Jump to content
SportsWrath

Shurmur expected to be fired at season's end, Getty expected to be on short leash.


BlueInCanada

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, mastershake said:

By the way, an example of turning over an OL in two years is the NY Giants. In 2005, Snee, Kareem McKenzie, and Shaun O'Hara were not on the line two years prior to that season, and the offense from 2003 - 2005 went from 30th in points to 3rd. 

Diehl, Pettigout, were both on the team for years prior to that, Ohara was picked up in 2003, a proven vet, Snee was added in 2004 and McKenzie in 2005.

Until McKenzie showed up the Oline wasnt actually improving at all.

The team actually showed no mark improvement until 2005, when Coughlin finally put a wining record together.

So if anything to goes to show you shouldn't bail on a unit or a GM because of couple losing years.

Granted I don't think Getty is the answer at the moment, but you can't just pull the trigger on rebuilds every couple of years because of losing records.

49ers are a pretty good example of that as well.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sephiroth said:

Yeah honestly it seems to be a league-wide thing.  O-lines just aren't as good as they used to be. 

According to PFF, our line improved... slightly. Keep in mind too though, Pugh missed almost an entire season last year and I believe this is the second year Richburg is going on IR, so how useful are they really?  Also, Flowers is being rated as a guard... last time he played LT his rating was a 48.4, which is historically bad. 

This line isn't great but I'd take them over the 2017 version, no doubt. 

 

 

2017 O-line

 

Bobby Hart - 55.8

Dj Fluker - 60.2

Weston Richburg - 59.8

Justin Pugh - 66.5

Ereck Flowers 63.5

 

Average: 61.2

 

2019 O-line

 

Mike Remmers - 64.4

Kevin Zeitler - 73.7

Jon Halapio - 50.3

Will Hernandez 59.0

Nate Solder - 65.5

 

Average: 62.58

How fucking dare you bring PFF into this lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mastershake said:

Where I agree is that the jury is still out on him. He just doesn't look like a starter now.

The problem is, basing everything off one year, or even two is what franchises like the Browns do.

Yeah I understand you can't hold onto people to long, the perfect example if that fuck face JR being here three years too long.

But when you have a team like the Giants who have been pretty much non competitive for the last 8 years, you can't just hope for a one or two year turn around.

DG and company literally threw out the ENTIRE roster last year, like 90% turnover which is unheard of in the NFL.

We are playing with units of rookies and veterans who have been together for at most two years.

No single team in the NFL has ever won with a roster like that.

Like I said I'm not in support of either Shurmur or Getty, they havent shown much that they "could" be winners in the NFL, but still throwing them out the door in the middle of their plan is just cause for another rebuild.

Besides it's not all bad, DG has done some good, he's just failed to put together a Oline, with a team strapped with cap hell the last two years, and a guy like Solder they can't remove.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But sorry I should say I do understand what you're saying.

DG has failed to improve a weak Oline unit, Hernandez has regressed and Zeitler is the only bright spot, although I feel Pulley would make a much better center.

When you have a rookie QB and all star RB, an Oline is kind of an important thing.

However I don't put the blame solely on DG.

Hal Hunter has got to be the worst Oline coach to be in the NFL at the moment, the unit has regressed in all departments with his coaching.

I also simply blame JR for a big part of this.

This team has been in cap hell with unfriendly contracts they can't get rid of because no one else will take them.

Next year is the real test for DG.

He has the cap space, he has another draft, it's his team now, his and Shurmurs (if he's still the HC).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Storm said:

Well, he’s not telling Rosas to miss all those kicks and then plunk one out of bounds. 
 

I just don’t see the “tactical failures”.
 

Calling a time out with 17 seconds left with Doug Pederson, who is well known for playing analytics, having the Eagles lined up to go for it with your defense looking completely frantic is not a tactical error. Jake Elliott beat us just last year with a 60+ yard field goal. If he doesn’t call time out there and the Eagles run a quick out to Ertz, they win in regulation. The timeout was to get a defensive playcall in.

Of course, calling time out with 40 seconds left and then the Eagles still go for it, gives the Eagles even more time to get even closer. But it also gives the Giants plenty of time if the Eagles fail on a 4th down. Which is why Pederson letting the clock run down makes it look even more convincing that he’s going for it. 

Personally, I was telling my TV to call the time out for about 20 seconds before Shurmur called his time out. I knew Pederson wasn't going for it, total bluff, and that we would have 30 seconds and two time outs, plenty to get into fg range. 

Lots of TO issues with Shurmur. If it's one mistake once in great while, sure, happens to the best of them. It's multiple times a season with Shurmur, and worse, he gets baited into misusing his time outs. 

Of course you can't forget the mass substitution errors, twice this season alone. 

It's bad. It's really, really bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh another fun thing I found on PFF about roster turnover.

In 2018 they looked at the last 10 years of roster turnover and the average length someone is on the team here's the rankings;

Which teams have the longest average tenure? (League average is 2.263 seasons, between the Ravens and Colts.)

  1. Packers: 2.918 seasons

  2. Patriots: 2.882

  3. Bengals: 2.861

  4. Steelers: 2.628

  5. Chargers: 2.506

  6. 49ers: 2.488

  7. Falcons: 2.467

  8. Cowboys: 2.455

  9. Seahawks: 2.360

  10. Vikings: 2.329

  11. Saints: 2.329

  12. Eagles: 2.324

  13. Lions: 2.312

  14. Ravens: 2.280

  15. Colts: 2.241

  16. Dolphins: 2.231

  17. Texans: 2.227

  18. Panthers: 2.211

  19. Bears: 2.194

  20. Jets: 2.192

  21. Redskins: 2.176

  22. Bills: 2.158

  23. Cardinals: 2.156

  24. Rams: 2.082

  25. Chiefs: 2.071

  26. Titans: 2.063

  27. Broncos: 2.051

  28. Raiders: 2.025

  29. Giants: 2.011

  30. Browns: 1.909

  31. Jaguars: 1.853

  32. Buccaneers: 1.568

 

Notice how the bottom five teams (including the Giants) have been on the losing end of things the last 10 years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, BlueInCanada said:

Oh another fun thing I found on PFF about roster turnover.

In 2018 they looked at the last 10 years of roster turnover and the average length someone is on the team here's the rankings;

Which teams have the longest average tenure? (League average is 2.263 seasons, between the Ravens and Colts.)

  1. Packers: 2.918 seasons

  2. Patriots: 2.882

  3. Bengals: 2.861

  4. Steelers: 2.628

  5. Chargers: 2.506

  6. 49ers: 2.488

  7. Falcons: 2.467

  8. Cowboys: 2.455

  9. Seahawks: 2.360

  10. Vikings: 2.329

  11. Saints: 2.329

  12. Eagles: 2.324

  13. Lions: 2.312

  14. Ravens: 2.280

  15. Colts: 2.241

  16. Dolphins: 2.231

  17. Texans: 2.227

  18. Panthers: 2.211

  19. Bears: 2.194

  20. Jets: 2.192

  21. Redskins: 2.176

  22. Bills: 2.158

  23. Cardinals: 2.156

  24. Rams: 2.082

  25. Chiefs: 2.071

  26. Titans: 2.063

  27. Broncos: 2.051

  28. Raiders: 2.025

  29. Giants: 2.011

  30. Browns: 1.909

  31. Jaguars: 1.853

  32. Buccaneers: 1.568

 

Notice how the bottom five teams (including the Giants) have been on the losing end of things the last 10 years?

That's player tenure right? That's on the gm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mastershake said:

That's player tenure right? That's on the gm

It's roster turn over your not going to keep shit players just to keep the same players on your team.

The good teams have continuity in their roster.

The bad teams don't because they keep turning over their roster mostly due to FO or coaching changes.

Look at the Browns they are under 2 years of average player stays on their team.

It's not because they aren't paying the good ones lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CrazedDogs said:

so are the teams bad because they keep turning over the roster, or are they turning over their roster because they're bad? 

I think its usually the latter. 

I think it’s because those teams are constantly changing coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Storm said:

I think it’s because those teams are constantly changing coaches.

The Seahawks, Chiefs, 49ers, Rams, and Bills as examples all turned over their last coaches quickly, and they're largely doing well lately.

Moreover, Garrett, Marvin Lewis, Jay Gruden, are guys that other franchises kept around far too long just for the sake of it.

The point is to find the right person for the job, and Schurmer isn't it, regardless of personnel on this team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mastershake said:

The Seahawks, Chiefs, 49ers, Rams, and Bills as examples all turned over their last coaches quickly, and they're largely doing well lately.

Moreover, Garrett, Marvin Lewis, Jay Gruden, are guys that other franchises kept around far too long just for the sake of it.

The point is to find the right person for the job, and Schurmer isn't it, regardless of personnel on this team.

Jay Gruden is a terrible example. That franchise sucks because of ownership. 
 

The fact of the Giants is they’ve been given a shit sandwich for a roster for years and they’re finally starting to get returns on drafted players. They have what looks to be a franchise QB in the making. They will be well below the cap next year. All I’m saying is that Shurmur has never been given a chance since he’s been here. He basically was forced to play Manning (which, by the way, is the reason a lot of other coaches passed on the Giants gig). And he’s playing a rookie QB this year on a team that wasn’t even able to spend over 60 million dollars on its roster. It’s just ridiculously knee jerk to start the process over again. Saddle a coach with a roster built for one thing when he wants to do another. The switch to 4-3 wouldn’t be difficult but now you’ve drafted like 3 different DTs who are rotational nose tackles. Better hope they can switch or there goes that draft capital; now you need new players. Don’t want a traditional pocket passer who can make plays rolling out? Well they’re probably drafting one. 
 

I mean, a guy like Rivera or McCarthy aren’t going to even want to come here with stipulations like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not about pulling the trigger every couple of years or because of losing records. The problem is this team is show 0 - ZERO improvement in any facet of the game. In fact it is progressively getting worse. Every single unit is performing worse week after week. Barkley is being made to look like Miami's back-up RB or something. There is something fundamentally wrong with the thought process of putting together a competitive team. Thats the issue and thats why Im OK with cleaning house up in senior management this off season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Iceman_NYG said:

Its not about pulling the trigger every couple of years or because of losing records. The problem is this team is show 0 - ZERO improvement in any facet of the game. In fact it is progressively getting worse. Every single unit is performing worse week after week. Barkley is being made to look like Miami's back-up RB or something. There is something fundamentally wrong with the thought process of putting together a competitive team. Thats the issue and thats why Im OK with cleaning house up in senior management this off season

The defensive backfield is progressively getting better. The defensive line sackrd Wentz several times. I’ll agree the offensive line sucks. I knew that the Tate and Shepard combo was going to suck. Barkley’s not himself and again, the line sucks. I don’t know if you expected a bad team to start winning or what it is. But there are teams that are much better and much deeper talent-wise. I don’t know what more you want than a bad team losing by one score week after week. You think they can win out or something?

 

Shannahan had a bad team and was on the verge of being fired. Now they’re about to get a first round bye. You just don’t sell out a coach if he hasn’t lost the team. Outside of Barkley’s frustrations and stupid ass Janoris Jenkins who has wanted to leave, anyway, I don’t see it. The rookies are playing hard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Storm said:

The defensive backfield is progressively getting better. The defensive line sackrd Wentz several times. I’ll agree the offensive line sucks. I knew that the Tate and Shepard combo was going to suck. Barkley’s not himself and again, the line sucks. I don’t know if you expected a bad team to start winning or what it is. But there are teams that are much better and much deeper talent-wise. I don’t know what more you want than a bad team losing by one score week after week. You think they can win out or something?

 

Shannahan had a bad team and was on the verge of being fired. Now they’re about to get a first round bye. You just don’t sell out a coach if he hasn’t lost the team. Outside of Barkley’s frustrations and stupid ass Janoris Jenkins who has wanted to leave, anyway, I don’t see it. The rookies are playing hard. 

there is some individual progress.... Baker in man coverage looks pretty good last couple games....  and yet, there seem to be more miscommunications on both sides of the ball than there were at the start of the season. 

But again my opinion on Shurmur really has nothing to do with the whether or not this roster is good enough to compete, it's because of poor decision making that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the players are good enough, and a demonstrated inability to teach (or build a staff that can teach) the teamwork concepts that are really what drive a team's success. 

Losing sucks, but it sucks a lot less when its because you're getting beat by a better team.... us, we're getting beat both by better teams and by our own inability to carry out basic football concepts. FFS, we're in year two of being unable to pick up a basic stunt, or pass off a man through zone coverage. We just had an incident a few weeks back that a player was inserted at left tackle, and he didn't even know until he was told to go in the game that it was possible he would play at LT... how the actual fuck does that happen on the NFL level? The team is bad because we're putting guys that aren't good enough on the field, but the coach needs to go because he's putting guys on the field who aren't even remotely prepared. Exchange out the bad players for good players, and guess what.... if we still have Shurmur, we're going to have good players who are unprepared... and we'll still be losing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Iceman_NYG said:

Its not about pulling the trigger every couple of years or because of losing records. The problem is this team is show 0 - ZERO improvement in any facet of the game. In fact it is progressively getting worse. Every single unit is performing worse week after week. Barkley is being made to look like Miami's back-up RB or something. There is something fundamentally wrong with the thought process of putting together a competitive team. Thats the issue and thats why Im OK with cleaning house up in senior management this off season

This.

Plus, I don't expect Schurmer to get his act together even if we get better players. He's not the guy. Why delay the inevitable if you don't expect him to succeed? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, mastershake said:

Why delay the inevitable if you don't expect him to succeed? 

That sums it up right there. 

I don't think having better players is going to make him suddenly make better snap decisions. He's demonstrated a total inability to respond to in game situations. Dude needs to seriously play a lot more Madden or something, he makes mistakes that the average gamer wouldn't make. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CrazedDogs said:

 

...and wishful thinking doesn't count!

My problem with Schurmer is:

1) He seems content with just being "in the game" i.e. being within a score or two by the 4th quarter. He's also seemingly content if they have a few nice drives, defensive series etc, so he can say "Hey, we looked good there for a few minutes." 

2) Complete mis-use of Saquon Barkley in particular, but also others on offense.

3) Poor planning. Poor in game adjustments, adjustments on the fly. Salient example is the 2nd half of the Phili game.

4) He makes far too many excuses "We're young" "We're injured" "That guy didn't do what he was supposed to do" and refuses to take responsibility.

5) He has clearly been outfoxed by other coaches several times over the past 2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...