn't fact the same competition. You'd have to normalise for the SD of the opposition somehow.

 

Because of a reduced sample size, I'm presupposing that the offense and defense faced similar competition. Football outsiders has a DVOA formula that adjusts for opponent. According to that measure, the offense ranked 6th in the league whereas the defense ranked 8th.

 

The problem is that DVOA is designed to measure efficiency, not consistency. So it doesn't really confirm or disconfirm the notion that our offense went through sizable lull periods under Gilbride's guidance. It just says that over 16 games, our offense was the 6th most efficient.

[Money]

True, Plax made a huge difference, even when he was only catching 2 or 3 balls a game, but you can't excuse the OC for losing ONE guy, it's part of the game. We did lose Osi in the preseason, but that's worse than losing a guy for 7 games last time I checked. Yeah we had time to adjust, but Kiwi wasn't ready to play de, and it showed. Couldn't agree more about Toomer though. That got ugly fast.

It may not be fair to measure with the post-plax games, but such is life. Gilbride has produced points without Plax before, our running game was best in the league, and our defense was top 5. That's a hell of a lot more than some teams have to work with so, no pass.

 

I'm almost certain I am. Especially inconsistent play? Yes. Can some of the blame for that be put on KG as well? Yes.

 

Losing one guy becomes a big deal when it's your most irreplaceable guy. If it had happened earlier in the season, we'd have had more time for players like Hixon and Manningham to adjust to new roles. Kiwi had two weeks prior to the start of season to adjust back to a position he played throughout college and during his rookie season...and I think performed well from game 1 on.

 

[Nesta]

Losing one guy becomes a big deal when it's your most irreplaceable guy. If it had happened earlier in the season, we'd have had more time for players like Hixon and Manningham to adjust to new roles. Kiwi had two weeks prior to the start of season to adjust back to a position he played throughout college and during his rookie season...and I think performed well from game 1 on.

 

Ofcourse, but in the end we're still talking about a team sport. It's KG's job to get it done, with or without Burress, and there were times he did just that, and times he left us scratching our heads. It's not like that Philly game was ever out of our reach without Burress. Kiwi adjusted well, he just wasn't ready to play DE, weight wise. But as good as he played, he's not Osi, our team sack leader since 2004.

[Treehugger]

Because of a reduced sample size, I'm presupposing that the offense and defense faced similar competition. Football outsiders has a DVOA formula that adjusts for opponent. According to that measure, the offense ranked 6th in the league whereas the defense ranked 8th.

 

The problem is that DVOA is designed to measure efficiency, not consistency. So it doesn't really confirm or disconfirm the notion that our offense went through sizable lull periods under Gilbride's guidance. It just says that over 16 games, our offense was the 6th most efficient.

Rankings are a different measure than consistancy. The point is that by your original stats the offense was actually more consistant (22.5% more) than the defense in terms of scoring.