Next Season

[Allstarjim]

BigBlueView

 

'Kudos & Wet Willies': Giants Are 'Pathetic' Edition

by Ed Valentine on Nov 21, 2011 10:52 AM EST in Kudos & Wet Willies

 

Well, we do this every week so -- whether we really want to put ourselves through it or not -- let's get to the 'Kudos & Wet Willies' review of Sunday night's ridiculous 17-10 loss by the New York Giants to the Philadelphia Eagles.

 

I have already written about coach Tom Coughlin's comments from Sunday night, and they are apt. The Giants were everything Coughlin said they were, and none of that was very good. This was a game they should have been able to win, that they needed to win. It turned into a game in which they did what they have done all too often the past three seasons -- make too many mistakes, fail to play with urgency, play without discipline and end up losing to a team that should not beat them.

 

The 'Kudos & Wet Willies' will look a little bit different today. It is difficult, to say the least, to find many players to hand out 'Kudos' to, so I am changing up the format a touch.

 

 

 

Offense

 

'Wet Willies' to everyone on that side of the ball not named Eli Manning or Victor Cruz. I don't care what Manning's numbers were, I can't include him in the 'Wet Willies.' It often looked like the Giants' quarterback was playing one-on-11. He got no blocking, no running game, his receivers couldn't catch the ball. Cruz caught six passes and at least made a couple of plays, but he also had his typical, weekly easy drop.

 

I have a new name for the Giants 'offensive' line. Until they begin to prove otherwise I think I will just refer to them as the 'Invis-O-Line.' Especially in the run game (17 carries, 29 yards) teams go through them like they aren't even there. I will examine this group in more detail later, but for now suffice it to say their effort can be summed up in one word -- terrible.

 

Jake Ballard? Three drops, and his first one on a wide open play that would have netted 30 yards set the tone for a horrible night for the Giants offense. Ridiculous. Hakeem Nicks had a big drop. Will Brandon Jacobs ever make a defender miss again?

 

Defense

 

'Wet Willies' to everyone on that side of the ball not named Mathias Kiwanuka or Prince Amukamara. Kiwanuka was a monster, and the seven tackles don't begin to tell the story. Many of those plays were special from a guy who has become a tremendous force against the run from the linebacker position. Amukamara got a little bit lucky that Vince Young underthrew DeSean Jackson on the first pass thrown his way, but made the interception when given the opportunity. Also had five tackles and two passes defensed. The kid can play.

 

You might want to argue that some other guys played well, but I just can't justify 'Kudos' to anyone else. All of the rookie linebackers had their moments, but they were all also helpless in pass coverage. The Giants played good run defense most of the night, but could not get anywhere near Vince Young with the pass rush, even when they sent extra people.

 

Coaching

 

I try not to go here because it so often leads to viciousness in the comments. But, today I am going to say my piece with the coaches and I am going to hope you guys can frame your comments without going over the top.

 

Tom Coughlin deserves 'Kudos' for ripping into the team after the game. The head coach, though, deserves a 'Wet Willie' for what went on during the game. This is the third time this season the Giants have been beaten by a team with a losing record. They did not look ready to play. As Coughlin said, they played without discipline with penalties, stupid skirmishes and dropped passes.

 

The thing is, these kinds of performances have become normal for the Giants over the past few seasons. There are highs like the recent victory over the New England Patriots that show you what this team can be, but there are too many lows against teams that have no business competing with the Giants. That is on the head coach.

 

I saw many of you with the 'Killdrive' comments and all the 'fire Gilbride' vitriol both Sunday night and this morning. My defense of offensive coordinator Kevin Gilbride is that when your line can't block, your receivers can't catch and your running backs can't run it makes zero difference what plays you call. Nothing is going to work, anyway. So, I don't want to hear the foolishness about 'he should have called this play in this situation' or 'why did he call back-to-back shotgun draws?'

 

Where Gilbride -- and probably Coughlin -- deserve a 'Wet Willie' Sunday night is in failing to recognize that the Giants had only one chance to generate real offense in the second half. That was to abandon their traditional set, go no-huddle and completely put the game in Manning's hands. Shotgun and hurry up were really the only things they were successful with all night, and things might have been different if they Giants had gone that way the entire second half.

 

As for Perry Fewell, like many of you I am tired of the lack of aggressiveness in his play-calling. He gets a 'Wet Willie' as well. The three-man line is a poor use of personnel, with Jason Pierre-Paul stuck at nose tackle where I don't think he has made a play all season. Justin Tuck and Osi Umenyiora are not 3-4 defensive ends, and being asked to do that does not play to their strengths. It's even worse when Fewell chooses to rush just three, negating on purpose the thing the Giants defense is built to do -- rush the passer. I just don't get what Fewell is looking at when he sees this defensive unit. He has a team built to attack, to go downhill, to press on the outside all the time and he simply does not let them do that.

[Storm]

17 points, 3 turnovers. All I have to say. Mccoy 50 some yards outside of the garbge 60 yarder.

[Allstarjim]

17 points, 3 turnovers. All I have to say. Mccoy 50 some yards outside of the garbge 60 yarder.

 

17 points that didn't have to be. Like I said in the game thread, great play calling on first down. Most of those blitzes came on 1st down, some on second. All I have to say is the defense was dominant when they blitzed, and they were swiss cheese when they didn't, particularly when they didn't on 3rd down. 6-7 passing for 89 yards and a TD, 4 first downs on 3rd and 5 or longer when no blitz. 0-2 passing with a near INT and a sack on the 3 plays where they blitzed on 3rd and 5 or longer.

[Allstarjim]

And Storm, none of those 3 INT's involved the linebackers. They were all athletic plays but the cornerbacks, 2 of three in one on one man situations, and 1 forced by a blitz. There were no positive plays by the linebackers in pass coverage at all in this game.

[Nas]

BigBlueView

 

'Kudos & Wet Willies': Giants Are 'Pathetic' Edition

by Ed Valentine on Nov 21, 2011 10:52 AM EST in Kudos & Wet Willies

 

Reading this... was soothing... I feel like there someone else out there who saw the game exactly the way I saw it. Thanks Jim.

[CrazedDogs]

Dude, Nas, that's what I've been saying. When your team isn't good at blitzing, it's not going to be effective. It's not Fewell's fault that blitzes take 3 hours. That's a timing issue on the part of the players.

 

 

That reminds me, I noticed that too... the few times they did blitz this week, and too often throughout the season, they are telegraphing their blitzes. If they're coming, they show blitz almost immediately.

 

And I noticed they once faked rushing 7, then dropped 7 in coverage... how about faking dropping 7, then rush five or six?

[Storm]

That reminds me, I noticed that too... the few times they did blitz this week, and too often throughout the season, they are telegraphing their blitzes. If they're coming, they show blitz almost immediately.

 

And I noticed they once faked rushing 7, then dropped 7 in coverage... how about faking dropping 7, then rush five or six?

 

That was what I was trying to say, telegraphing is a much better word than the "mistiming" that I used. Telegraphing the blitz is the biggest reason why they gave up those two 3rd and shorts on the game winning drive. If you know the blitz is coming, it's quite easy to dump it off to Desean Jackson in the flat.

[CrazedDogs]

gmenroc, see, that is an intelligent post. You are the anti-Dog much like Fewell is the anti-Spags. Your post is logical. However, within the game, when you see that you are unsuccessful generating pressure on the QB with just 4, you need to try 5. You simply can't allow an NFL QB to sit back there and have a nice pocket and just wait for receivers to come open. It's called an in-game adjustment, and Fewell doesn't make them. And one more thing, I could support this argument about rushing 4 if that's what they did. Four times on 3rd down though, they only sent 3 at Young. All four plays resulted in completions, three of them for first downs, one of THOSE came on 3rd and 10 during the final drive. It's a defensive set I've seen the Giants use plenty this year and rarely has it stopped the opponent from getting a first. The Giants blitzed earlier in the game and it was working. They used the blitz a few times to get off the field, successfully.

 

[CrazedDogs]

That was what I was trying to say, telegraphing is a much better word than the "mistiming" that I used. Telegraphing the blitz is the biggest reason why they gave up those two 3rd and shorts on the game winning drive. If you know the blitz is coming, it's quite easy to dump it off to Desean Jackson in the flat.

 

Totally agreed... I think they would be better off starting their blitz from a typical base D set. I don't understand what is so hard about waiting until deeper in the play clock to show your blitz. Nobody snaps the ball three seconds after breaking huddle, the Giants D needs to develop some patience and a poker face.

[Storm]

Totally agreed... I think they would be better off starting their blitz from a typical base D set. I don't understand what is so hard about waiting until deeper in the play clock to show your blitz. Nobody snaps the ball three seconds after breaking huddle, the Giants D needs to develop some patience and a poker face.

 

Maybe some day when the LBers aren't in their early 20s.....

[boohyah]

They didn't let anyone have anything. That's what I'm saying. Bringing them to 3rd down 6 times, you'd expect based on the law of averages, that one of those times, a player steps up and makes a tackle (Corey Webster's attempt on Desean Jackson was pathetic). That didn't happen, and while you would hope the defense would make one play for a stop, it didn't but I fail to see how that is Fewell's fault. He blitzed, like you guys wanted him to, that drive. And nothing I've read from any analyst or any article puts that on Fewell, either. He can't go out there and play for them, the best he can do is get his players in position to make a play, which he did. But it is just like Coughlin and Gilbride can't go out to play for the offensive line.

 

If the defense doesn't play well, that goes hand in hand with the defensive coordinator. I wonder if you would feel the same way if the offensive line had played well, the Giants score to tie the game and then you proceeded to watch the Eagles drive the length of the field and score while knocking off 7-8 minutes off the clock on your own home field.

 

Let me tell you what pisses me off about this?. How did Spags figure this out a few years back?, when he had lets face it, less talent on D. He moved guys all over the place and gave different looks.Remember the look away blitz, creativity!. You think 4 years ago that if they saw Osi getting bossed around by an all pro that they wouldn't switch it up a bit ( i didn't see JPP line up one time on that side of the line) This team got fuck all pressure on Young. This organization has piled more of their resources on defensive players no question. There are 5 first rounders on defense, and I believe 4 second rounders. We paid big bucks to get Chris Canty, Michael Boley, Antrel Rolle and Rocky Bernard. And you roll Tuck and Osi in there. Do you see that same comittment on the offensive side. Eli and Nicks are first rounders and they spent on Baas and McKenzie, everyone else is no higher than a second rounder. The organization has made a commitment to emphasize the D, and that's why they went gaga when Fewell became available. This guy, with this talent should be able to do the job. And that job requires big stops at crucial times.

 

Well in that situation, I expect better than what we got the other night.

 

There are several defensive co-ordinators out there that would cream their pants to have some of our players on D.

 

I get it the offense didn't play well, and the o-line was the shits, but this team is at 6-4 when really on offense it has little reason to be. Eli has made gold outta shit at times. His 265 lb running back can't get a fucking extra yard when we need it (tiki used to make yards on plays where the blocking completely broke down). But as bad as they are, we have a winning record. Most teams get scoring help from their defense sometimes or special teams, but correct me if I'm wrong, but we've gotten nothing this year at all from either group.

[Storm]

I don't blame Gilbride for the offensive line's complete failure to do anything and it's hard to call anything with any success given the circumstance...why would I blame Fewell for the defensive line's complete failure to get any pressure and the linebacker's complete failure in pass coverage? With what he had to work with and the success the defense was having for 95% of the game, I'm fine with what Fewell was doing. So sue me.

 

You don't hear anyone at all blaming Gilbride for this game, and rightly so. That's because you can't do much offensively when you're letting Eagles defensive lineman run through you like a turnstile.....on some occasions almost getting the hand off. I just don't see how you can blame Fewell for the same thing on defense, only it's the defensive line that couldn't get any pressure. Like has been said, it's not easy to just change your entire game plan mid drive (that, mind you, HAD been working all game---which is why it doesn't make sense why you would change it up during the TD drive).

 

Even Coughlin's number one gripe was the embarrassing showing by the offensive line. I'm with him on that one.

 

Holding any team to 17 points while forcing 3 turnovers and holding possibly the leagues best running back in check all game should be enough to win a football game, defensively. If you tell me otherwise, you're lying.

[Storm]

And I still think the defensive personnel, for the most part, is highly overrated. Especially guys like Rolle and Umenyiora.

 

But obviously, it's much harder to change that up or even to put the blame on some individual efforts that game. So instead, the blame gets thrown on Fewell. I can see why, because it's easier, but I still disagree with it.

 

The Bears suck on defense, they change their two safeties (to lesser drafted talents, even) and start playing well again. The Giants suck on defense we make no changes and it's Fewell that gets the brunt of the criticism. It just makes no sense to me.

[Storm]

So in other words, other than guys like Tuck (who is very obviously a shell of himself this year due to injury), JPP, Webster at times, Ross this year, Kenny Phillips at times, Michael Boley most of the time, and Chris Canty at times......I don't see all this "talent" on defense that you do, Boo. We will have to settle on the differing opinions. And I also don't think teams would cream their pants about anything other than our Dline, fully healthy.

 

We suffer from inconsistency on defense....and maybe some of that is on Fewell, I'll give you that. But I put an equal amount of the blame on the players, and for the Eagles game the lion's share of the blame on the players during that last drive.

[Steitzenhaus]

This team suffers from inconsistency in general. We can talk about whats to blame till we're blue in the face but the bottom line is the Eagles punched us in the mouth Sunday night and instead of rising to the challenge we curled into a little ball. The lack of heart and pride displayed is what really pisses me off more than the failure to execute.

[osi724dasack]

Antrel Rolle is a top flight player. Anyone who doesn't see it is blind.

[Storm]

This team suffers from inconsistency in general. We can talk about whats to blame till we're blue in the face but the bottom line is the Eagles punched us in the mouth Sunday night and instead of rising to the challenge we curled into a little ball. The lack of heart and pride displayed is what really pisses me off more than the failure to execute.

 

Alright, let's see if they can come out and fix it.

 

I would seriously consider bringing guys like O'Hara and Seubert (if he is healthy enough) back to fill in on this offensive line. Guys like Snee and Mckenzie appear to have mailed it in this year and I do not know why....

[boohyah]

Alright, let's see if they can come out and fix it.

 

I would seriously consider bringing guys like O'Hara and Seubert (if he is healthy enough) back to fill in on this offensive line. Guys like Snee and Mckenzie appear to have mailed it in this year and I do not know why....

I think if you were to get an honest answer out of snee and diehl, they would tell of their frustrations of a lack of a running game. Offensive linemen love running and snee in particular is good at it. But apart from bradshaw who hits holes, jacobs rarely earns a yard by himself anymore. There was at least one play on sunday where jacobs ran right into baas for no gain, when all he had to do was go left and he could have driven a bus through the gap.

[ksm7]

And Storm, none of those 3 INT's involved the linebackers. They were all athletic plays but the cornerbacks, 2 of three in one on one man situations, and 1 forced by a blitz. There were no positive plays by the linebackers in pass coverage at all in this game.

 

but you are only looking at this via your own lense. yes, positive plays are generated from their blitzing, but the dog wonders, what about the plays that hurt them? these are part of a coaches line of thinking during a game. for example, the giants blitzed at the 2 yard line, and jackson burned them for a 55 yard completion. blitzing puts you in more man coverage, which creates more opportunities to get burned, especially when playing a team that has explosive game changers like the eagles have. even the early pick which you say was in man coverage, although the dog isn't 100% sure of that, jackson had prince beat deep. the ball was underthrown...and smith's TD catch was not against a blitz, but was against man coverage, and he was running free. there are plenty of examples of blitzing working, and not. the giants defensive game plan was effective for the most part. blitzing sets you up for potential big plays against you, particularly when playing a very mobile QB who can make one person miss and be off and running. or when you have a mccoy or jackson who can burn coverage when one on one regularly. in addition, when you know your offense doesn't have it from the get go, as a defensive coordinator, you know you can't get into a shoot out. slow things down and don't get into a track meet, and maybe you can overcome poor offense to escape with a win...that's the dog's pov on this...

[Allstarjim]

but you are only looking at this via your own lense. yes, positive plays are generated from their blitzing, but the dog wonders, what about the plays that hurt them?

 

There were very few plays that hurt them while blitzing compared to zone.

 

these are part of a coaches line of thinking during a game. for example, the giants blitzed at the 2 yard line, and jackson burned them for a 55 yard completion.

You have to live with some risk, but you can't allow an opposing QB to throw passes with no pressure, no matter how many people you drop into coverage. I am did not record what the play was on the 55 yarder, because it was wiped out and I only included plays that counted. And also, the lack of a blitz or playing man or zone dropping 8 on the sideline many times doesn't necessarily guarantee you're not going to get hurt with deep balls, particularly on the sideline.

 

blitzing puts you in more man coverage, which creates more opportunities to get burned, especially when playing a team that has explosive game changers like the eagles have. even the early pick which you say was in man coverage, although the dog isn't 100% sure of that, jackson had prince beat deep. the ball was underthrown...

Yep, he underthrew the ball, the Giants didn't blitz on that play, and yet, it still resulted in a one on one situation, and Prince made up ground and picked off the poorly thrown ball. This was a situation where they didn't blitz, yet there still wasn't safety help.

 

and smith's TD catch was not against a blitz, but was against man coverage, and he was running free.

. They didn't blitz on that play either. Also, I don't think you know that it was man coverage, because Rolle let him go. No matter whether that was man or zone, it was blown coverage. If you're going to have mistakes like that in coverage, and there were many by the linebackers in this game, might as well send them.

 

there are plenty of examples of blitzing working, and not.

Not in this game. The blitz worked the vast majority of the time, and the Eagles didn't get ANY big plays when the Giants blitzed.

 

the giants defensive game plan was effective for the most part.

I agree, on first and second down. That would be the "most part". Then they got very passive on 3rd downs and that is where they were hurt badly. Whether some people think that the Giants did well defensively or not, the Giants coaches and players did not think they did well. And Vince Young was 23 for 36 for 258 yards with the 2 TDs. That is way to high of a completion % (63%) to say that the Giants played the pass well in this game. Bottom line, the zone was a FAILURE in this game. An absolute, total failure. Philosophically you can say what you want about defensive theory. I'm talking about what actually happened in this game, and what happened was the zone didn't work, because the linebackers aren't good at zone coverage (or man), and the secondary was asked to hang back in their zones, while Young exploited the linebackers. underneath and in the middle of the field. In this game, the blitz was extremely effective, yet was abondoned at key times, especially on 3rd and long.

 

blitzing sets you up for potential big plays against you, particularly when playing a very mobile QB who can make one person miss and be off and running. or when you have a mccoy or jackson who can burn coverage when one on one regularly.

Even when the Giants blitzed, and McCoy caught screens or short passes, he was immediately dropped. It's not like just because you send an additionally pass rusher, you can't defend these guys.

[Storm]

Goodness gracious, Antrel Rolle made a glaring mental mistake in coverage!? Say it ain't so! He's a complete beast back there!

[BIGBLUE01]

Yeah this cooper guy HoF material.

 

I'll wait and see what Prince does against a real WR.

 

But once again fuck this team in general.

 

This is what it has become to me.

 

Thats unacceptable, letting another team win. Yes, I said LETTING. Thats what it had to be. Because all of the insufficiencies we speak of here, were here when we were playing well. We didnt lose to the eagles because our Oline played bad, no pressure from the DTs..........etc. We went in lackluster and our minds on other things and got handled by a FAR inferior team. Im done givin my heart and soul and my ENTIRE Sunday to a team that plays like shit when they feel like it. Youre fucking millionaires. I dont give a shit if your wifes sick, or you argued with your gf........FUCK YOU....PLAY!!!!!

 

I wish all of you a happy Thanksgiving, enjoy your families and time off from work. Im ghost, its been a pleasure, but I aint puttin in anymore time to a bunch of fucks that dont care.

 

 

OK, eggdog, heres where you have your fun.

[ksm7]

There were very few plays that hurt them while blitzing compared to zone.

 

You have to live with some risk, but you can't allow an opposing QB to throw passes with no pressure, no matter how many people you drop into coverage. I am did not record what the play was on the 55 yarder, because it was wiped out and I only included plays that counted. And also, the lack of a blitz or playing man or zone dropping 8 on the sideline many times doesn't necessarily guarantee you're not going to get hurt with deep balls, particularly on the sideline.

 

Yep, he underthrew the ball, the Giants didn't blitz on that play, and yet, it still resulted in a one on one situation, and Prince made up ground and picked off the poorly thrown ball. This was a situation where they didn't blitz, yet there still wasn't safety help.

 

. They didn't blitz on that play either. Also, I don't think you know that it was man coverage, because Rolle let him go. No matter whether that was man or zone, it was blown coverage. If you're going to have mistakes like that in coverage, and there were many by the linebackers in this game, might as well send them.

 

Not in this game. The blitz worked the vast majority of the time, and the Eagles didn't get ANY big plays when the Giants blitzed.

 

I agree, on first and second down. That would be the "most part". Then they got very passive on 3rd downs and that is where they were hurt badly. Whether some people think that the Giants did well defensively or not, the Giants coaches and players did not think they did well. And Vince Young was 23 for 36 for 258 yards with the 2 TDs. That is way to high of a completion % (63%) to say that the Giants played the pass well in this game. Bottom line, the zone was a FAILURE in this game. An absolute, total failure. Philosophically you can say what you want about defensive theory. I'm talking about what actually happened in this game, and what happened was the zone didn't work, because the linebackers aren't good at zone coverage (or man), and the secondary was asked to hang back in their zones, while Young exploited the linebackers. underneath and in the middle of the field. In this game, the blitz was extremely effective, yet was abondoned at key times, especially on 3rd and long.

 

Even when the Giants blitzed, and McCoy caught screens or short passes, he was immediately dropped. It's not like just because you send an additionally pass rusher, you can't defend these guys.

 

but the dog doesn't think you can discount a play that was called back for taunting in the mind of the d-coordinator. the play happened, and they were burned. and when you account for plays in man coverage where the defense was burned, whether the eagles capitalized or not, the coach is keeping account of that while trying to position the team for the best chance to win. but again, we only know so much watching games on tv. you don't know the ins and outs of what has taken place. is it possible since they were missing their starting linebacker (a player that has been called the quarterback of the defense for them), that a d-coordinator may be less apt to blitz and leave that player on an island? there are so many things that go into coaching, that it is rediculous for you, for the dog, or for any other fan to assume that you know how to approach things better. when asked what happened on the last drive, rolle commented that the calls were correct, but eluded to players not fulfilling their assignments. who knows? and the zone and defensive scheme wasn't a total failure, because if it was, they wouldn't have held the team to 10 points for 3 and a half quarters.

[ksm7]

This is what it has become to me.

 

Thats unacceptable, letting another team win. Yes, I said LETTING. Thats what it had to be. Because all of the insufficiencies we speak of here, were here when we were playing well. We didnt lose to the eagles because our Oline played bad, no pressure from the DTs..........etc. We went in lackluster and our minds on other things and got handled by a FAR inferior team. Im done givin my heart and soul and my ENTIRE Sunday to a team that plays like shit when they feel like it. Youre fucking millionaires. I dont give a shit if your wifes sick, or you argued with your gf........FUCK YOU....PLAY!!!!!

 

I wish all of you a happy Thanksgiving, enjoy your families and time off from work. Im ghost, its been a pleasure, but I aint puttin in anymore time to a bunch of fucks that dont care.

 

 

OK, eggdog, heres where you have your fun.

 

well, the dog for one is shocked. how dare the dog ever suggest in the past that you were the definition of fair weather fan. stating that the giants needed a new QB next year after the redskins loss...disappearing in 2007 when the giants were struggling, only to come back in december when they made the playoffs...the dog wonders, if the giants make the playoffs, how long after that until we are blessed with your presence and insight again? you may be the brett favre of the sportswrath message board...

[fringe]

well, the dog for one is shocked.

 

is the grocery out of hungry man turkey dinners?