Mr. P Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 If they gave out awards for the first quarter of the NFL season, Coach of the Year would have to go to the New York Giants' Tom Coughlin. And not just because his team has played better than it should have. That's actually the terrible thing about Coach/Manager of the Year awards -- that they always go to the guy whose team everybody thought would stink but didn't. Coach of the Year should go to a coach whose particular style and abilities had an obvious impact on the team's success, and so far this year, Coughlin is that coach. Coughlin's style is, as you may have heard from Plaxico Burress and others, old school. He's a no-nonsense 65-year-old grouch who doesn't have patience for the kind of coddling to which a lot of modern pro athletes are accustomed. Coughlin believes in accountability and responsibility and doing your job instead of feeling sorry for yourself. And so, given the cascade of injuries and other issues that have rained down on the heads of the Giants since the lockout ended, there may be no coach in the league better equipped to lead them. "I think we've paid particular attention to the player that was injured, and I felt very badly for that player and for the way he had worked, and then we moved on from there," Coughlin said Wednesday on a conference call when Seattle reporters asked him how he'd handled all of the season-ending injuries the Giants have had already. "I think the players all basically felt the same -- that we have to keep pushing and people have to play better and try to overcome whatever it is that our problems were." And there have been plenty. Don't kid yourself thinking Coughlin was thrilled that the Giants watched key players leave in free agency while the Eagles signed everyone in sight and his contract was extended for only one more year. Don't believe for a second that he heard the torn ACL news on Terrell Thomas and Jonathan Goff and didn't think those losses would hurt. Don't think he wouldn't rather have had Osi Umenyiora and Prince Amukamara healthy and playing for him since the season started. Coughlin isn't blind to the adversity his team is facing. He'd much rather everything had gone smoothly since training camp started, that they'd signed every player he wanted and that no one had got hurt. But Coughlin's "tough, old coach" demeanor is genuine, and because of that it (a) helps him avoid wallowing in his troubles and (b) rings true in the locker room. The players know he's not just up there making hollow speeches about the Next Man Up and not feeling sorry for themselves, because they know he really believes it. He's made it clear to all of them since the day they walked through the door that they're responsible for handling their own business and problems and assignments, that no one else is going to take care of it for them and that if they don't, there will be consequences. Yeah, he benched Aaron Ross in the Rams game even though he had no one to back him up, because Ross deserved it and that's the way things are done around Coughlin's Giants. "Injuries come and go and other issues come and go and there are things you can't do anything about, so it doesn't make sense to worry about them and get down about them," linebacker Michael Boley said. "He's pretty good at getting that message across and letting guys know, 'All right, that talk's over with, and now it's time to work.'" A team isn't going to sit around feeling sorry for itself when its head coach has made it clear time and again what an unacceptable sentiment that is. People who think that Coughlin's time as a head coach has run its course, or that he should be held accountable for the way the team has played down the stretch the past couple of years, need to look at the way he manages the locker room in times like these, and in the most heavily scrutinized market in the league. There are plenty of teams that would have been crushed by what's happened to the Giants so far, but partly thanks to the leadership style of their coach, these Giants haven't been. Tom Coughlin knows -- and constantly makes sure his players know -- that no matter what the world throws at you, the best way to handle it is to get up the next morning and go to work. That attitude, and Coughlin's ability to instill it in the men who play for him, is a huge part of the reason these Giants are 3-1. http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/31303/coughlin-suits-these-giants-perfectly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 ESPN were the only ones thinking the Giants would "stink". I think almost everyone thought we'd win games. Some might not have thought playoffs or Super Bowl, but teams that "stink" are teams like Miami, Denver, Minnesota, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStroud Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 i never bought into the notion we were rendered helpless by the injuries I saw it as a chance for some real talented bench guys to get their shot My only gripe is that we do not keep real talented QBs behind Eli.....if Eli goes down were in a Hostetler situation Perriloux was cut in my opinion because he showed too much promise............thats mindboggling Reese and Coughlin have given us the strongest 53 man deep roster in the NFL......its only at TE that we are not deep and QB Rosenfels should have gotten the back up job.....Perriloux should be on the practice squad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted October 6, 2011 Author Share Posted October 6, 2011 hahahah yeah periloux was cut because he showed too much promise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueInCanada Posted October 6, 2011 Share Posted October 6, 2011 hahahah yeah periloux was cut because he showed too much promise. Tearing up third string players = HoF QB. The decision to cut him will set the Giants back at least 45 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 i never bought into the notion we were rendered helpless by the injuries I saw it as a chance for some real talented bench guys to get their shot My only gripe is that we do not keep real talented QBs behind Eli.....if Eli goes down were in a Hostetler situation Perriloux was cut in my opinion because he showed too much promise............thats mindboggling Reese and Coughlin have given us the strongest 53 man deep roster in the NFL......its only at TE that we are not deep and QB Rosenfels should have gotten the back up job.....Perriloux should be on the practice squad correct the dog is he is wrong, but didn't hostetler lead the team to the super bowl following the simns injury? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazedDogs Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 correct the dog is he is wrong, but didn't hostetler lead the team to the super bowl following the simns injury? No, the rest of the team put Hostetler on their backs and carried him through the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 ESPN were the only ones thinking the Giants would "stink". I think almost everyone thought we'd win games. Some might not have thought playoffs or Super Bowl, but teams that "stink" are teams like Miami, Denver, Minnesota, etc. And Philly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelmo Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 No, the rest of the team put Hostetler on their backs and carried him through the playoffs. Watch out you're lobbing a softball to the dog for him to say that forget about backups, even our current starter only made it through the playoffs in 2007 on other people's backs. -Z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Watch out you're lobbing a softball to the dog for him to say that forget about backups, even our current starter only made it through the playoffs in 2007 on other people's backs. -Z a most excellent point. the dog was so inclined to look at hostetler's playoff run that year, and it is remarkably similar to what eli did minus one game. both played mistake free, solid football during that stretch, and relied on the defense to get them over the top. the dog likes your style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazedDogs Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Watch out you're lobbing a softball to the dog for him to say that forget about backups, even our current starter only made it through the playoffs in 2007 on other people's backs. -Z I don't lob softballs... and my eephus isn't half bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazedDogs Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 a most excellent point. the dog was so inclined to look at hostetler's playoff run that year, and it is remarkably similar to what eli did minus one game. both played mistake free, solid football during that stretch, and relied on the defense to get them over the top. the dog likes your style. What the hell....I'll pretend for a moment that you're actually here to talk football.... what point are you trying to make? That because a team once upon a time, 20+ years ago, got more than anybody expected out of a bare bones game plan with an average-at-best QB, that therefore teams shouldn't try to get the best possible back up QB? Regardless, this is why you're a joke. See above, your post I'm responding to? Nobody had even said anything to the contrary, yet you step up with it like you're making some sort of profound correction to a bunch of errant fan boys. Just like I knew you would. When it comes to Eli, you just can't help yourself, can you? Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? How does someone come to have such a pathetic fixation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 What the hell....I'll pretend for a moment that you're actually here to talk football.... what point are you trying to make? That because a team once upon a time, 20+ years ago, got more than anybody expected out of a bare bones game plan with an average-at-best QB, that therefore teams shouldn't try to get the best possible back up QB? Regardless, this is why you're a joke. See above, your post I'm responding to? Nobody had even said anything to the contrary, yet you step up with it like you're making some sort of profound correction to a bunch of errant fan boys. Just like I knew you would. When it comes to Eli, you just can't help yourself, can you? Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? How does someone come to have such a pathetic fixation? wow, the dog really finds you interesting. let's see if the dog can sequence this for you...jack made a comment about wanting to sign a good back-up because otherwise you are in hostetler territory...the dog pointed out that the hostetler territory seemed to work out OK for the giants in 1990. you got all hot and bothered and said it was the team that carried hostetler (side note, are you phil simms by chance?), someelse observed that the same thing occurred in 2007...the dog merely commented that hos' run and eli's run in the playoffs were remarkably similar, and you have a tantrumish meltdown (see above)...so, this is the dog's issue how? let the dog know if you need some more help in the future. the dog is always there for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 wow, the dog really finds you interesting. let's see if the dog can sequence this for you...jack made a comment about wanting to sign a good back-up because otherwise you are in hostetler territory...the dog pointed out that the hostetler territory seemed to work out OK for the giants in 1990. you got all hot and bothered and said it was the team that carried hostetler (side note, are you phil simms by chance?), someelse observed that the same thing occurred in 2007...the dog merely commented that hos' run and eli's run in the playoffs were remarkably similar, and you have a tantrumish meltdown (see above)...so, this is the dog's issue how? let the dog know if you need some more help in the future. the dog is always there for you. Eli went down in 2007 and a below average back up QB had to lead the team through the playoffs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMFP Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Great article....makes a ton of sense when you think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfA4 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 a most excellent point. the dog was so inclined to look at hostetler's playoff run that year, and it is remarkably similar to what eli did minus one game. both played mistake free, solid football during that stretch, and relied on the defense to get them over the top. the dog likes your style. Hostetler lead the Giants to a come from behind win against what would have been called "the greatest team in history" had they won? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazedDogs Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 wow, the dog really finds you interesting. let's see if the dog can sequence this for you...jack made a comment about wanting to sign a good back-up because otherwise you are in hostetler territory...the dog pointed out that the hostetler territory seemed to work out OK for the giants in 1990. you got all hot and bothered and said it was the team that carried hostetler (side note, are you phil simms by chance?), someelse observed that the same thing occurred in 2007...the dog merely commented that hos' run and eli's run in the playoffs were remarkably similar, and you have a tantrumish meltdown (see above)...so, this is the dog's issue how? let the dog know if you need some more help in the future. the dog is always there for you. Hahaha.... no, somebody else observed that you would respond to say that the same thing occurred in 2007. Which you did. And what makes it even funnier, to me at least, is that I knew you would. So I would hardly call it a tantrum - I'm genuinely curious about what happened to you. The way you insert Eli into every conversation, its... curious. I'm thinking there's got to be some history there. Did Archie once cut you off on the interstate? Did Eli once steal your girl? Come on, don't be shy, we're all friends here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Eli went down in 2007 and a below average back up QB had to lead the team through the playoffs? they (little eli and hostetler) performed similarly during both runs...do try and keep up, it is challenging in and of itself when the dog has to explain things to the likes of bigblue01 100 times, adding you into the mix will just slow down any momentum... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Hahaha.... no, somebody else observed that you would respond to say that the same thing occurred in 2007. Which you did. And what makes it even funnier, to me at least, is that I knew you would. So I would hardly call it a tantrum - I'm genuinely curious about what happened to you. The way you insert Eli into every conversation, its... curious. I'm thinking there's got to be some history there. Did Archie once cut you off on the interstate? Did Eli once steal your girl? Come on, don't be shy, we're all friends here. That it seems he actually thinks he has a valid comparison. I would argue with him that Eli played more than just "mistake free football", and did more than just merely rely on the defense to win 4 elimination games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Hostetler lead the Giants to a come from behind win against what would have been called "the greatest team in history" had they won? Well, actually, yeah. The 49ers were 1 last-second field goal away from possibly being the only team in NFL history to win three consecutive SBs. they (little eli and hostetler) performed similarly during both runs...do try and keep up, it is challenging in and of itself when the dog has to explain things to the likes of bigblue01 100 times, adding you into the mix will just slow down any momentum... This is nonsense, as usual. Our defense and running game got us the Lombardi in 1990--that would have been the case even with Simms in the picture. There is no way you could say that about 2007, particularly the playoff run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Well, actually, yeah. The 49ers were 1 last-second field goal away from possibly being the only team in NFL history to win three consecutive SBs. This is nonsense, as usual. Our defense and running game got us the Lombardi in 1990--that would have been the case even with Simms in the picture. There is no way you could say that about 2007, particularly the playoff run. why is this such a sore spot for everyone? to say the defense wasn't the key reason for the 2007 run is what is nonsense. the dog has always maintained that eli played solid in that stretch. for the only time in his career, he pulled it together for 4 consecutive games and played consistent mistake free football. he wasn't chasing down romo, favre and brady all day long. he did what he had to...as did hostetler during that run. both very similar in production and results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 why is this such a sore spot for everyone? to say the defense wasn't the key reason for the 2007 run is what is nonsense. the dog has always maintained that eli played solid in that stretch. for the only time in his career, he pulled it together for 4 consecutive games and played consistent mistake free football. he wasn't chasing down romo, favre and brady all day long. he did what he had to...as did hostetler during that run. both very similar in production and results. Because it's a bullshit argument. The defense played a key role for certain, but we weren't exactly winning games by 3-0 scores, either. Toss in a backhanded comment like "for the only time in his career," and you've got the makings of a troll, not football discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Because it's a bullshit argument. The defense played a key role for certain, but we weren't exactly winning games by 3-0 scores, either. Toss in a backhanded comment like "for the only time in his career," and you've got the makings of a troll, not football discussion. the dog suggests you go back and review the games. defense controlled the buccears. now, certainly the giants in general handled that game in all aspects, and again, manning played a solid mistake free game. go to dallas. after a sluggish start against the run game, that defense tortured that o-line and romo all game. the fact that eli completed a short out pattern that toomer took 54 yards after breaking a tackle doesn't strike the dog as dominant. solid, yes. solid game overall, yes. go to green bay. defense stymied that team as well. eli didn't turn the ball over (very much to his credit, by the way, given the circumstances). he played a solid game. and the super bowl was more of the same. since the defense played a key role in all of that, it fails to be a bullshit argument. and please highlight another 4 game stretch in his 7 year career that eli played mistake free football and was solid throughout? when you do, then you can call the dog's comment backhanded...until then, deal with the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfA4 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Well, actually, yeah. The 49ers were 1 last-second field goal away from possibly being the only team in NFL history to win three consecutive SBs. This is nonsense, as usual. Our defense and running game got us the Lombardi in 1990--that would have been the case even with Simms in the picture. There is no way you could say that about 2007, particularly the playoff run. were the 9ers undefeated? how was joe montana's health in that game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I honestly don't know why you guys bother. Talk to the wiener, bang your head against a wall, try and teach a retard advanced physics... you just get the same results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now