Its Over

[fishgutmartyr]

99 yards in under two minutes, 1 timeout. I like our chances if we go for it on 4th down, miss it, and be only up 3 better than being up 6 and kicking it off to them, forcing them to score the TD. Add in the fact that scoring the TD would have sealed the game for us. Piss poor play call, no excuse whatsoever. 3 passes to the end zone would have been extreme, but to attempt zero to the end zone is lame and piss poor coaching.

 

 

I like our chances much better up 3, anyway, forcing them to drive 60 yards to tie the game with a field goal in under 2 minutes. Even if they tie, we at least go to overtime. They would have been playing to tie it up.

 

But the point in all this is: had we either thrown a pass or went for it on 4th down, we could have been up 10 with under 2 minutes to play. Sealing the game. Instead, Coughlin and Co. lost their edge and aggression and thus lost the game.

 

And Fish, the endzone isn't "mighty crowded" from the opposing 14. A pass play after the penalty would have thrown everyone off, huh?

 

You are also giving them the opportunity to tie with a field goal if you don't make it. In theory, it's much easier to play for the field goal than a TD. In reality, even if we were stopped at the one, it didn't look like our D would have stopped them for the TD anyway. Jesus, Storm, they had to drive 80 yards for the TD--do you really think it would have been a problem to go 60? That's even assuming that there's some defensive stop after 60 yards; I didn't see any indication our defense would have been able to stop them at 60 yards to force them into a field goal.

 

You're also not taking into consideration the boost the Chargers would have gotten with a goal line stand. That defense holds the Giants with no points, and you don't think their offense gets even more energized than it already was?

 

And yes, from 14 yards out, the end zone gets crowded. Between DBs and LBs dropping into coverage (I know that's a foreign concept considering our LBs), there are a lot of bodies in there, and a pretty limited space to get open. Not that it matters, because if he did throw and there was an incompletion, or threw underneath for a completion, you guys would be having a stroke for not running the ball.

 

I realize this board has this insane, desperate need to get rid of Gilbride at all costs, despite us having the best offense I've ever seen a Giants team have; but can we at least admit that the defense is capable of fucking up once in a while?

 

The defense has had two fucking blow-outs and a last minute TD scoring drive in the last four games. And the battle cry around here is "Fire Gilbride!" I don't fucking get it.

[Gspotter]

this is just the way of things, you're up and your down: happens to every team. We have talent and we're not executing and that's that! We really need an impact WR, defenses are just different with us now and Eli has been playing well most of the time, but he's best if he throws to a really tall WR, not a spot passer in most cases.

 

The D just looks worn down. You only have so many years and so I think we're just showing signs of not just reloading our D but reworking it from coaches on through to personnel.

 

We won't be in the playoffs this year and if we do make it, it won't be for long. I'll bet yesterday will be our back breaker.

 

I'll still be watching with a degree of hope, but I won't be on pins and needles because from here on out, we might just be spoilers for a really good team that takes us lightly. Of course, I don't know another way to take us since scoring for us is a slow and painful process.

[JMFP]

I realize this board has this insane, desperate need to get rid of Gilbride at all costs, despite us having the best offense I've ever seen a Giants team have; but can we at least admit that the defense is capable of fucking up once in a while?

 

The defense has had two fucking blow-outs and a last minute TD scoring drive in the last four games. And the battle cry around here is "Fire Gilbride!" I don't fucking get it.

 

I think the defense gets the goat horns for yesterday. Bottom line - they had 80 yards, 6 points, and 2 minutes on their side. All they needed to do was keep them out of the endzone.....and they couldn't get it done.

 

To me, the image of Tuck, on his back, gassed, summed it up perfectly.

 

But Fish, in my opinion, Gilbride deserves the criticism.

 

Until I see better tempo and more creativity, I'm convinced that the offense moves the ball in spite of Gilbride's gameplan, not because of it.

[fishgutmartyr]

I think the defense gets the goat horns for yesterday. Bottom line - they had 80 yards, 6 points, and 2 minutes on their side. All they needed to do was keep them out of the endzone.....and they couldn't get it done.

 

To me, the image of Tuck, on his back, gassed, summed it up perfectly.

 

But Fish, in my opinion, Gilbride deserves the criticism.

 

Until I see better tempo and more creativity, I'm convinced that the offense moves the ball in spite of Gilbride's gameplan, not because of it.

Is Gilbride immune to criticism? Definitely not. His insistence on playing Bradshaw as much as he is, despite having Ware and Gatrell Johnson is a mystery to me. The guy has a broken bone in his foot--yeah, he's not executing cut-backs.

 

Long balls on 3rd and two? Hated that.

 

A little too dependent on the shotgun? You bet.

 

Still, we are one of the better offenses in the league. And we've had to come from behind in every one of the last 4 games, twice where our defense couldn't have held off the opposing teams enough to make ball controll even feasible. I've never seen a coordinator get lambasted as much as this guy, and it's to a level I don't think is warrented.

 

It's not so much as I'm a big fan of the guy, but think about what he's doing with inexperienced wide receivers and one injured RB in a tandem running game.

[JackStroud]

I guess you can call me crazy but this team does not have the passion sand personnel of a playoff team

 

how far the mighty have fallen

 

I'm not even sure what the essential issue is.....they are just walking zombies

 

im a little upset that Tuck ws not on the field for those last few plays........he our only front 7 playmaker

 

Osi is asleep

[CrazedDogs]

I guess you can call me crazy but this team does not have the passion sand personnel of a playoff team

 

how far the mighty have fallen

 

I'm not even sure what the essential issue is.....they are just walking zombies

 

im a little upset that Tuck ws not on the field for those last few plays........he our only front 7 playmaker

 

Osi is asleep

 

Save that for the day after a game in which he didn't have a sack and a forced fumble.

[Storm]

You are also giving them the opportunity to tie with a field goal if you don't make it. In theory, it's much easier to play for the field goal than a TD. In reality, even if we were stopped at the one, it didn't look like our D would have stopped them for the TD anyway. Jesus, Storm, they had to drive 80 yards for the TD--do you really think it would have been a problem to go 60? That's even assuming that there's some defensive stop after 60 yards; I didn't see any indication our defense would have been able to stop them at 60 yards to force them into a field goal.

 

You're also not taking into consideration the boost the Chargers would have gotten with a goal line stand. That defense holds the Giants with no points, and you don't think their offense gets even more energized than it already was?

 

And yes, from 14 yards out, the end zone gets crowded. Between DBs and LBs dropping into coverage (I know that's a foreign concept considering our LBs), there are a lot of bodies in there, and a pretty limited space to get open. Not that it matters, because if he did throw and there was an incompletion, or threw underneath for a completion, you guys would be having a stroke for not running the ball.

 

I realize this board has this insane, desperate need to get rid of Gilbride at all costs, despite us having the best offense I've ever seen a Giants team have; but can we at least admit that the defense is capable of fucking up once in a while?

 

The defense has had two fucking blow-outs and a last minute TD scoring drive in the last four games. And the battle cry around here is "Fire Gilbride!" I don't fucking get it.

 

A field goal ties the game and sends it to overtime. It doesn't send us home with a loss.The right call is to go for it on 4th down and try to WIN THE GAME. The goal isn't "try not to lose the game". 6 point leads do just as much good as a 3 point lead, except with a 3 point lead and 2 minutes left, teams play for the field goal. A touchdown wins in either case. A field goal doesn't.

 

However, you make that 4th down touch down (or *gasp* throw the ball on 2nd or 3rd and goal for the touchdown) and you leave with a win.

[fringe]

A field goal ties the game and sends it to overtime. It doesn't send us home with a loss.The right call is to go for it on 4th down and try to WIN THE GAME. The goal isn't "try not to lose the game". 6 point leads do just as much good as a 3 point lead, except with a 3 point lead and 2 minutes left, teams play for the field goal.

i agree- i think we would have scored. they were on their heels. plus if you remember the super bowl, both peyton and eli said they'd rather be down by 4 than 3 with 2 minutes left because you know what you need.

[fishgutmartyr]

A field goal ties the game and sends it to overtime. It doesn't send us home with a loss.The right call is to go for it on 4th down and try to WIN THE GAME. The goal isn't "try not to lose the game". 6 point leads do just as much good as a 3 point lead, except with a 3 point lead and 2 minutes left, teams play for the field goal. A touchdown wins in either case. A field goal doesn't.

 

However, you make that 4th down touch down (or *gasp* throw the ball on 2nd or 3rd and goal for the touchdown) and you leave with a win.

 

We didn't get the job done 2-2 and 3-1 in the first drive. What possible reason do you have to think it would happen 4th and 4?

 

Again, show me where in that last drive that the defense seemed capable of stopping the Chargers AT JUST A FIELD GOAL. We don't make it on 4th and 4, and we lose anyway. With the way our defense "held," Rivers could have started in the back of the end zone and still would have gotten a touchdown.

 

But just for the sake of argument, let's say that the defense does something that they haven't been able to do for the last 4 games, and actually do keep them out of the end zone in a critical series. (You know, maybe a receiver drops a wide-open ball, or Sproles doesn't tie his laces and trips.) The Chargers get the field goal and the game goes into OT. With the goal line stand and the drive for the field goal, who has the momentum going into overtime? You don't think the defense makes two successful series in a row, do you?

 

You guys are talking like we didn't already have a lead, and we didn't get points out of the turnover. We did have a lead, and we did extend our lead. A competent defense would have held it. Shit, a Reeves-era defense would have held it!

 

If you want to blame Gilbride for something, maybe it should be that he assumed our defense would be able to hold a 6 point lead for two minutes like a real NFL defense would. Silly Gilbride.

 

Could it be that maybe, just maybe, our defense has sucked over the last 4 games and cost us 3 of them? I don't know how you look at the final scores, the consistent breakdowns in coverage on both run and pass plays, and the inability of the players on the field to tackle; and come up with any other conclusion.

 

It's insane how the only things coming out of this forum after getting absolutely slaughtered by halftime in two games and a complete defensive meltdown in the final minutes in a third is to blame the offensive coordinator.

[NightFire]

We didn't get the job done 2-2 and 3-1 in the first drive. What possible reason do you have to think it would happen 4th and 4?

 

Again, show me where in that last drive that the defense seemed capable of stopping the Chargers AT JUST A FIELD GOAL. We don't make it on 4th and 4, and we lose anyway. With the way our defense "held," Rivers could have started in the back of the end zone and still would have gotten a touchdown.

 

But just for the sake of argument, let's say that the defense does something that they haven't been able to do for the last 4 games, and actually do keep them out of the end zone in a critical series. (You know, maybe a receiver drops a wide-open ball, or Sproles doesn't tie his laces and trips.) The Chargers get the field goal and the game goes into OT. With the goal line stand and the drive for the field goal, who has the momentum going into overtime? You don't think the defense makes two successful series in a row, do you?

 

You guys are talking like we didn't already have a lead, and we didn't get points out of the turnover. We did have a lead, and we did extend our lead. A competent defense would have held it. Shit, a Reeves-era defense would have held it!

 

If you want to blame Gilbride for something, maybe it should be that he assumed our defense would be able to hold a 6 point lead for two minutes like a real NFL defense would. Silly Gilbride.

 

Could it be that maybe, just maybe, our defense has sucked over the last 4 games and cost us 3 of them? I don't know how you look at the final scores, the consistent breakdowns in coverage on both run and pass plays, and the inability of the players on the field to tackle; and come up with any other conclusion.

 

It's insane how the only things coming out of this forum after getting absolutely slaughtered by halftime in two games and a complete defensive meltdown in the final minutes in a third is to blame the offensive coordinator.

 

Fishgut I got your back and I concur that Gilbride gets more blame then he deserves. He may not be an all star OC but he's decent and bad execution has killed the Giants in 2 games. Manningham's drop in the Arizona game and 2 running attempts for 2 yards on the first drive that failed are not the OC's fault. Storm also contradicts himself often by stating that Gilbride should mix things up but attacks Gilbride for trying a deep throw on 3rd and 1. Hell the Giants could have also easily lost the Dallas game if they hadn't scored 33 points. If anybody thinks the Giants can score 30+ points a game with any OC they are delusional. The Giants are not the Saints. Also our Red Zone D is a real problem.

 

The one criticism I will agree with is that the Giants should have went for it on that last drive. Being down by 3 or 6 is basically the same thing but that's Coughlin's fault as he has final say. Then again if the Chargers get a field goal and win in overtime Coughlin's taking the heat again anyway.

[JackStroud]

It seems in the past we always had a solid core of back up safteys to turn to as 5th men and injury placements

 

kevin dockery etc...........where have all those guys gone? Did Reese and Coughlin just let them walk away?

[fishgutmartyr]

Fishgut I got your back and I concur that Gilbride gets more blame then he deserves. He may not be an all star OC but he's decent and bad execution has killed the Giants in 2 games. Manningham's drop in the Arizona game and 2 running attempts for 2 yards on the first drive that failed are not the OC's fault. Storm also contradicts himself often by stating that Gilbride should mix things up but attacks Gilbride for trying a deep throw on 3rd and 1. Hell the Giants could have also easily lost the Dallas game if they hadn't scored 33 points. If anybody thinks the Giants can score 30+ points a game with any OC they are delusional. The Giants are not the Saints. Also our Red Zone D is a real problem.

 

The one criticism I will agree with is that the Giants should have went for it on that last drive. Being down by 3 or 6 is basically the same thing but that's Coughlin's fault as he has final say. Then again if the Chargers get a field goal and win in overtime Coughlin's taking the heat again anyway.

Thanks, it's gotten to the point where I defend the guy in situations I normally wouldn't.

 

If the defense was anything approaching competent, I still think how that last series went down wouldn't have been that bad. It should have set up the defense to succeed, and possibly get another turnover--San Diego was throwing virtually every play in that situation. The problem was nothing the defense did stopped it.

 

In hindsight, considering the defense's complete inability to stop anybody in a consistent manner, maybe they should have went for it. But the only way it would have mattered in the outcome would have been a TD. Anything short of that, and the defense would have blown the game.

[fringe]

We didn't get the job done 2-2 and 3-1 in the first drive. What possible reason do you have to think it would happen 4th and 4?

 

we had gained 10 yards back with the run. i think a play action would've gotten us in. don't you think peyton or brady or ben would've been given the chance to get the ball in the end zone? we were playing not to lose and when you do that, you lose. the blame rests squarely on coughlin. and if eli had balls, he would've thrown some chairs in coughlin's office and said "you paid me, now let me work."

[fishgutmartyr]

we had gained 10 yards back with the run. i think a play action would've gotten us in. don't you think peyton or brady or ben would've been given the chance to get the ball in the end zone? we were playing not to lose and when you do that, you lose. the blame rests squarely on coughlin. and if eli had balls, he would've thrown some chairs in coughlin's office and said "you paid me, now let me work."

I don't know if it would have, Blu. 4th and 4 is a passing down, and you can't really disguise that.

 

We don't know what Eli thought, and I don't know if Pitts or Indy would have felt as urgent a need to get a touchdown at that point as you guys do. A six point lead usually gives you the game.

[fishgutmartyr]

Fucking Gilbride...

 

1. Bolder coaching. The two series late in the fourth quarter underscored the Giants’ shocking 21-20 loss to the Chargers. The Giants had a 1st and goal from the Chargers’ 4 after Terrell Thomas’ interception return. But they pulled in their horns with the play-calling, especially after Chris Snee was called for holding. Two straight runs up the middle by Brandon Jacobs, and the Giants had to settle for a field goal and a 20-14 lead. Score a touchdown there, and the game is over. But the Giants played not to lose, and they lost. A source familiar with the Giants’ play-calling told me that Eli Manning was the one who decided to check out of a pass play on the third-and-goal from the 9 and have Jacobs run it. Head coach Tom Coughlin and offensive coordinator Kevin Gilbride have taken the bulk of the criticism, but put Manning in there, too. You’ve got to take ashot at the endzone.

[NightFire]

Fucking Gilbride...

 

This is something I have wanted to bring up more. It's really hard to tell who is causing the issues and with the forever play calling time, how many balls are hiked with 5 seconds or less, I have the feeling Eli is calling a lot of the plays at the line. If he wasn't the ball would be out much faster as he wouldn't be changing anything. Hell we hear Omaha so often because you better hike it soon or it's going to delay of game.

 

Also the O has played decent and as far as I am concerned the O problems are execution. Also if Tuck was gassed on that last drive, as posters have reported, then he needs to stop doing commercials and hit the bike more. The Giants O held the ball for more than enough time for the D to be rested.

[Storm]

Fishgut I got your back and I concur that Gilbride gets more blame then he deserves. He may not be an all star OC but he's decent and bad execution has killed the Giants in 2 games. Manningham's drop in the Arizona game and 2 running attempts for 2 yards on the first drive that failed are not the OC's fault. Storm also contradicts himself often by stating that Gilbride should mix things up but attacks Gilbride for trying a deep throw on 3rd and 1. Hell the Giants could have also easily lost the Dallas game if they hadn't scored 33 points. If anybody thinks the Giants can score 30+ points a game with any OC they are delusional. The Giants are not the Saints. Also our Red Zone D is a real problem.

 

The one criticism I will agree with is that the Giants should have went for it on that last drive. Being down by 3 or 6 is basically the same thing but that's Coughlin's fault as he has final say. Then again if the Chargers get a field goal and win in overtime Coughlin's taking the heat again anyway.

 

I have never once advocated a 3rd and 1 bomb because that's stupid. That has nothing to do with mixing it up. You obviously attempt to extend the drive on 3rd and 1.

 

Now, I would prefer some misdirection and movement with Bradshaw and runs up the gut with Jacobs or off tackle. Not the other way around like what's been happening. I want to see a screen to Bradshaw...a called screen, not a dump off pass. I want to see more playaction.

 

I don't, however, want to see 1 drive where we run the ball and get stuffed twice and end up in 3rd and long. I also do not want to see us throw deep or even passed the 1st down markers on 3 successive plays either. The run sets up the pass and though we end up with a "balanced" offense in terms of runs vs passes, we just don't get that rhythm going on a typical offensive series. We look completely out of sync and to argue otherwise is putting your head in the sand.

 

And yes, the one thing you've got right about your post that I did actually say is the one thing you claim to agree with fish on (though his post states otherwise):

 

"The one criticism I will agree with is that the Giants should have went for it on that last drive. Being down by 3 or 6 is basically the same thing but that's Coughlin's fault as he has final say. Then again if the Chargers get a field goal and win in overtime Coughlin's taking the heat again anyway."

[Treehugger]

Fishgut I got your back and I concur that Gilbride gets more blame then he deserves. He may not be an all star OC but he's decent and bad execution has killed the Giants in 2 games. Manningham's drop in the Arizona game and 2 running attempts for 2 yards on the first drive that failed are not the OC's fault. Storm also contradicts himself often by stating that Gilbride should mix things up but attacks Gilbride for trying a deep throw on 3rd and 1. Hell the Giants could have also easily lost the Dallas game if they hadn't scored 33 points. If anybody thinks the Giants can score 30+ points a game with any OC they are delusional. The Giants are not the Saints. Also our Red Zone D is a real problem.

 

The one criticism I will agree with is that the Giants should have went for it on that last drive. Being down by 3 or 6 is basically the same thing but that's Coughlin's fault as he has final say. Then again if the Chargers get a field goal and win in overtime Coughlin's taking the heat again anyway.

Even if he pulled Jacobs on 3rd & 1 and tried to a power run up the middle with Bradshaw instead? That was designed to fail.

[Mr. P]

i dont like gilbride. but i do agree he gets too much of the blame too much of the time.

[JackStroud]

i dont like gilbride. but i do agree he gets too much of the blame too much of the time.

 

I think you have to start citicizing the oline

 

they are not what they once were.....they always were a bit of the over-achievers

its catching up with their not so caddilac bodies

[ksm7]

I think you have to start citicizing the oline

 

they are not what they once were.....they always were a bit of the over-achievers

its catching up with their not so caddilac bodies

 

the dog would have to agree here...great o-line play in recent years have helped to cover weaknesses in jacobs abilities and inconsistencies on the QB position.

[Treehugger]

It could be because the OLine's performance has slumped, or it could be because our playcalling has become predictable and more easily countered by opposing defenses.

[JackStroud]

i just hope this does not turn into an 11 game losing streak

 

that is beginning to seem possible