Things to blame Gilbride for...

[ksm7]

The dog will start:

 

1. His poor planning and time management resulted in him not completing the syllabus for the night school class he was teaching on proper gun management...one of his registered students, a young brash athlete named Plaxico.

 

2. His poor decision making and planning when coordinating a presidential motorcade through the streets of Dallas in November of 1963 without appropriate protection.

 

3. At a young age, he discovered an unpublished manuscript on coaching QB's written by Vince Lombardi. While packing for a trip, his poor planning resulted in him not packing the last chapter of the manuscript, and so it went unread. the title of the chapter: How to teach a grown man to throw in the wind.

 

4. His poor planning resulted in a weak exit strategy for the military in Iraq.

 

 

yup...he should be out of the league...

[Virginia Giant]

5. Unfunny piss poor trolls.

[Treehugger]

Yawn. Time for some new schtick.

[Mr. P]

the dog needs to:

 

[BIGBLUE01]

The dog should say nothing about a team, on that teams board, when the dog has ZERO balls (except for the ones in his mouth) to say who his team is. :glare:

 

 

 

Joke.......not even remotely funny.

[Virginia Giant]

The dog should say nothing about a team, on that teams board, when the dog has ZERO balls (except for the ones in his mouth) to say who his team is. :glare:

 

 

 

Joke.......not even remotely funny.

At this point, it's a legitimate point. He's spent the last couple years using every chance he's had to make the Giants look bad, or to make us as fans look foolish. If he hasn't got the sack to root for his team openly, he's a bitch. And now he's poking fun at Giants fans for bitching about the coaching staff?

 

I'm sorry, I'm just done with this clown, he;s worse than Egg will ever be, because at least we know where he stands, Dog is just some bitter fan of some secret team that apparently isn't very good and the only thing he has in his life is to try his best to make Giants fans look dumb.

[BIGBLUE01]

Agreed...I havent replied to him too much....he'sj ust a douchebag

[ksm7]

At this point, it's a legitimate point. He's spent the last couple years using every chance he's had to make the Giants look bad, or to make us as fans look foolish. If he hasn't got the sack to root for his team openly, he's a bitch. And now he's poking fun at Giants fans for bitching about the coaching staff?

 

I'm sorry, I'm just done with this clown, he;s worse than Egg will ever be, because at least we know where he stands, Dog is just some bitter fan of some secret team that apparently isn't very good and the only thing he has in his life is to try his best to make Giants fans look dumb.

 

the dog finds it interesting that ever since the giants won the super bowl, you have presented with a swagger as if you were on the team...anyhow, the fact is, you and others want to blame gilbride for everything. can you tell the dog how many teams last year had two 1000 yard backs? how many teams had their traditionally inconsistent QB have his best year after losing a top tight end in the league and without his best WR? the fact is, gildbride is a good OC. you watch a game from your basement with a budweiser in hand and assume you understand the intracacies of game planning (um, we have some big fast running backs. we should run the ball all day. especially since our elite QB is unable to throw in a little wind. never mind their tendancies on defense)...right, game planning and play selection is so easy, especially when you make a call and get out-executed on the field...

[Lubeck]

the dog finds it interesting that ever since the giants won the super bowl, you have presented with a swagger as if you were on the team...anyhow, the fact is, you and others want to blame gilbride for everything. can you tell the dog how many teams last year had two 1000 yard backs? how many teams had their traditionally inconsistent QB have his best year after losing a top tight end in the league and without his best WR? the fact is, gildbride is a good OC. you watch a game from your basement with a budweiser in hand and assume you understand the intracacies of game planning (um, we have some big fast running backs. we should run the ball all day. especially since our elite QB is unable to throw in a little wind. never mind their tendancies on defense)...right, game planning and play selection is so easy, especially when you make a call and get out-executed on the field...

 

Tell us who you root for or take your lame act and move along douche.

[Nesta]

the dog finds it interesting that ever since the giants won the super bowl, you have presented with a swagger as if you were on the team...anyhow, the fact is, you and others want to blame gilbride for everything. can you tell the dog how many teams last year had two 1000 yard backs? how many teams had their traditionally inconsistent QB have his best year after losing a top tight end in the league and without his best WR? the fact is, gildbride is a good OC. you watch a game from your basement with a budweiser in hand and assume you understand the intracacies of game planning (um, we have some big fast running backs. we should run the ball all day. especially since our elite QB is unable to throw in a little wind. never mind their tendancies on defense)...right, game planning and play selection is so easy, especially when you make a call and get out-executed on the field...

 

You've become a pathetic shell of a troll doggy. You're coming off as someone desperately seeking an idiosyncrasy to sink your teeth into. Another swing and a miss. Imagine a fan criticising an oc's gameplan. One that lost a playoff game no less. Incredible. Again, this is not something unique to sportswrath. You should get out more often.

[ksm7]

You've become a pathetic shell of a troll doggy. You're coming off as someone desperately seeking an idiosyncrasy to sink your teeth into. Another swing and a miss. Imagine a fan criticising an oc's gameplan. One that lost a playoff game no less. Incredible. Again, this is not something unique to sportswrath. You should get out more often.

 

fans should be critical...when it warrents criticism...the dog will continue to show the difference in the giant's offense since gilbride has been on board. and, nesta, if you are suggesting that fans are being critical b/c they lost a recent playoff game, well VG and others goes far beyond...and demonstrates ignorance on the topic...

[Nesta]

fans should be critical...when it warrents criticism...the dog will continue to show the difference in the giant's offense since gilbride has been on board. and, nesta, if you are suggesting that fans are being critical b/c they lost a recent playoff game, well VG and others goes far beyond...and demonstrates ignorance on the topic...

 

Really? And how so?

 

I'd say losing a playoff game, one in which you couldn't score a single touchdown, or match half of your season scoring avg, warrants a little criticism. But you're right, it's not because of the playoff game itself. The criticism started when Gilbride took over, and has since had several bad games per year.

 

What about you doggy? Where does all your criticism for sportswrath members or the giants come from? How is it warranted?

 

the dog will continue to show the difference in the giant's offense since gilbride has been on board

 

When you're showing us the difference, please remember to point out how our offense was 3rd and 7th in points and yards respectively this year. Which is the best we've had since ranking 3rd and 4th in 2005, the year before Gilbride became oc.

[xxi-xxv]

Although I tend to agree with Dog about Gilbride as its hard to argue the things he brought up, where I will say I was frustrated with him(and Coughlin because he is the HC and the buck stops there) was the play calling IN THE RED ZONE(green zone as the Giants call it)in the Philly playoff game. Too many times the Giants executed things well that day between the 20's and when they got inside scoring distance its like they changed the playbook specifically for that part of the field instead of just doing what they do well.

 

I know people want to crucify Gilbride all the time, but one thing that No one ever wants to realize is he is executing the type of offense Tom Coughlin likes to run and has always run every place he has been. Power run game and a deep passing offense. So if you do not like Gilbride then look Tc's way.

 

It will be interesting to see what they do in terms of the passing offense now and the routes they run as opposed to what they did before.

[Virginia Giant]

the dog finds it interesting that ever since the giants won the super bowl, you have presented with a swagger as if you were on the team..

.

 

How so? Please, give me an example where I have have acted like i was part of the team.

 

anyhow, the fact is, you and others want to blame gilbride for everything. can you tell the dog how many teams last year had two 1000 yard backs?

 

I know of at least 1, and have I been arguing that the Giants should pass more? I don't understand where you're going with this. My complaints have always been situational play calling, leaving the run and force feeding the pass when it's not there, as in Cleveland.

 

how many teams had their traditionally inconsistent QB have his best year after losing a top tight end in the league and without his best WR?

 

Traditionally? You mean the 4 full seasons he has played? And if you're giving Gilbride credit for improving Eli, who gets the blame for Eli's regression in the 2007 regular season? Gilbride's first full year as OC? And what about the fact that before Gilbride was the OC, he was Eli's qb coach. Maybe Palmer has had more to do with developing Eli than Gilbride?

 

the fact is, gildbride is a good OC. you watch a game from your basement with a budweiser in hand and assume you understand the intracacies of game planning (um, we have some big fast running backs. we should run the ball all day. especially since our elite QB is unable to throw in a little wind. never mind their tendancies on defense)...right, game planning and play selection is so easy, especially when you make a call and get out-executed on the field...

 

 

Actually, I watch the game in my living room, and it's not usually Budweiser, sometimes it's Pacifico, sometimes Amstel light, sometimes Red Stripe. There are all kinds of beers I drink on game days.

 

The Giants have had a reasonably effective offense for some time, in 2005 they were a top 5 offense in terms of yards per game, so it's not like Gilbride took a bunch of scrubs and won a super bowl with them.

 

And the man at the wheel for that top 5 offense? Huff, say that name around here and see what kind of reaction you get. It's not like Giants bitching about coordinators is something new and reserved for Gilbride

 

As for my knowledge of the game, just because I'm out spoken doesn't mean I don't know a great deal about football. I may not be the next Giants O.C., but I'm not just some beer swigging know it all who doesn't follow the game closely and doesn't know about the game.

 

 

 

 

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

.

 

How so? Please, give me an example where I have have acted like i was part of the team.

 

 

 

I know of at least 1, and have I been arguing that the Giants should pass more? I don't understand where you're going with this. My complaints have always been situational play calling, leaving the run and force feeding the pass when it's not there, as in Cleveland.

 

 

 

Traditionally? You mean the 4 full seasons he has played? And if you're giving Gilbride credit for improving Eli, who gets the blame for Eli's regression in the 2007 regular season? Gilbride's first full year as OC? And what about the fact that before Gilbride was the OC, he was Eli's qb coach. Maybe Palmer has had more to do with developing Eli than Gilbride?

 

 

 

 

Actually, I watch the game in my living room, and it's not usually Budweiser, sometimes it's Pacifico, sometimes Amstel light, sometimes Red Stripe. There are all kinds of beers I drink on game days.

 

The Giants have had a reasonably effective offense for some time, in 2005 they were a top 5 offense in terms of yards per game, so it's not like Gilbride took a bunch of scrubs and won a super bowl with them.

 

And the man at the wheel for that top 5 offense? Huff, say that name around here and see what kind of reaction you get. It's not like Giants bitching about coordinators is something new and reserved for Gilbride

 

As for my knowledge of the game, just because I'm out spoken doesn't mean I don't know a great deal about football. I may not be the next Giants O.C., but I'm not just some beer swigging know it all who doesn't follow the game closely and doesn't know about the game.

 

No need to justify your opinions VG...its an internet board. If people don't like your opinions and its within the parameters of what is allowed....then that is another person's problem not yours. I have been a fan of the Giants since '68. A serious fan since '75. So if people have an opinion concerning the Giants that is different than mine...so be it. And I will call him KillDrive...Gilfuck...Gilhump....and/or whatever creative or imitative nick names I can give him; if people don't like the post or the name calling don't read it. There is plenty I ignore on here (including people); and I will continue to do so.

[Nesta]

I googled a bit for this very topic. "Gilbride to blame" Oddly enough this thread was first on the list.

 

Anyway, I did it to make sure, well you know, that we Sportswrath yokels aren't the only few who felt this way about that game. I found this article. I know nothing about the author, but I thought it conveyed my feeling toward the game almost to a T.

 

LINK

 

New York Giants fail to use Brandon Jacobs against Philadelphia Eagles, and it costs them

by Steve Politi/The Star-Ledger

Sunday January 11, 2009, 8:48 PM

 

Brandon Jacobs looked like he was ready to run over anybody that got in his way Sunday, as he did in the second half when Brian Dawkins got in front of him.Instead of another Super Bowl ring to celebrate during the long offseason, the Giants are left with this debate: Which development was more troubling Sunday in this devastating loss to the Eagles?

 

Was it that the franchise quarterback failed to show up for the biggest game of the season?

 

Or was it that the franchise running back actually did show up, and the Giants failed to use him?

 

Pick your poison, because either way, the result was a deadly combination in this 23-11 loss. For four quarters, Eli Manning looked like the skittish kid he did in 2006 again, throwing his passes high or wide or into the waiting arms of eager Philadelphia defenders.

 

This might be a good time for Manning to find that Super Bowl MVP trophy and carry it in his backpack, because the fans who watched this performance might need a reminder in the coming months. Some of his passes looked like kites, hung up and helpless in the wind.

 

"I didn't think the wind was all that bad today," Manning said after completing 15 of 29 passes for 169 yards with two interceptions.

 

Uh, Eli? Just go ahead blame the wind next time. Because if it wasn't the wind ... well, then you just stank up the joint again.

 

And still: The Giants could have won this game with Bad Eli, since they had the only dominant player on the field. Brandon Jacobs was so hyped up for this one, so eager for the opportunity, it looked like he was going to jump out of his cleats -- and that was during the national anthem.

 

He charged through the first few plays like a man possessed. The Eagles could not tackle him in the first half, which makes this the most frustrating and flustering statistic from a game filled with them: Nine. That's the number of times Jacobs carried the ball in the first half.

 

He had nine carries when 19 would have been more appropriate, when a better offensive coordinator would have made their 270-pound battering ram the centerpiece of the perfect windy-day game plan.

 

Instead, the Giants went with a platoon. Derrick Ward is a fine running back -- he did gain more than 1,000 yards this season -- but Jacobs is a force. He never had a chance to set the tone in this game since the Giants failed to establish the one clear advantage they had in this matchup.

 

Jacobs is not the most elusive back, nor could he completely dance around the questions about his workload.

 

"I had nine carries," he said, "and I couldn't do anything about it but go out and run what's called."

 

The man calling those plays, Kevin Gilbride, had a job interview for the vacant head coaching job with the Oakland Raiders. Given their recent track record, this game must have catapulted him to the top of their list.

 

Jacobs finished with 92 yards on just 19 carries. Most of the questions about his misuse came back to that fourth-and-inches play in the fourth quarter, when Manning sneaked the ball up the middle and failed to gain a millimeter as Jacobs stood helplessly behind him.

 

"I want the ball every time -- that doesn't mean I'm going to get it," Jacobs said when asked about that play, but the reality is, the game was already over by then. The real mysteries came earlier.

 

Why was Jacobs standing on the sidelines for the second and fourth series of the game? Why was he taken out on the first drive of the second half, maybe the Giants' best chance to score a touchdown?

 

They finally got a break, with lineman Fred Robbins picking off a Donovan McNabb pass and lumbering to the Eagles' 33. Jacobs rushed for 11 yards on the first play and five yards on the next one.

 

Then, inexplicably, he went to the sidelines. The Giants lined up with an empty backfield on the next play, and two poor Manning throws later, they settled for a John Carney field goal. The Eagles kicked their own on their next possession and never trailed again.

 

"It's not like we came out here and they just flat-out beat us," Manning said, who apparently did not watch the same game that a few million critics did. "We moved the ball, we had opportunities, we had chances, we just didn't make the plays when we needed to."

 

Manning was never the same after receiver Plaxico Burress shot himself out of the lineup. He missed that big target Sunday, and the closer the Giants moved toward the end zone, the more Burress' 6-foot-5 presence hovering over the smaller Eagles corners was missed.

 

But even during that 11-1 start, it was never the quarterback or the receiver who scared teams. It was the running game. It was the way the Giants could physically chew up a good defense for more than 200 yards, then take control of the game in the fourth quarter.

 

It was Jacobs. The quarterback was bad again, but what makes this loss even harder to swallow is that the running back was great. And somehow, the Giants forgot to use him.

 

 

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

Thanks Nesta...I guess this guy is another uninformed Gilbride hater....

[BlueInCanada]

I blame the beer I just spilt on Gilbride....I should of ran with it instead of throwing it at my computer.

[Virginia Giant]

I googled a bit for this very topic. "Gilbride to blame" Oddly enough this thread was first on the list.

 

Anyway, I did it to make sure, well you know, that we Sportswrath yokels aren't the only few who felt this way about that game. I found this article. I know nothing about the author, but I thought it conveyed my feeling toward the game almost to a T.

 

LINK

 

New York Giants fail to use Brandon Jacobs against Philadelphia Eagles, and it costs them

by Steve Politi/The Star-Ledger

Sunday January 11, 2009, 8:48 PM

 

Brandon Jacobs looked like he was ready to run over anybody that got in his way Sunday, as he did in the second half when Brian Dawkins got in front of him.Instead of another Super Bowl ring to celebrate during the long offseason, the Giants are left with this debate: Which development was more troubling Sunday in this devastating loss to the Eagles?

 

Was it that the franchise quarterback failed to show up for the biggest game of the season?

 

Or was it that the franchise running back actually did show up, and the Giants failed to use him?

 

Pick your poison, because either way, the result was a deadly combination in this 23-11 loss. For four quarters, Eli Manning looked like the skittish kid he did in 2006 again, throwing his passes high or wide or into the waiting arms of eager Philadelphia defenders.

 

This might be a good time for Manning to find that Super Bowl MVP trophy and carry it in his backpack, because the fans who watched this performance might need a reminder in the coming months. Some of his passes looked like kites, hung up and helpless in the wind.

 

"I didn't think the wind was all that bad today," Manning said after completing 15 of 29 passes for 169 yards with two interceptions.

 

Uh, Eli? Just go ahead blame the wind next time. Because if it wasn't the wind ... well, then you just stank up the joint again.

 

And still: The Giants could have won this game with Bad Eli, since they had the only dominant player on the field. Brandon Jacobs was so hyped up for this one, so eager for the opportunity, it looked like he was going to jump out of his cleats -- and that was during the national anthem.

 

He charged through the first few plays like a man possessed. The Eagles could not tackle him in the first half, which makes this the most frustrating and flustering statistic from a game filled with them: Nine. That's the number of times Jacobs carried the ball in the first half.

 

He had nine carries when 19 would have been more appropriate, when a better offensive coordinator would have made their 270-pound battering ram the centerpiece of the perfect windy-day game plan.

 

Instead, the Giants went with a platoon. Derrick Ward is a fine running back -- he did gain more than 1,000 yards this season -- but Jacobs is a force. He never had a chance to set the tone in this game since the Giants failed to establish the one clear advantage they had in this matchup.

 

Jacobs is not the most elusive back, nor could he completely dance around the questions about his workload.

 

"I had nine carries," he said, "and I couldn't do anything about it but go out and run what's called."

 

The man calling those plays, Kevin Gilbride, had a job interview for the vacant head coaching job with the Oakland Raiders. Given their recent track record, this game must have catapulted him to the top of their list.

 

Jacobs finished with 92 yards on just 19 carries. Most of the questions about his misuse came back to that fourth-and-inches play in the fourth quarter, when Manning sneaked the ball up the middle and failed to gain a millimeter as Jacobs stood helplessly behind him.

 

"I want the ball every time -- that doesn't mean I'm going to get it," Jacobs said when asked about that play, but the reality is, the game was already over by then. The real mysteries came earlier.

 

Why was Jacobs standing on the sidelines for the second and fourth series of the game? Why was he taken out on the first drive of the second half, maybe the Giants' best chance to score a touchdown?

 

They finally got a break, with lineman Fred Robbins picking off a Donovan McNabb pass and lumbering to the Eagles' 33. Jacobs rushed for 11 yards on the first play and five yards on the next one.

 

Then, inexplicably, he went to the sidelines. The Giants lined up with an empty backfield on the next play, and two poor Manning throws later, they settled for a John Carney field goal. The Eagles kicked their own on their next possession and never trailed again.

 

"It's not like we came out here and they just flat-out beat us," Manning said, who apparently did not watch the same game that a few million critics did. "We moved the ball, we had opportunities, we had chances, we just didn't make the plays when we needed to."

 

Manning was never the same after receiver Plaxico Burress shot himself out of the lineup. He missed that big target Sunday, and the closer the Giants moved toward the end zone, the more Burress' 6-foot-5 presence hovering over the smaller Eagles corners was missed.

 

But even during that 11-1 start, it was never the quarterback or the receiver who scared teams. It was the running game. It was the way the Giants could physically chew up a good defense for more than 200 yards, then take control of the game in the fourth quarter.

 

It was Jacobs. The quarterback was bad again, but what makes this loss even harder to swallow is that the running back was great. And somehow, the Giants forgot to use him.

 

 

Ward coming in on like the second series has bothered me as well, I know he did a great job this year, but i am completely with the author in the thought that Jacobs just never got the chance to establish himself in the game and punish the Eagles early.

 

I remember thinking during the game when Ward came in that it was too early for a change of pace back.

[ksm7]

.

 

How so? Please, give me an example where I have have acted like i was part of the team.

 

I know of at least 1, and have I been arguing that the Giants should pass more? I don't understand where you're going with this. My complaints have always been situational play calling, leaving the run and force feeding the pass when it's not there, as in Cleveland.

 

Traditionally? You mean the 4 full seasons he has played? And if you're giving Gilbride credit for improving Eli, who gets the blame for Eli's regression in the 2007 regular season? Gilbride's first full year as OC? And what about the fact that before Gilbride was the OC, he was Eli's qb coach. Maybe Palmer has had more to do with developing Eli than Gilbride?

 

Actually, I watch the game in my living room, and it's not usually Budweiser, sometimes it's Pacifico, sometimes Amstel light, sometimes Red Stripe. There are all kinds of beers I drink on game days.

 

The Giants have had a reasonably effective offense for some time, in 2005 they were a top 5 offense in terms of yards per game, so it's not like Gilbride took a bunch of scrubs and won a super bowl with them.

 

And the man at the wheel for that top 5 offense? Huff, say that name around here and see what kind of reaction you get. It's not like Giants bitching about coordinators is something new and reserved for Gilbride

 

As for my knowledge of the game, just because I'm out spoken doesn't mean I don't know a great deal about football. I may not be the next Giants O.C., but I'm not just some beer swigging know it all who doesn't follow the game closely and doesn't know about the game.

 

the dog wasn't saying you argue for more passing...in fact, quite the contrary. the dog was making a point that there aren't many teams out there that were as productive offensively with two 1000 yards backs etc...but let's not credit the OC for that. let's blame him for the fact that manning threw a poor pass that was picked early in the game. if manning connects on that, gilbride is a genius for a gutsy but smart playaction pass in that situation. and situational playcalling comes down to 100 different things on the field. easy for us all to sit and question the calls that aren't executed. funny how when pierce was burnt by westbrook the second game, everyone attacked pierce for being old and slow and unable to cover...yet nobody attacked precious little spags and his call that ultimately resulted in one of the best if not the best pass recieving backs matched up against his linebacker...and yes, 4 full seasons as a starter plus 7 games of a fifth season makes you a veteran in the league...so traditionally, your veteran QB has been inconsistent...he had one of his better years. if you are going to blame gilbride for passing too much b/c it is a little windy out, then the dog is going to give him credit for running an effective offense with a QB that is inconsistent and can't be expected to pass in a little wind...

[ksm7]

I googled a bit for this very topic. "Gilbride to blame" Oddly enough this thread was first on the list.

 

Anyway, I did it to make sure, well you know, that we Sportswrath yokels aren't the only few who felt this way about that game. I found this article. I know nothing about the author, but I thought it conveyed my feeling toward the game almost to a T.

 

LINK

 

New York Giants fail to use Brandon Jacobs against Philadelphia Eagles, and it costs them

by Steve Politi/The Star-Ledger

Sunday January 11, 2009, 8:48 PM

 

Brandon Jacobs looked like he was ready to run over anybody that got in his way Sunday, as he did in the second half when Brian Dawkins got in front of him.Instead of another Super Bowl ring to celebrate during the long offseason, the Giants are left with this debate: Which development was more troubling Sunday in this devastating loss to the Eagles?

 

Was it that the franchise quarterback failed to show up for the biggest game of the season?

 

Or was it that the franchise running back actually did show up, and the Giants failed to use him?

 

Pick your poison, because either way, the result was a deadly combination in this 23-11 loss. For four quarters, Eli Manning looked like the skittish kid he did in 2006 again, throwing his passes high or wide or into the waiting arms of eager Philadelphia defenders.

 

This might be a good time for Manning to find that Super Bowl MVP trophy and carry it in his backpack, because the fans who watched this performance might need a reminder in the coming months. Some of his passes looked like kites, hung up and helpless in the wind.

 

"I didn't think the wind was all that bad today," Manning said after completing 15 of 29 passes for 169 yards with two interceptions.

 

Uh, Eli? Just go ahead blame the wind next time. Because if it wasn't the wind ... well, then you just stank up the joint again.

 

And still: The Giants could have won this game with Bad Eli, since they had the only dominant player on the field. Brandon Jacobs was so hyped up for this one, so eager for the opportunity, it looked like he was going to jump out of his cleats -- and that was during the national anthem.

 

He charged through the first few plays like a man possessed. The Eagles could not tackle him in the first half, which makes this the most frustrating and flustering statistic from a game filled with them: Nine. That's the number of times Jacobs carried the ball in the first half.

 

He had nine carries when 19 would have been more appropriate, when a better offensive coordinator would have made their 270-pound battering ram the centerpiece of the perfect windy-day game plan.

 

Instead, the Giants went with a platoon. Derrick Ward is a fine running back -- he did gain more than 1,000 yards this season -- but Jacobs is a force. He never had a chance to set the tone in this game since the Giants failed to establish the one clear advantage they had in this matchup.

 

Jacobs is not the most elusive back, nor could he completely dance around the questions about his workload.

 

"I had nine carries," he said, "and I couldn't do anything about it but go out and run what's called."

 

The man calling those plays, Kevin Gilbride, had a job interview for the vacant head coaching job with the Oakland Raiders. Given their recent track record, this game must have catapulted him to the top of their list.

 

Jacobs finished with 92 yards on just 19 carries. Most of the questions about his misuse came back to that fourth-and-inches play in the fourth quarter, when Manning sneaked the ball up the middle and failed to gain a millimeter as Jacobs stood helplessly behind him.

 

"I want the ball every time -- that doesn't mean I'm going to get it," Jacobs said when asked about that play, but the reality is, the game was already over by then. The real mysteries came earlier.

 

Why was Jacobs standing on the sidelines for the second and fourth series of the game? Why was he taken out on the first drive of the second half, maybe the Giants' best chance to score a touchdown?

 

They finally got a break, with lineman Fred Robbins picking off a Donovan McNabb pass and lumbering to the Eagles' 33. Jacobs rushed for 11 yards on the first play and five yards on the next one.

 

Then, inexplicably, he went to the sidelines. The Giants lined up with an empty backfield on the next play, and two poor Manning throws later, they settled for a John Carney field goal. The Eagles kicked their own on their next possession and never trailed again.

 

"It's not like we came out here and they just flat-out beat us," Manning said, who apparently did not watch the same game that a few million critics did. "We moved the ball, we had opportunities, we had chances, we just didn't make the plays when we needed to."

 

Manning was never the same after receiver Plaxico Burress shot himself out of the lineup. He missed that big target Sunday, and the closer the Giants moved toward the end zone, the more Burress' 6-foot-5 presence hovering over the smaller Eagles corners was missed.

 

But even during that 11-1 start, it was never the quarterback or the receiver who scared teams. It was the running game. It was the way the Giants could physically chew up a good defense for more than 200 yards, then take control of the game in the fourth quarter.

 

It was Jacobs. The quarterback was bad again, but what makes this loss even harder to swallow is that the running back was great. And somehow, the Giants forgot to use him.

 

 

no offense, but steve politi is the epitomy of newspaper sports journalist that ride the waves of the game results each week...the dog would encourage you to read more of his fine work...most likely you will find him praising gilbride as the second coming of christ in an article somewhere over the course of the year...have to do better than that...

 

[ksm7]

No need to justify your opinions VG...its an internet board. If people don't like your opinions and its within the parameters of what is allowed....then that is another person's problem not yours. I have been a fan of the Giants since '68. A serious fan since '75. So if people have an opinion concerning the Giants that is different than mine...so be it. And I will call him KillDrive...Gilfuck...Gilhump....and/or whatever creative or imitative nick names I can give him; if people don't like the post or the name calling don't read it. There is plenty I ignore on here (including people); and I will continue to do so.

 

the dog thinks you're in the wrong thread...this was entitled "Things to blame gilbride for...", not "Things to blame the officiating and the mayor of NY for"...

[Virginia Giant]

the dog wasn't saying you argue for more passing...in fact, quite the contrary. the dog was making a point that there aren't many teams out there that were as productive offensively with two 1000 yards backs etc...but let's not credit the OC for that. let's blame him for the fact that manning threw a poor pass that was picked early in the game. if manning connects on that, gilbride is a genius for a gutsy but smart playaction pass in that situation. and situational playcalling comes down to 100 different things on the field. easy for us all to sit and question the calls that aren't executed. funny how when pierce was burnt by westbrook the second game, everyone attacked pierce for being old and slow and unable to cover...yet nobody attacked precious little spags and his call that ultimately resulted in one of the best if not the best pass recieving backs matched up against his linebacker...and yes, 4 full seasons as a starter plus 7 games of a fifth season makes you a veteran in the league...so traditionally, your veteran QB has been inconsistent...he had one of his better years. if you are going to blame gilbride for passing too much b/c it is a little windy out, then the dog is going to give him credit for running an effective offense with a QB that is inconsistent and can't be expected to pass in a little wind...

I think it has been mentioned several times by people on here that having Pierce covering Westbrook in any situation is a dumb idea. I readily admit Spags gets a pass and Gilbride doesn't.

 

Still doesn't explain why you care so much about Giants fans arguing about their offensive coordinator.

[xxi-xxv]

I think it has been mentioned several times by people on here that having Pierce covering Westbrook in any situation is a dumb idea. I readily admit Spags gets a pass and Gilbride doesn't.

 

Still doesn't explain why you care so much about Giants fans arguing about their offensive coordinator.

 

I am starting to think he is a Giant fan who likes to strum up controversy as an altar ego poster.........

[JMFP]

Great article, and great points.

 

 

I googled a bit for this very topic. "Gilbride to blame" Oddly enough this thread was first on the list.

 

Anyway, I did it to make sure, well you know, that we Sportswrath yokels aren't the only few who felt this way about that game. I found this article. I know nothing about the author, but I thought it conveyed my feeling toward the game almost to a T.

 

Or was it that the franchise running back actually did show up, and the Giants failed to use him?

 

He charged through the first few plays like a man possessed. The Eagles could not tackle him in the first half, which makes this the most frustrating and flustering statistic from a game filled with them: Nine. That's the number of times Jacobs carried the ball in the first half.

 

He had nine carries when 19 would have been more appropriate, when a better offensive coordinator would have made their 270-pound battering ram the centerpiece of the perfect windy-day game plan.

 

Instead, the Giants went with a platoon. Derrick Ward is a fine running back -- he did gain more than 1,000 yards this season -- but Jacobs is a force. He never had a chance to set the tone in this game since the Giants failed to establish the one clear advantage they had in this matchup.

 

Jacobs finished with 92 yards on just 19 carries. Most of the questions about his misuse came back to that fourth-and-inches play in the fourth quarter, when Manning sneaked the ball up the middle and failed to gain a millimeter as Jacobs stood helplessly behind him.

 

 

Why was Jacobs standing on the sidelines for the second and fourth series of the game? Why was he taken out on the first drive of the second half, maybe the Giants' best chance to score a touchdown?

 

They finally got a break, with lineman Fred Robbins picking off a Donovan McNabb pass and lumbering to the Eagles' 33. Jacobs rushed for 11 yards on the first play and five yards on the next one.

 

Then, inexplicably, he went to the sidelines. The Giants lined up with an empty backfield on the next play, and two poor Manning throws later, they settled for a John Carney field goal. The Eagles kicked their own on their next possession and never trailed again.

 

The offensive gameplan was lacking. That doesn't necessarily mean that Gilbride sucks, or that he should be fired. But, honestly, the guy deserves criticism for a suspect gameplan, just as he deserves (and receives) praise for sound gameplans.

 

Again, this was a day where Jacobs should have pounded the rock 30+ times, and then they should have switched to Bradshaw in the 4th quarter. That was the winning formula in 2007, but for whatever reason, they decided to platoon Earl Campbell. And with a struggling passing game, why take Jacobs out, when his mere presence on the field requires the defense to commit to the run, which opens up the play-action pass?

 

It would be a different story if the Eagles had stonewalled Jacobs, or if the game were in a dome, or if Eli Manning had a hot hand....but none of that was the case. And so, criticism is deserved. I've supported Eli, TC, and Gilbride on many occasions. But God forbid you point out a suspect offensive gameplan and suddenly, you become a no-nothing bandwagon hater.