If you're not outraged at this season....

[Herc]

straw man

[Allstarjim]

There's really nothing left to say except that the Dog is as you said, Storm, a condescending Dolt who doesn't know half about football that he claims to know.

 

I honestly don't know why he hasn't been banned because he is the biggest troll here and he's been doing it for a long time. We that have watched the games know what we are talking about. The Dog just looks up stats and then cherry picks them to fit his ill-conceived arguments... anyone can do this. Real truth comes from observation and comprehensive analysis. Few people watch more football than I do. I readily admit that, as my wife says, I'm obsessed. Storm, you and I know what others like the Dog will refuse to admit. Miscommunications between QB and receiver were common this year and let to a lot more INT's. Tipped balls were also a big problem. Without those two factors Eli's INT total is going to be in the 10-15 range.

 

Of course, we would all love to see the footage of these NFL players talking about their pre-snap read offense they ran in high school. If anything proves that guy is a disingenious troll it was that statement. You have no idea what you are talking about when it concerns the NY Giants offense. We saw it multiple times every game, drives stalling or resulting in turnovers because QB and WR could not get on the same page. We would see the same thing over and over, Eli talking to receiver on the sidelines with receiver having a confused or frustrated look on his face. What we didn't see was a 2 minute offense being ran, which Eli excels at, we didn't see barely any play action, and we didn't see much misdirection. That's the point when I say this offense lacked imagination and was to predictable for defenses to defend. And, as you so astutely stated earlier, a lot of us blamed Sheridan last season for the poor performance of the defense. Apparently, Coughlin and the NYG front office agreed with us because he was FIRED after only 1 season. Difference this time is that I have defended Gilbride here for a few years, and at times I have been critical.... but this season was his poorest season I have seen, and we cannot tolerate more of the same.... we are watching the game pass someone by right before our eyes. The younger coaches in the league understand that in today's NFL, the defenses are going to give you a couple of different looks before the snap and will then do something entirely different when the ball is snapped.

 

Anyways, I came here to talk football with Giants fans and even some good sporting fans of other teams are ok, like DFNG. Welcome to ignore, Dog. I'm done reading and responding to your nonsensical arguments. For all the crap Jack gets around here, he makes a ton more sense than you.

[ksm7]

There's really nothing left to say except that the Dog is as you said, Storm, a condescending Dolt who doesn't know half about football that he claims to know.

 

I honestly don't know why he hasn't been banned because he is the biggest troll here and he's been doing it for a long time. We that have watched the games know what we are talking about. The Dog just looks up stats and then cherry picks them to fit his ill-conceived arguments... anyone can do this. Real truth comes from observation and comprehensive analysis. Few people watch more football than I do. I readily admit that, as my wife says, I'm obsessed. Storm, you and I know what others like the Dog will refuse to admit. Miscommunications between QB and receiver were common this year and let to a lot more INT's. Tipped balls were also a big problem. Without those two factors Eli's INT total is going to be in the 10-15 range.

 

Of course, we would all love to see the footage of these NFL players talking about their pre-snap read offense they ran in high school. If anything proves that guy is a disingenious troll it was that statement. You have no idea what you are talking about when it concerns the NY Giants offense. We saw it multiple times every game, drives stalling or resulting in turnovers because QB and WR could not get on the same page. We would see the same thing over and over, Eli talking to receiver on the sidelines with receiver having a confused or frustrated look on his face. What we didn't see was a 2 minute offense being ran, which Eli excels at, we didn't see barely any play action, and we didn't see much misdirection. That's the point when I say this offense lacked imagination and was to predictable for defenses to defend. And, as you so astutely stated earlier, a lot of us blamed Sheridan last season for the poor performance of the defense. Apparently, Coughlin and the NYG front office agreed with us because he was FIRED after only 1 season. Difference this time is that I have defended Gilbride here for a few years, and at times I have been critical.... but this season was his poorest season I have seen, and we cannot tolerate more of the same.... we are watching the game pass someone by right before our eyes. The younger coaches in the league understand that in today's NFL, the defenses are going to give you a couple of different looks before the snap and will then do something entirely different when the ball is snapped.

 

Anyways, I came here to talk football with Giants fans and even some good sporting fans of other teams are ok, like DFNG. Welcome to ignore, Dog. I'm done reading and responding to your nonsensical arguments. For all the crap Jack gets around here, he makes a ton more sense than you.

 

ok jim. ok. the dog is sure you were on the sidelines observing all of what you say. look, you call it as you see it, the dog calls it as the dog sees it. you want to jump to insults right away as you did, then you are worse than what you think the dog is. you know so much about football, yet you attack the dog's thoughts (and others) regarding head coaches and cowher...etc...then you get all the facts wrong and now say the dog doesn't know what he is talking about. you and storm and others think that coaching is as simple as you see it. guess what, it is not...for all the reasons the dog has pointed out to you that you both choose to ignore or dismiss. you all argue that eli had a bad year in terms of turnovers, and point blame at the OC because the schemes are so confusing for the young receivers, yet last year he had his best year statistically, with the same receivers just one year younger in the same system, and you choose to ignore that b/c as you say, it doesn't fit your argument. say what you want, there were plenty of examples of manning throwing into coverage that was not a result of confusion....here, the dog will take a page from your book and simplify it - hey eli, man (or two or three men) in your passing vision, don't throw the ball there...bradshaw/jacobs/manning funble the ball away and don't protect it, resulting in missed opportunities to score, and that is gillbride's fault for low point totals in the losses...really? you can't be that ignorant, or to use your words, that doltish. but then again, you believed tom flores won a super bowl with the raiders and with the rams as a head coach...well all knowing football guru couch potato arm chair QB, the dog can't begin to tell you how many things are wrong with that. one being, any fan of the game would know that the rams won a super bowl only once, and that was while they were in st. louis, and it was roughly a decade after flores retired, not as the coach of the rams mind you, b/c he never coached there, but as the coach of the seahawks. what your too blind to see is that you are a walking contradiction...gillbride's offense has no imagination you all argue, yet you want to simplify it and have them run basic patterns at the NFL level...yeah, that makes sense. how about finishing 8th in the league in scoring with a patched together o-line, two backs that can't hold onto the ball, and a QB that is as inconsistent as the day is long....try calling plays with that on your plate bill walsh...of course, bill walsh may be a bad example, as clearly from storm's perspective his idea of scripting the first 10-15 plays is stupid and valueless, super bowl wins be damned...

[BadEgg]

ok jim. ok. the dog is sure you were on the sidelines observing all of what you say. look, you call it as you see it, the dog calls it as the dog sees it. you want to jump to insults right away as you did, then you are worse than what you think the dog is. you know so much about football, yet you attack the dog's thoughts (and others) regarding head coaches and cowher...etc...then you get all the facts wrong and now say the dog doesn't know what he is talking about. you and storm and others think that coaching is as simple as you see it. guess what, it is not...for all the reasons the dog has pointed out to you that you both choose to ignore or dismiss. you all argue that eli had a bad year in terms of turnovers, and point blame at the OC because the schemes are so confusing for the young receivers, yet last year he had his best year statistically, with the same receivers just one year younger in the same system, and you choose to ignore that b/c as you say, it doesn't fit your argument. say what you want, there were plenty of examples of manning throwing into coverage that was not a result of confusion....here, the dog will take a page from your book and simplify it - hey eli, man (or two or three men) in your passing vision, don't throw the ball there...bradshaw/jacobs/manning funble the ball away and don't protect it, resulting in missed opportunities to score, and that is gillbride's fault for low point totals in the losses...really? you can't be that ignorant, or to use your words, that doltish. but then again, you believed tom flores won a super bowl with the raiders and with the rams as a head coach...well all knowing football guru couch potato arm chair QB, the dog can't begin to tell you how many things are wrong with that. one being, any fan of the game would know that the rams won a super bowl only once, and that was while they were in st. louis, and it was roughly a decade after flores retired, not as the coach of the rams mind you, b/c he never coached there, but as the coach of the seahawks. what your too blind to see is that you are a walking contradiction...gillbride's offense has no imagination you all argue, yet you want to simplify it and have them run basic patterns at the NFL level...yeah, that makes sense. how about finishing 8th in the league in scoring with a patched together o-line, two backs that can't hold onto the ball, and a QB that is as inconsistent as the day is long....try calling plays with that on your plate bill walsh...of course, bill walsh may be a bad example, as clearly from storm's perspective his idea of scripting the first 10-15 plays is stupid and valueless, super bowl wins be damned...

 

 

Please allow me to simplify this convoluted thread:

 

1) The Giants have some undisciplined players who do not execute on both sides of the ball and who should be more consistent and should protect the ball better at this stage of their careers.

 

2) The Giants have a coaching staff that, for whatever reason, cannot get through to these players and correct the problems.

 

3) Add in an aging o-line and they're are too many issues to fix in 1 off season, assuming and this is a big "if", TC is the man for the job.

 

4) This makes Cowboys fans alll over the world happy.

[Nas]

Please allow me to simplify this convoluted thread:

 

1) The Giants have some undisciplined players who do not execute on both sides of the ball and who should be more consistent and should protect the ball better at this stage of their careers.

 

2) The Giants have a coaching staff that, for whatever reason, cannot get through to these players and correct the problems.

 

3) Add in an aging o-line and they're are too many issues to fix in 1 off season, assuming and this is a big "if", TC is the man for the job.

 

4) This makes Cowboys fans alll over the world happy.

 

Our O-line is still one of the best in the league. They were pushing mountains before the injuries took a toll.

 

TC is the man for the Job.

 

Yes we're aware what makes the cowboy fans happy.. although we can say we finished 10-6.. not 6-10. The focus now shifts to the Eagles.. we know who you and I will be rooting for this weekend

[Storm]

ok jim. ok. the dog is sure you were on the sidelines observing all of what you say. look, you call it as you see it, the dog calls it as the dog sees it. you want to jump to insults right away as you did, then you are worse than what you think the dog is. you know so much about football, yet you attack the dog's thoughts (and others) regarding head coaches and cowher...etc...then you get all the facts wrong and now say the dog doesn't know what he is talking about. you and storm and others think that coaching is as simple as you see it. guess what, it is not...for all the reasons the dog has pointed out to you that you both choose to ignore or dismiss. you all argue that eli had a bad year in terms of turnovers, and point blame at the OC because the schemes are so confusing for the young receivers, yet last year he had his best year statistically, with the same receivers just one year younger in the same system, and you choose to ignore that b/c as you say, it doesn't fit your argument. say what you want, there were plenty of examples of manning throwing into coverage that was not a result of confusion....here, the dog will take a page from your book and simplify it - hey eli, man (or two or three men) in your passing vision, don't throw the ball there...bradshaw/jacobs/manning funble the ball away and don't protect it, resulting in missed opportunities to score, and that is gillbride's fault for low point totals in the losses...really? you can't be that ignorant, or to use your words, that doltish. but then again, you believed tom flores won a super bowl with the raiders and with the rams as a head coach...well all knowing football guru couch potato arm chair QB, the dog can't begin to tell you how many things are wrong with that. one being, any fan of the game would know that the rams won a super bowl only once, and that was while they were in st. louis, and it was roughly a decade after flores retired, not as the coach of the rams mind you, b/c he never coached there, but as the coach of the seahawks. what your too blind to see is that you are a walking contradiction...gillbride's offense has no imagination you all argue, yet you want to simplify it and have them run basic patterns at the NFL level...yeah, that makes sense. how about finishing 8th in the league in scoring with a patched together o-line, two backs that can't hold onto the ball, and a QB that is as inconsistent as the day is long....try calling plays with that on your plate bill walsh...of course, bill walsh may be a bad example, as clearly from storm's perspective his idea of scripting the first 10-15 plays is stupid and valueless, super bowl wins be damned...

 

I think we go to "insults" (quotations because dolt isn't an insult in your case, it's a lot better than what I could have wrote and speaks the truth) because you're a sarcastic and condescending know it all who, with his statements, clearly thinks he knows more about football than everyone else. And hey, we're all armchair quarterbacks come Sunday, but you're view is apparently more correct than ours....though WE'RE the guys that as you put it, are to insert sarcasm--"standing on the sidelines"...like you somehow need to be to form an opinion. Nor do any of us think we could do better because, hey, none of us have ever coached football in the pros. But at least some of us here are being critical of the status quo that so obviously needs an adjustment or else we're going to see more 8-8, 9-7, seasons from Tom Coughlin and company.

[ksm7]

I think we go to "insults" (quotations because dolt isn't an insult in your case, it's a lot better than what I could have wrote and speaks the truth) because you're a sarcastic and condescending know it all who, with his statements, clearly thinks he knows more about football than everyone else. And hey, we're all armchair quarterbacks come Sunday, but you're view is apparently more correct than ours....though WE'RE the guys that as you put it, are to insert sarcasm--"standing on the sidelines"...like you somehow need to be to form an opinion. Nor do any of us think we could do better because, hey, none of us have ever coached football in the pros. But at least some of us here are being critical of the status quo that so obviously needs an adjustment or else we're going to see more 8-8, 9-7, seasons from Tom Coughlin and company.

 

right, right. and the dog is sure that you forcefully regurgitating your basic opinions is not the same thing being done - review what you write, and tell the dog that you are not acting as a know it all hothead...in fact, if memory serves correctly, it was only a few months ago when a number of people were hammering you for this kind of thing. and you can form all the opinions you want, that is what this if for, but if you are going to state as fact that you know the system was too complex based on what you observed, and in allstarjim's case, what he apparently witnesses that was taking place on the sidelines/field in conversation form between the players, well, you best be able to solidify that you were there to see it...like it or not, the dog has backed everything up with facts. facts you choose to dismiss. you're being critical, but not looking at it with a critical eye. deal with it. the coaching is not the number one issue, and the facts support it. you want to shake things up, fine...just know that given what is out there, with new coaching, this team may start achieving on par with their current talent level, and that just may result in you longing for the days of 10-6...

[RandolphScott]

Aging offensive line?

 

Didn't the Giants give up like only 15 or 16 sacks this year and rarely had their top 5 guys playing?

 

 

Typical Cowboys fan, fucking stupid.

[Nas]

right, right. and the dog is sure that you forcefully regurgitating your basic opinions is not the same thing being done - review what you write, and tell the dog that you are not acting as a know it all hothead...in fact, if memory serves correctly, it was only a few months ago when a number of people were hammering you for this kind of thing. and you can form all the opinions you want, that is what this if for, but if you are going to state as fact that you know the system was too complex based on what you observed, and in allstarjim's case, what he apparently witnesses that was taking place on the sidelines/field in conversation form between the players, well, you best be able to solidify that you were there to see it...like it or not, the dog has backed everything up with facts. facts you choose to dismiss. you're being critical, but not looking at it with a critical eye. deal with it. the coaching is not the number one issue, and the facts support it. you want to shake things up, fine...just know that given what is out there, with new coaching, this team may start achieving on par with their current talent level, and that just may result in you longing for the days of 10-6...

 

Idon't know, Dog. This team has more than enough talent to go 13-3 on any given season. The outrageous # of turnovers is what killed us.. and that alone is out of any team's character. Even if we make 0 changes in the off-season this team will have another year under its belt... Part of the problem is coaching.

[RandolphScott]

Worry about your own team BadEgg, and let us worry about the Giants.

[BadEgg]

Aging offensive line?

 

Didn't the Giants give up like only 15 or 16 sacks this year and rarely had their top 5 guys playing?

 

 

Typical Cowboys fan, fucking stupid.

 

Yea...aging, dumbass. I didn't say old. Aging.

 

Most of these jokers are over 30. I believe O'hara is like 33 and been around 11 years. Mckenzie will be 32 in May. I think Diehl/Seubter will be 31/32 by next season. I Snee/Andrews are still in their late 20's but I think its safe to say that when you are pushing 32/33 you are aging as far as an offensive lineman goes. Not old, but aging.

 

I also think it's safe to say that, when you are aging, you are more prone to injury. Hence, that is why there top 5 guys were rarely playing together this season.

 

If the Giants are smart, they address this aging line in the offseason. They certainly don't want Eli panicking under pressure and doing anymore left handed jump shots from the 5 yard line...

[JackStroud]

The O Line for the most part performed well but in "Dog Years" its 95 yrs old......like Coughlin

 

These are the two most aged parts of our presentation

 

It needs work

 

Look what happened to the Knicks...........they discarded 80% of the roster, shuffled the deck, added one super star and are now tearing up the NBA

 

As I said before, you can bring in one catalyst (like Justin Tuck on Specials 4-5 yrs ago) and the whole team mojo can upgrade tremendously

 

This team seemed stale to me this year..........still not over the post SB blues.......they lacked killer instinct as Carl Banks, Strahan and Tiki pointed out

 

They could not bury people, and put them away...........only beat one winning team

 

I think Coughlin is a poor motivator , and has lost his edge as he aged......good coach, poor motivator, and cannot remain calm in the midst of chaos- contrast his sidelines demeanor with Tom Landry or Lovie Smith

[RandolphScott]

Yea...aging, dumbass. I didn't say old. Aging.

 

Most of these jokers are over 30. I believe O'hara is like 33 and been around 11 years. Mckenzie will be 32 in May. I think Diehl/Seubter will be 31/32 by next season. I Snee/Andrews are still in their late 20's but I think its safe to say that when you are pushing 32/33 you are aging as far as an offensive lineman goes. Not old, but aging.

 

I also think it's safe to say that, when you are aging, you are more prone to injury. Hence, that is why there top 5 guys were rarely playing together this season.

 

If the Giants are smart, they address this aging line in the offseason. They certainly don't want Eli panicking under pressure and doing anymore left handed jump shots from the 5 yard line...

 

 

Yet, we had guys like William Beatty step in, Adam Koets and Kevin Boothe play and the offensive line was just fine.

 

I didn't say the world old either, you did...stop making shit up.

 

Kareem McKenzie had a great year aside from the Colts game and graded out as a top tackle in the game this year.

 

All this and YOUR offensive line got two QBs knocked out this year.

[JackStroud]

certainly the O-line and LBer continue to be our two biggest areas of concern.......the oline played well in spots but they were not consistent and they are like bananas with the black spots on them......still good but in the autumn of their existence

 

As for Dallas and Washington, watch out, they will soon be breathing down our necks

[BadEgg]

Yet, we had guys like William Beatty step in, Adam Koets and Kevin Boothe play and the offensive line was just fine.

 

I didn't say the world old either, you did...stop making shit up.

 

Kareem McKenzie had a great year aside from the Colts game and graded out as a top tackle in the game this year.

 

All this and YOUR offensive line got two QBs knocked out this year.

 

By all means, go with Beatty, Koets, and Boothe next season when the injury bug bites the older guys again. And you will be home for the playoffs again. Hopefully Gilbride will be around to blame.

 

And because McKenzie has a good year this year he will most certainly have a good year next year.

 

I do think the Cowboys need to revamp their line. Though a blown assignment by a backup full back, not the oline, was the main cause for Romo's injury.

[Steitzenhaus]

certainly the O-line and LBer continue to be our two biggest areas of concern.......the oline played well in spots but they were not consistent and they are like bananas with the black spots on them......still good but in the autumn of their existence

 

As for Dallas and Washington, watch out, they will soon be breathing down our necks

 

 

That's a funny analogy Jack. The line is still good, but it's time to start preparing for the future. Beatty showed flashes and Petrus supposedly has plenty of physical ability so I think the team has a good start with youth and depth. I hope they resign Boothe he's only 27, has been with the team a while and knows the system. I'm really interested to see what they do at linebacker. I don't follow too much college football but I read up on who's coming out right around this time of year. They say Ayers from UCLA has the potential to play any linebacker position. I don't know where he is expected to go in the first round but he sounds like a good option.

[JackStroud]

By all means, go with Beatty, Koets, and Boothe next season when the injury bug bites the older guys again. And you will be home for the playoffs again. Hopefully Gilbride will be around to blame.

 

And because McKenzie has a good year this year he will most certainly have a good year next year.

 

I do think the Cowboys need to revamp their line. Though a blown assignment by a backup full back, not the oline, was the main cause for Romo's injury.

 

neither team has the 7 blocks of Granite but Boothe, Koets and Beatty are good players...........Boothe was the guy opening holes when we were doing 8-10 yds per carry

[Storm]

right, right. and the dog is sure that you forcefully regurgitating your basic opinions is not the same thing being done - review what you write, and tell the dog that you are not acting as a know it all hothead...in fact, if memory serves correctly, it was only a few months ago when a number of people were hammering you for this kind of thing. and you can form all the opinions you want, that is what this if for, but if you are going to state as fact that you know the system was too complex based on what you observed, and in allstarjim's case, what he apparently witnesses that was taking place on the sidelines/field in conversation form between the players, well, you best be able to solidify that you were there to see it...like it or not, the dog has backed everything up with facts. facts you choose to dismiss. you're being critical, but not looking at it with a critical eye. deal with it. the coaching is not the number one issue, and the facts support it. you want to shake things up, fine...just know that given what is out there, with new coaching, this team may start achieving on par with their current talent level, and that just may result in you longing for the days of 10-6...

 

 

Yet you know for a fact that every team in the NFL, every college team, and most high school football teams tell their wide receivers and quarterbacks to run whatever you think will work based on the defense. You must have been privy to numerous team meetings and locker room discussions. Yet these are the "facts" you speak of. Bite me, Dog.

 

I've given you numerous stats about our anemic PPG against good teams. Our worse-than-the-Bills 3rd down conversion percentage. The fact that Eli and the receivers suddenly were no longer on the same page this season creating many more turnovers. These are also observable facts. More so than your stellar assertion that every team ever runs their offense this way.

[ksm7]

 

Yet you know for a fact that every team in the NFL, every college team, and most high school football teams tell their wide receivers and quarterbacks to run whatever you think will work based on the defense. You must have been privy to numerous team meetings and locker room discussions. Yet these are the "facts" you speak of. Bite me, Dog.

 

I've given you numerous stats about our anemic PPG against good teams. Our worse-than-the-Bills 3rd down conversion percentage. The fact that Eli and the receivers suddenly were no longer on the same page this season creating many more turnovers. These are also observable facts. More so than your stellar assertion that every team ever runs their offense this way.

 

and the dog has twice now countered your PPG argument on two threads with facts that support the notion that it is not on the OC...but you ignore or dismiss. the fact that eli and the wr were apparently not on the same page on a regular basis (which certainly cannot be proven) was not an issue last year (um, again, same system, same receivers, one year younger)...so why is it suddenly an issue? and every team does run option routes with their receivers on every play...not every receiver mind you, as some run specific patterns in an effort to open up other routes, but every play has at least one or two receivers running option routes...that is a fact. look it up. read a book or two, or simply watch any analysis show on any given sunday where they break down plays...it is not that hard. but again, get a new OC...the dog has seen josh mcdaniels name thrown around a little, and lord knows he doesn't run a complicated offense filled with option routes...the point being, given the success this offense has had over the years, once again, and the dog truly is patient, be careful what you wish for, because the odds are you will get worse at that position...

[Storm]

I've yet to see any of these counters. Care to explain the worse than the Billls 3rd down conversion percentage? Oh yeah, we were calling pass plays on 3rd and long that were not passed the first down marker. WR screens....draws....what have you.

 

And given what you have just told me....perhaps the Giants designate a single receiver to run the option routes. Perhaps Steve Smith was the one running these notorious option routes to set up other receivers? In fact, I think it's pretty likely he WAS the one running them last year as well, to set up the more physically talented players. So tell me, smart guy, when Steve Smith goes down and quite possibly that job falls to either Manningham or Nicks, and it turns out they aren't able to do it effectively, which they weren't, wouldn't you simplify what you were asking them to do? This is what I'm trying to drive through your head. Not the fact that we've been doing it for the past couple seasons, more the fact that our wide receivers weren't doing it THIS YEAR (because who cares about last year's mediocre 8-8 season) so you make the adjustments. Similar to how Fassel simplified Payton's "Freak Out" before the snap offense.

[Nas]

and the dog has twice now countered your PPG argument on two threads with facts that support the notion that it is not on the OC...but you ignore or dismiss. the fact that eli and the wr were apparently not on the same page on a regular basis (which certainly cannot be proven) was not an issue last year (um, again, same system, same receivers, one year younger)...so why is it suddenly an issue? and every team does run option routes with their receivers on every play...not every receiver mind you, as some run specific patterns in an effort to open up other routes, but every play has at least one or two receivers running option routes...that is a fact. look it up. read a book or two, or simply watch any analysis show on any given sunday where they break down plays...it is not that hard. but again, get a new OC...the dog has seen josh mcdaniels name thrown around a little, and lord knows he doesn't run a complicated offense filled with option routes...the point being, given the success this offense has had over the years, once again, and the dog truly is patient, be careful what you wish for, because the odds are you will get worse at that position...

 

I admire your take on this.. but now the hard part... what do you really think the problems are with the NY Giants then?

[ksm7]

I've yet to see any of these counters. Care to explain the worse than the Billls 3rd down conversion percentage? Oh yeah, we were calling pass plays on 3rd and long that were not passed the first down marker. WR screens....draws....what have you.

 

And given what you have just told me....perhaps the Giants designate a single receiver to run the option routes. Perhaps Steve Smith was the one running these notorious option routes to set up other receivers? In fact, I think it's pretty likely he WAS the one running them last year as well, to set up the more physically talented players. So tell me, smart guy, when Steve Smith goes down and quite possibly that job falls to either Manningham or Nicks, and it turns out they aren't able to do it effectively, which they weren't, wouldn't you simplify what you were asking them to do? This is what I'm trying to drive through your head. Not the fact that we've been doing it for the past couple seasons, more the fact that our wide receivers weren't doing it THIS YEAR (because who cares about last year's mediocre 8-8 season) so you make the adjustments. Similar to how Fassel simplified Payton's "Freak Out" before the snap offense.

 

oh for the love of the lord...go back to this whole debate starting on page three and reread what the dog has written about the PPG...and genius, the giants ranked SEVENTH in the league in third down conversions this year. SEVENTH...as in only SIX teams were better than they were...as in they ranked AHEAD OF 25 OTHER TEAMS IN THIS CATEGORY...as in, oh never mind, you will never get it. never. but keep trying, this is fun for the dog...

 

as for the receivers, how do you know they don't get it? did you ever see any giant player ever comment and say, hey, we just need to get on the same page in the passing game? not once. and the fact that they did it well last year is relevant if you are going to argue that the same players this year can't grasp the same system. it goes beyond steve smith, who mind you, is only in his 4th year and mind you, was here for 9 games this year (manning's picks were happening long before his departure, and you yourself stated a number of times how careless he was with the ball)...

[ksm7]

oh for the love of the lord...go back to this whole debate starting on page three and reread what the dog has written about the PPG...and genius, the giants ranked SEVENTH in the league in third down conversions this year. SEVENTH...as in only SIX teams were better than they were...as in they ranked AHEAD OF 25 OTHER TEAMS IN THIS CATEGORY...as in, oh never mind, you will never get it. never. but keep trying, this is fun for the dog...

 

as for the receivers, how do you know they don't get it? did you ever see any giant player ever comment and say, hey, we just need to get on the same page in the passing game? not once. and the fact that they did it well last year is relevant if you are going to argue that the same players this year can't grasp the same system. it goes beyond steve smith, who mind you, is only in his 4th year and mind you, was here for 9 games this year (manning's picks were happening long before his departure, and you yourself stated a number of times how careless he was with the ball)...

 

here storm, the dog is feeling kind...this is what the dog wrote just one page ago:

 

well, let the dog take a look...hmm, they ranked 5th in total offense. 10th in passing yards. 6th in rushing. 8th in points scored (probably pretty important to rank high in that category, at least, well, if you are going to judge the offensive coordinator). manning threw for over 4000 yards despite your complaints. they had two average backs combine for over 2000 yards rushing. and here is something interesting, as the dog pointed out to you in another thread that you didn't seem to want to comprehend...in the loss against the titans - how many red zone turnovers were there? that will sure keep your point total down...thanks eli, ahmad and company. how about against the cowboys - hey, eli threw an interception on a BASIC slant route in the endzone that was returned for a TD...that will sure keep the point total down...let's analyze the packer game...after a rousing speech to fire up the troops, eli responded with 4 interceptions to compliment the two fumbles and 6 turn overs...yeah, that is all on gillbride, and yes, that will impact point total for another loss...let's see. the colts were up by 24 before you could blink an eye. not easy playing catch up at that point....and didn't eli fumble on the team's way to knotting up the eagle game, hence lowering point totals....hello? are you there?

 

and here is the 3rd down conversion stats for your viewing entertainment:

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/downs

 

now go call allstarjim and stroke eachother's egos...after this beating, you need it...

[Storm]

You're right, it is relevant to differentiate between this year and last year, since you're claiming some teams have one or two wide receivers who the duty of running option routes falls on. If that's Steve Smith or Mario Manningham most of the time, and suddenly Steve Smith goes down (just after the halfway mark of the season where he came back for one game and was injured for good)....and suddenly the duty falls to other players. Steve Smith was healthy all of last year. He wasn't this year. You were asking to explain why the same wide receivers were successful at doing it last year and not this year. That's a reason. You lose your most reliable wide receiver and fail to alter the gameplan and time after time it's pretty evident that the wide receivers aren't on the same page (it doesn't take them coming out to the media to say they don't grasp the offense to realize this) yet continue to implement the same offense when it leads to more turnovers

 

And in case you didn't realize, the Giants were fairly good the first half of the season with Smith around. They weren't afterwards. Now Steve Smith is good but he is by no means a game changer. He's a very solid possession wide receiver. Suffice to say, conclusions can be drawn that the gameplan revolves heavily around Smith drawing coverage and opening the field for Nicks (the physical beast) and Manningham (the speed and deep threat). Losing him hurt but good teams and good coaches find a way to alter the game plan so that the loss of a single player doesn't lead to turnovers and losses. Ours didn't. End of story.

[Nas]

You're right, it is relevant to differentiate between this year and last year, since you're claiming some teams have one or two wide receivers who the duty of running option routes falls on. If that's Steve Smith or Mario Manningham most of the time, and suddenly Steve Smith goes down (just after the halfway mark of the season where he came back for one game and was injured for good)....and suddenly the duty falls to other players. Steve Smith was healthy all of last year. He wasn't this year. You were asking to explain why the same wide receivers were successful at doing it last year and not this year. That's a reason. You lose your most reliable wide receiver and fail to alter the gameplan and time after time it's pretty evident that the wide receivers aren't on the same page (it doesn't take them coming out to the media to say they don't grasp the offense to realize this) yet continue to implement the same offense when it leads to more turnovers

 

And in case you didn't realize, the Giants were fairly good the first half of the season with Smith around. They weren't afterwards. Now Steve Smith is good but he is by no means a game changer. He's a very solid possession wide receiver. Suffice to say, conclusions can be drawn that the gameplan revolves heavily around Smith drawing coverage and opening the field for Nicks (the physical beast) and Manningham (the speed and deep threat). Losing him hurt but good teams and good coaches find a way to alter the game plan so that the loss of a single player doesn't lead to turnovers and losses. Ours didn't. End of story.

 

I think this has to do with our D being worn down. The Giants were scoring too quickly.. giving the D very little rest... this explains late game and late season collapses...