Top Contenders for '12 Superbowl

[Allstarjim]

12 yrs isn't a long time to be in the nfl , and as i've stated, he has been a good coach, and a respected coach around the nfl.

 

Let's see, in the games the giants lost, they were outscored 210 to 109. That's 6 games. Your defense gave up an average of 35 points in its 6 losses, and you don't think they deserve blame?

 

perhaps perry shares your philosophy on ypg, maybe his job hinges on making top ten in yards allowed instead of wins.

 

 

 

A while ago I showed in great detail who offensive miscues and special teams blunders created a lot of points for the opposition. The defense was very good this year, despite point totals. It's why looking at broad stats doesn't always tell the story.

 

There were 2 games in particular where I thought our defense was bad, which I do put on Fewell more than the players. The Indianapolis game and the Green Bay game. It was bewildering to me why Fewell consistently gave a 8 yard cushion off the line of scrimmage to GB receivers and Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers was fishing in a barrel that game. So, I am not singing Fewell's praises right now, but most of the time, he did a great job scheming against teams. It's a game by game analysis with these guys. But to say that the defense was the problem last season is simply not true. There were just too many turnovers and too much erratic play from specials that told the story of the Giants missing the playoffs with a 10-6 record.

[BIGBLUE01]

12 yrs isn't a long time to be in the nfl, and as i've stated, he has been a good coach, and a respected coach around the nfl.

 

Let's see, in the games the giants lost, they were outscored 210 to 109. That's 6 games. Your defense gave up an average of 35 points in its 6 losses, and you don't think they deserve blame?

 

perhaps perry shares your philosophy on ypg, maybe his job hinges on making top ten in yards allowed instead of wins.

 

Or maybe Perry was getting used to a new D, new players, etc. It was his 1st yr with this squad. He did do a stellar job vs all the rest, losing records or not. And remember, its the NFL, any given Sun. The Seahawks took out the Saints, and we dusted SEA.

 

I see your point, and youre right, other than CHI, we stomped whats considered to be subpar competitoion, and struggled vs better offenses. But it was his first yr with our guys. Bet you see somethin different this yr.

 

And most of all, as Jim pointed out....TURNOVERS.

[Cowboyz]

 

 

A while ago I showed in great detail who offensive miscues and special teams blunders created a lot of points for the opposition. The defense was very good this year, despite point totals. It's why looking at broad stats doesn't always tell the story.

 

There were 2 games in particular where I thought our defense was bad, which I do put on Fewell more than the players. The Indianapolis game and the Green Bay game. It was bewildering to me why Fewell consistently gave a 8 yard cushion off the line of scrimmage to GB receivers and Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers was fishing in a barrel that game. So, I am not singing Fewell's praises right now, but most of the time, he did a great job scheming against teams. It's a game by game analysis with these guys. But to say that the defense was the problem last season is simply not true. There were just too many turnovers and too much erratic play from specials that told the story of the Giants missing the playoffs with a 10-6 record.

 

interesting. i just posted how you were outscored by more than 100 pts in 6 games, and you choose to focus on the 12 year thing.

 

12 years in the league is not a long time relatively speaking for a coach to be in the nfl.

 

your defense was horrible against good competition. i put the blame mostly on fewell.

 

youre focusing on the fact that you missed the playoffs by one game.

 

i'm focusing on the fact you only beat one good team last year. and no, it wasn't the cowboys.

you wouldn't have beaten the bears had you faced them later in the season.

 

 

your counterparts are focusing on the 'broad stats' not myself. i'm looking purely at win-loss and scoring defense.

is there a better way to judge a defense?

 

there is a pattern to games in which fewell successfully gameplanned

 

matt moore

 

cutler (with poor oline play and a new offense)

 

drew stanton

 

charlie whitehurst

 

garrard

 

mcnabb

 

schaub

 

tarvaris jackson

 

rex grossman

 

 

 

yea some of these guys are better than other, but none of them are among the best in the league. how did fewell do vs the better qb's?

manning, brees, brady, rodgers, among others can just sit back and pick your defense apart.

 

who do you think you're gonna face in the playoffs if you get that extra win?

[Cowboyz]

Or maybe Perry was getting used to a new D, new players, etc. It was his 1st yr with this squad. He did do a stellar job vs all the rest, losing records or not. And remember, its the NFL, any given Sun. The Seahawks took out the Saints, and we dusted SEA.

 

I see your point, and youre right, other than CHI, we stomped whats considered to be subpar competitoion, and struggled vs better offenses. But it was his first yr with our guys. Bet you see somethin different this yr.

 

And most of all, as Jim pointed out....TURNOVERS.

 

 

it's perry's defense. the players are the one's who have to 'get used to it'

his problem is he lacks the personnel. drafting amukamara will help (if he's as good as advertised).

but in this scheme a middle lb who can drop into coverage is essential. boley's ok, but not a fit here.

 

 

gints beat the teams they were supposed to beat, and failed (in giant fashion) vs heavier competition.

is that really something that deserves kudos from the fans?

[BIGBLUE01]

it's perry's defense. the players are the one's who have to 'get used to it'

his problem is he lacks the personnel. drafting amukamara will help (if he's as good as advertised).

but in this scheme a middle lb who can drop into coverage is essential. boley's ok, but not a fit here.

 

 

gints beat the teams they were supposed to beat, and failed (in giant fashion) vs heavier competition.

is that really something that deserves kudos from the fans?

 

Either way, its still something that takes some gelling. And theres not ONE person here who doesnt think we need an MLB thats good. So that could be a big reason too. But what we give kudos too is winning when we should. A win is a win. We take the losses as something to learn from. At least we weren't dealing with a 10 loss season.

[Cowboyz]

Either way, its still something that takes some gelling. And theres not ONE person here who doesnt think we need an MLB thats good. So that could be a big reason too. But what we give kudos too is winning when we should. A win is a win. We take the losses as something to learn from. At least we weren't dealing with a 10 loss season.

 

 

so if i go back and look at pre-draft threads here, there's gonna be no talk about drafting a linebacker early?

i doubt it

[BIGBLUE01]

so if i go back and look at pre-draft threads here, there's gonna be no talk about drafting a linebacker early?

i doubt it

 

No, you may have misunderstood me, we ALL wanted an MLB early. We just didnt think one of value would fall to us at 19.

[Cowboyz]

No, you may have misunderstood me, we ALL wanted an MLB early. We just didnt think one of value would fall to us at 19.

 

 

so all of you thought a mlb was important before the draft, not so much when i point out the need for one.

gotcha

[BIGBLUE01]

so all of you thought a mlb was important before the draft, not so much when i point out the need for one.

gotcha

 

My bad, maybe Im the one who didnt see who was saying we didnt need an MLB when you pointed it out. Most, if not all here want a good MLB.

[NightFire]

so all of you thought a mlb was important before the draft, not so much when i point out the need for one.

gotcha

 

For years most posters have been asking for a 1st round LB and it just never happens. The Giants never draft for need and always draft for value. That's how you end up with 10 DEs.

[Allstarjim]

interesting. i just posted how you were outscored by more than 100 pts in 6 games, and you choose to focus on the 12 year thing.

 

12 years in the league is not a long time relatively speaking for a coach to be in the nfl.

 

your defense was horrible against good competition. i put the blame mostly on fewell.

 

youre focusing on the fact that you missed the playoffs by one game.

 

i'm focusing on the fact you only beat one good team last year. and no, it wasn't the cowboys.

you wouldn't have beaten the bears had you faced them later in the season.

 

 

your counterparts are focusing on the 'broad stats' not myself. i'm looking purely at win-loss and scoring defense.

is there a better way to judge a defense?

 

there is a pattern to games in which fewell successfully gameplanned

 

matt moore

 

cutler (with poor oline play and a new offense)

 

drew stanton

 

charlie whitehurst

 

garrard

 

mcnabb

 

schaub

 

tarvaris jackson

 

rex grossman

 

 

 

yea some of these guys are better than other, but none of them are among the best in the league. how did fewell do vs the better qb's?

manning, brees, brady, rodgers, among others can just sit back and pick your defense apart.

 

who do you think you're gonna face in the playoffs if you get that extra win?

 

You're post is nonsensical... I put two smileys to address your ridiculous notion that 12 years isn't a long time to coach in the NFL. 12 years is a long time to do anything. It's 12 YEARS. Are there guys that have spent a lot longer than that in the NFL, guys like Tom Coughlin or Mike Holmgren? Sure... but only a complete doofus would suggest that a guy with 12 years experience coaching in the NFL is inexperienced.

 

Anyhow, to then go on to say after that when the rest of my entire post, other than the smileys, was pointing out that in the majority of the losses, the defense played good enough to win, but were undone by special teams miscues and offensive turnovers. No team can survive the enormous number of turnovers we had on offense this year. It's always about the turnovers. But it's comical how you would say I focused on the 12 year thing when I spent the entire post talking about Fewell's performance and the defense in general... oh, except the two smileys. Maybe you have poor reading comprehension skills, I suppose.

 

Anyhow, I said the Giants played poor defense in the Colts and Packers games.

 

For example, in the Titans game, all but 7 points for the Titans were scored off of turnovers or special teams blunders. They scored 29 points. The Giants turned the ball over 3 times that game. Special teams gave the Titans field position at around the 50 yard line all game long.

 

In the second Philly game, the Eagles scored 24 points off of turnovers and special teams miscues. 24 of their 38 points. And if the offense gets ONE first down with a minute to go in that game, we win. One first down. But they went incomplete, incomplete, and sack... 3 and out. Then Dodge kicks a line drive punt right to DeSean Jackson. Yep, that was all the defense's fault there. Or perhaps it was the defense's fault for Eli throwing a pick at the Giants' 25 yard line in the 2nd Quarter...

 

The first Philly game? FIVE turnovers, and they win by 10. Twice in the second quarter of that game the offense turned the ball over deep in their own territory, resulting in Philly possessions that started at the 13 yard line and 23 yard line respectively. Both times Philly was held to a field goal. Another turnover in the first half resulted in a Philly possession that started at midfield, resulting in a FG attempt that was blocked. The game was put away by the Eagles in the 4th quarter by another fumble in Giants territory late, when Eli fell to the ground and fumbled without anyone hitting him. The Eagles hit the game securing FG moments later.

 

The Dallas game we lost, I didn't think our defense played all that well in that game. We gave up a lot of big plays to Dez Bryant and Felix Jones. But the difference in that game was a Eli Manning INT when we were on the doorstep of a touchdown. McCann took it the other direction for 101 yards for a TD. That was a 14 point swing... we lose that game by 13. We lost 4 games this year because of turnovers and special teams play.

 

So don't tell me about our defensive problems. We have a pretty good damn defense. We're not the 2000 Ravens, but we're pretty close to being near the top in the NFL right now. The defense was the only reason we won 10 games last year. This offense could not protect the football. When you have 42 turnovers in a season, AND your special teams are the worst in the NFL by far, yet you still win 10 games? That is probably because you have a good defense.

 

You haven't been here long so let me clue you in. There are few posters here that will be as critical as I am to the coaching staff or players that aren't performing. We all know our football here on this board. And I'll bet you can come in here and outline the Cowboy's strengths and weaknesses a lot better than I can. But you sure as hell don't know shit about the Giants compared to me or most of us here. We are critical enough about our team... nobody here pulls punches about who's screwing up, or who needs to go.

 

Enjoy the offseason, where you guys win a championship every year from the media.

[Allstarjim]

No, you may have misunderstood me, we ALL wanted an MLB early. We just didnt think one of value would fall to us at 19.

 

I wanted Castonzo in the first round... but was thrilled with the steal of Amukamara, as well as the steal we got in the 2nd with Austin.

 

MLB doesn't necessarily need to be addressed in the draft. Besides, I'm optimistic about Greg Jones. Even if we sit tight with Goff for another year, with the front four and secondary we have, we're going to be ok.

[BIGBLUE01]

I wanted Castonzo in the first round... but was thrilled with the steal of Amukamara, as well as the steal we got in the 2nd with Austin.

 

MLB doesn't necessarily need to be addressed in the draft. Besides, I'm optimistic about Greg Jones. Even if we sit tight with Goff for another year, with the front four and secondary we have, we're going to be ok.

 

I too wanted Costanzo. To be more specific, we want a good MLB, regardless of where we get him.

[Cowboyz]

You're post is nonsensical... I put two smileys to address your ridiculous notion that 12 years isn't a long time to coach in the NFL. 12 years is a long time to do anything. It's 12 YEARS. Are there guys that have spent a lot longer than that in the NFL, guys like Tom Coughlin or Mike Holmgren? Sure... but only a complete doofus would suggest that a guy with 12 years experience coaching in the NFL is inexperienced.

 

Anyhow, to then go on to say after that when the rest of my entire post, other than the smileys, was pointing out that in the majority of the losses, the defense played good enough to win, but were undone by special teams miscues and offensive turnovers. No team can survive the enormous number of turnovers we had on offense this year. It's always about the turnovers. But it's comical how you would say I focused on the 12 year thing when I spent the entire post talking about Fewell's performance and the defense in general... oh, except the two smileys. Maybe you have poor reading comprehension skills, I suppose.

 

Anyhow, I said the Giants played poor defense in the Colts and Packers games.

 

For example, in the Titans game, all but 7 points for the Titans were scored off of turnovers or special teams blunders. They scored 29 points. The Giants turned the ball over 3 times that game. Special teams gave the Titans field position at around the 50 yard line all game long.

 

In the second Philly game, the Eagles scored 24 points off of turnovers and special teams miscues. 24 of their 38 points. And if the offense gets ONE first down with a minute to go in that game, we win. One first down. But they went incomplete, incomplete, and sack... 3 and out. Then Dodge kicks a line drive punt right to DeSean Jackson. Yep, that was all the defense's fault there. Or perhaps it was the defense's fault for Eli throwing a pick at the Giants' 25 yard line in the 2nd Quarter...

 

The first Philly game? FIVE turnovers, and they win by 10. Twice in the second quarter of that game the offense turned the ball over deep in their own territory, resulting in Philly possessions that started at the 13 yard line and 23 yard line respectively. Both times Philly was held to a field goal. Another turnover in the first half resulted in a Philly possession that started at midfield, resulting in a FG attempt that was blocked. The game was put away by the Eagles in the 4th quarter by another fumble in Giants territory late, when Eli fell to the ground and fumbled without anyone hitting him. The Eagles hit the game securing FG moments later.

 

The Dallas game we lost, I didn't think our defense played all that well in that game. We gave up a lot of big plays to Dez Bryant and Felix Jones. But the difference in that game was a Eli Manning INT when we were on the doorstep of a touchdown. McCann took it the other direction for 101 yards for a TD. That was a 14 point swing... we lose that game by 13. We lost 4 games this year because of turnovers and special teams play.

 

So don't tell me about our defensive problems. We have a pretty good damn defense. We're not the 2000 Ravens, but we're pretty close to being near the top in the NFL right now. The defense was the only reason we won 10 games last year. This offense could not protect the football. When you have 42 turnovers in a season, AND your special teams are the worst in the NFL by far, yet you still win 10 games? That is probably because you have a good defense.

 

You haven't been here long so let me clue you in. There are few posters here that will be as critical as I am to the coaching staff or players that aren't performing. We all know our football here on this board. And I'll bet you can come in here and outline the Cowboy's strengths and weaknesses a lot better than I can. But you sure as hell don't know shit about the Giants compared to me or most of us here. We are critical enough about our team... nobody here pulls punches about who's screwing up, or who needs to go.

 

Enjoy the offseason, where you guys win a championship every year from the media.

 

 

and your post sir, is long winded with very little meat.

 

 

Philly game one: The eagles scored 9 points off turnovers. The gints scored 7. 2pt differential.

That's your excuse? really?

 

Philly game two: egals score 10 off TO's, gints 14. the punt return should've been irrellevant, if you played good defense.

 

Tennessee scored 3 pts off turnovers. Your defense gave up two td drives and two fg drives (20 of 29 pts). if you want to let your defense off the hook, cause a one dimensional team got good field position, be my guest.

 

and it looks like we're in agreement about the rest of the losses.

like i said, weak defense.

[Allstarjim]

and your post sir, is long winded with very little meat.

 

 

Philly game one: The eagles scored 9 points off turnovers. The gints scored 7. 2pt differential.

That's your excuse? really?

 

Philly game two: egals score 10 off TO's, gints 14. the punt return should've been irrellevant, if you played good defense.

 

Tennessee scored 3 pts off turnovers. Your defense gave up two td drives and two fg drives (20 of 29 pts). if you want to let your defense off the hook, cause a one dimensional team got good field position, be my guest.

 

and it looks like we're in agreement about the rest of the losses.

like i said, weak defense.

 

 

Little meat? I've already seen that you have poor reading comprehension skills. The only weak defense here is the weak defense of your argument. But hey, at least you unwittingly acknowledged that our defense was keeping us in the game despite the offensive issues. So smart guy, how did the Giants win 10 games with a special teams unit that was pretty much the worst in the NFL and an offense that gave the ball away more than any other team in the NFL? Hmmm, smart guy? You know who was after the Giants in that stat? The 2-14 Carolina Panthers and the 6-10 Vikings were next. So we won 10 games with the worst special teams in the NFL and an offense that gave the ball away more times than any other team based on what?

 

BTW, I write however long posts I want to. You can read them or choose not to. I thoroughly bitch-slapped your argument, so now that I've done that you can really show your ignorance by arguing in the face of a comprehensive, factually based argument. If this was a judged debate, they would've already thrown in your towel.

 

Do you want me to teach you about opportunity costs of turnovers? Do we really need to go there?

[Cowboyz]

Little meat? I've already seen that you have poor reading comprehension skills. The only weak defense here is the weak defense of your argument. But hey, at least you unwittingly acknowledged that our defense was keeping us in the game despite the offensive issues. So smart guy, how did the Giants win 10 games with a special teams unit that was pretty much the worst in the NFL and an offense that gave the ball away more than any other team in the NFL? Hmmm, smart guy? You know who was after the Giants in that stat? The 2-14 Carolina Panthers and the 6-10 Vikings were next. So we won 10 games with the worst special teams in the NFL and an offense that gave the ball away more times than any other team based on what?

 

BTW, I write however long posts I want to. You can read them or choose not to. I thoroughly bitch-slapped your argument, so now that I've done that you can really show your ignorance by arguing in the face of a comprehensive, factually based argument. If this was a judged debate, they would've already thrown in your towel.

 

Do you want me to teach you about opportunity costs of turnovers? Do we really need to go there?

 

that's an easy one. you played very shitty competition. go back and see my post on the combined record of teams beaten by the gints.b

 

it was not the turnovers, as i've just proven, it was the lack of defense.

 

the only thing bitchslapped is that selective memory of yours.

 

long-winded, superfluous, and muggy. that's your 'debate'.

[Allstarjim]

Try harder. You don't just show up and win 10 games in the NFL no matter who you're playing, especially when, as stated, the offense gives up an NFL-worst 42 turnovers, and the special teams SUCKS.

[Allstarjim]

By the way, you've proven nothing. Proving something means you have provided enough factual evidence to support your point to the extent that it can no longer be disputed. See, that's what I did.

[Cowboyz]

my points are concise and easy to understand

 

 

[Allstarjim]

my points are concise and easy to understand

 

You win the concise title. You lose the football argument.

[Cowboyz]

You win the concise title. You lose the football argument.

 

if you say so jimmy, i'm still waiting for a retort to my last comments.

well a retort that pertains to the comment anyway

[Allstarjim]

Don't need one, it's already been shown to be a fallacious argument. Nothing more to be said.

[BIGBLUE01]

I dont understand how cowboyz thinks he has an argument with the combined wins of the teams we beat thing?

 

YOU ONLY WON 6 GAMES AND YOU LOST TO INFERIOR COMPETITION!!

[Allstarjim]

and your post sir, is long winded with very little meat.

 

 

Philly game one: The eagles scored 9 points off turnovers. The gints scored 7. 2pt differential.

That's your excuse? really?

Philly game two: egals score 10 off TO's, gints 14. the punt return should've been irrellevant, if you played good defense.

Tennessee scored 3 pts off turnovers. Your defense gave up two td drives and two fg drives (20 of 29 pts). if you want to let your defense off the hook, cause a one dimensional team got good field position, be my guest.

 

and it looks like we're in agreement about the rest of the losses.

like i said, weak defense.

 

This is what I mean BIGBLUE, he has no argument. His argument is actually supporting mine... that the defense was the only thing that kept us in a lot of the games we lost, and we won in spite of the offense a lot of times, too.

 

He's like, well, you guys scored 14 points yourself off of what... oh yeah, YOUR DEFENSE. The game winning play, a special teams screw up that was only allowed to happen because the Giants couldn't get a first down was... was....IRRELEVANT??? LMAO.

[Cowboyz]

Don't need one, it's already been shown to be a fallacious argument. Nothing more to be said.

 

what is fallacious about turnovers not being the cause of your losses in those games you mentioned?

 

you never commented on those numbers, and all you've got is 'I win".

 

those numbers show the turnovers only netted 2, -4, and 3 pts in those games for your opponents.

i think your emotions are gettin the best of you jimmy