Bio not provided
Given Beckam's skills and attitude, he seems to be a player who's going to make a good contribution. All of the players you identified as real no. 1s, the dominant ones, were gone when the Giants picked. Because they didn't pass anyone up that you really wanted, your objection is that they didn't trade down and pick up another pick. Point noted, but not a disaster in the scheme of things. More to the point, if they wanted to make sure they got Beckam, maybe there was something they really liked. It was nice to see Reese say that it was an easy choice. (He always says what he really thinks, right?)For me, the biggest question is, if the game changers were gone, then did the G-men do well using the first pick in the next level on a WR not too different from Randle, Cruz, Jernigan? In other words, if you're getting a good but not a franchise player, is another average size but skilled WR what they need? Maybe they figure that he and Eli will have an easy time getting on the same page at the high school gym. Maybe they figure that better intangibles will give them what they need more than Randle and Jernigan. Whatever the case I hope they have a plan for protecting Eli, opening some holes for the RBs and rushing the passer if JPP is gimpy.
2 months, 2 weeks ago on Conversation @ http://ultimatenyg.com/2014-articles/odell-beckham-selected-in-round-1.html
The signings are exciting but a bit odd. Losing Tuck and Joseph
hurts and Boothe too. After years of loading up on DLs now we're loaded
at CB, S and returners but have to hope that the young DLs can step
up. Maybe Reese is setting himself up to draft more DLs but he still
needs a TE and maybe a beast at WR to replace Nicks. They should be OK
with Cruz, Randle and Manningham, but this is nowhere near the asset it
was in prior years.
Front office wise, the Reese has
gone from a relative FA wallflower to Dan Snyder. Team wise, the D
resembles the '80s era 49ers, built from the DBs down. New Blue.
4 months ago on DRC signs 5 yr Deal with the NY Giants
@capt george I disagree with the idea that the Giants' losing is the best way for them to get better. You are what your record says you are, unless you're hit with a streak of very bad luck. If they lose the rest of their games it's a pretty clear indication that their players aren't any good and the team needs to be rebuilt. Getting back to .500 means that their players are still functional and adjustments are necessary. We like that Nicks was better, instead of not showing up for the rest of the year (assuming a chance that he'll be back). We like that Tuck is getting some sacks. We'd like to see the LB corps continue to improve and the running game continue to improve. We want to see the DBs continue to improve, and Eli get back towards his form, with a little help from the OL. We want a lot of these guys around next year if they can play. If the Giants win the next few games it will be because these things are happening. If they lose it will be because they are not. Better draft choices are not a reason to hope for losses. Each loss is IMO more debilitating than the incremental increase in quality in the draftee from the worse record. I'd much rather have a 8-8 team at the end of the year than a 5-11 team, especially if the 8-8 is on the way up, regardless of the drafting opportunities. Substantial changes are necessary, whether or not the Giants win the rest of the way. I hope that JM, JR and even TC are able to realize them and pull them off. They're not stupid people and a lot of the needs are obvious. (I'd also be careful about getting rid of TC. I don't like him much either, but you don't know if the next coach will be the next Belichick, Dan Reeves or Ray Handley.) The schedule the rest of the way is hard, with only Washington not in contention for the playoffs. If the Giants can make a good showing against Detroit, NO and SD when they are fighting for the playoffs then there is hope for next year, especially if team management can adapt. If they lose out and the tank is really empty, especially Nicks and Tuck, then say goodbye to the team that we've known and probably contention for the next couple years.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Giants 24 Redskins 17
On CBS today Banks said that Rolle had Bryant in the slot because the
coaches don't have confidence in Hosley. Hindsight is pretty clear
that Amukamara would have been a better choice on 3d, even without
Hosley and McBride. Banks emphasized that Hosley needs to gain the
trust of the coaches, and apparently hasn't done so. This goes back to
our observation that winning championships depends on having the younger
guys step into the breach when needed. And vice versa.
also got on Gilbride for not throwing over the middle; he thought that
Dallas couldn't defend there and didn't do so when the Giants went
there. He said they were sticking too much to their game plan to force
downfield passes when the middle was there for the taking
8 months ago on DAL 24 NYG 21
All solid points, but the post is actually too easy on Gilbride. For me the killer play was the second trip to the red zone, calling a draw on 3d and goal from the 10. What did he expect to happen on that play? This is even worse than the throw to Myers because at least that was 1d. You're right that there cannot be wasted downs in the red zone, but it's pretty obvious that you can't waste 3d and goal. I wonder how much of this had to do with Nicks's absence. Was Gilbride surprised by his failure to play? Did he ever consider simplifying the offense for the two young receivers? Did Nicks's absence wipe out his options for throwing into the end zone?
I disagree with Dungy that Dallas dominated the game. The Giants had (slightly) more total offense and time of possession than Dallas, and matched them in first downs and takeaways. They ran for 200 yards. (Gilbride gets credit for running so effectively) Red zone failures and the defense's failure to stop Dallas on the last drive lost the game. (Rolle beaten for 3 first downs. Why was he playing Bryant?)
There is plenty of blame to go around in this lost season, but Gilbride stands out.
The development of a Giant linebacking corps with the addition of Beason and improvement in the others is to say the least welcome, and necessary if the team is to compete. But this has occurred (with associated positive stats) against Freeman in Minn., Barkley, a hobbled Pryor, and Tolzien. Romo is an entirely different test, as are the remaining QBs on the schedule. The rubber meets the road Sunday
8 months ago on Beason's Arrival Has Begun to Restore Pride to Big Blue LBs
@CommanderShepard @RussWellen1 Agree with CS. Hot young QBs have a way of getting figured out after a while. Foles's numbers are benefiting from being in a great offensive system, not to mention some weak or banged up teams. If the Jints can pull together anywhere near the offensive support that Philly has, I'll stick with Eli
8 months, 1 week ago on NYG 24 OAK 20
@RickHI used to think that running the clock down to 0, or beyond, was on Eli. Yesterday Eli made clear it was Gilbride. Good, maybe he'll fix the problem.
I think the Giant receivers are more than able to get separation most of the time, especially Cruz, but the plays aren't designed for that. Not only does Gilbride play too much longball, seems to me the Gmen also specialize in patterns with no moves, relying instead on back shoulders, fades and simple jump balls. Another head scratcher.
8 months, 4 weeks ago on NYG 15 PHI 7
@CommanderShepard Glass half full is that the D is gelling - JPP getting a bit healthier, Beason coalescing the LBs; Hill returning, Amukamara maturing, and Fewell simplifying improving the DB play. All combining to yield no points in the last 2 games. The glass half empty is that they haven't faced a functional QB in those 2 games.
Agree with RW and CS. The overall stats are bad, but the D
has been OK before they break from being overexposed. And this is
especially noteworthy given the lackluster LBs, injured secondary and
weak pass rush. If the offense gets into a better rhythm, especially by
developing a short passing game, and they can get a bit of pressure on
the QB the team can do damage. And as long as the rest of the division keeps losing,
playoffs are a (perverse) possibility. Let's see what happens tonight
9 months, 2 weeks ago on Backs to the Wall
@Arthuro And I would add 3. at least this year an opt out of an available shorter throw for a longer pattern exponentially increases Eli's exposure to free ranging 285 lb. defensive lineman. I would be surprised if this happened very often, especially after the first 10 minutes or so.
Especially since 4. a lot of the downfield throws are into coverage. Including 2d and 10 to Cruz in 4Q on Sunday right before the killer second pick.
9 months, 2 weeks ago on PHI 36 NYG 21
Absolutely spot on. Eli's racking up some bad numbers, but it's not all on him. Even Coughlin recognizes he's trying to do too much. And we see today they can pass block well enough in to keep competitive. And the receivers are by and large playing well. So what's the problem?
You highlighted the best example. Giants get the ball back down by 8. Philly has scored twice, but there is plenty of time left and the offense had shown enough life with 2 TDs in the 3Q to briefly take the lead before the Eagles jump back out. Giants need to move the ball, and get points. First play long pass, probably not the best idea but you take some shots. Getting no yards on 1D isn't a crisis but now you need to think about the sticks. But 2d and 10? You NEED to compete for first down here. So Gilbride dials up . . . a bomb to Cruz. After it drops, now it's 3d and 10 and Eli gets picked trying to gain the first down in one play when they had three. The OC is not seriously competing, or building a rhythm, or confidence, or helping out his leaky line or increasingly erratic QB. The failure has probably destroyed the season and definitely would have already if the division weren't so bad.
Makes total sense. Blackburn always survived on his game smarts, and the Giants certainly played like they were in Carolina's pocket. O-line may not be that good, but I would be surprised if they are that bad. It's amazing that the coaches didn't plan around this, or at least begin to figure it out during the game, and break a few tendencies. Maybe I've got my colored glasses on but from the beginning 38-0 has seemed like a coaching failure. I'm expecting a better effort against KC. Then again, it's not like their coach doesn't know a little about the G-men, including winning 8 of the last 10 . . .
10 months ago on Chase Black-burned
@ultimatenygMaybe but you used a very good word - adjustment. The opponents are adjusting and we aren't. Giant's defense was very good in the first half against Denver and decent against Dallas and Carolina at the outset. Then the opposing OC figures out how to exploit us. That's his job. Our OC didn't figure out very much at all against Denver and Carolina. It's hard to believe that the line is so weak as to not allow us to compete for first downs and set records for futility against a poor team, given the talented skill players.
10 months ago on CAR 38 NYG 0
I think you're (uncharacteristically) letting the coaching staff off too easy. Each year, the Giants, apparently with playoff or near-playoff talent, have several games where they are unable to compete, including two or three collapses (last year e.g. Cin, Atl. Bal). This is on the coaches, as well as the GM. Even with the incomplete squad Reese assembled (how many teams are complete?) there is no way this team should be that overmatched against Carolina. The offense must find a way to compete for first downs. Nobody confuses Carolina's defense with the 85 Bears. Is there really no way to block them? Maybe a couple more screen passes slows down the rush. It's one thing to lose because the GM didn't fully shore up a critical area (LB, OL) but it's another to get shut out by 38 against a winless team.
Yep, and with the defenses seeing it coming it all depends on whether
Cruz and Nicks can outjump the guys hanging all over them and hold the
ball before getting crushed. Seems like a dumb way to try to move the
chains, which is one reason why the Gmen have been posting such bad 3d
down stats and why everyone else makes sure they have a short passing
And especially with the O line still a work in progress, they probably ought to consider some quicker plays
10 months, 3 weeks ago on Giants Roster, Odds in Game 1
Agree totally, Reese et al are really pushing their LBs don't matter
theory to the limit. I know it's a passing league now, but unlike the
G-men, the other teams use short and midrange passing as a staple of the
offense, including on 3d and 5. Good LBs are still essential. And
what's up with T. Sash when we're 2 safeties down going into the
beginning of the season?
You make some great points. But I'd like to suggest two other factors: the growing dominance of offensive football and injuries. The game has become dominated by offense, which seems to help underdogs, and the team with momentum. NFL games, playoffs and regular season have become shootouts with wild swings in momentum and huge comebacks. It used to be a 21 point lead was a blowout, now it's little more than a glitch. This makes the whole thing more of a crapshoot, especially when it now comes down to managing the clock at the end to not score too soon, and the worst sin is to be flat at the wrong time. Used to be you needed a stout defense and team balance and consistency. Second is injuries. They have always been part of the game but it seems that now each team has a lot of significant injuries in the stretch. And aside from better medical techniques the way to manage them and thrive seems to be to integrate younger players more quickly into the game. This was a major factor for the G-men last year, especially in the defense becoming functional for the playoffs. If the goal is to have a serviceable defense along with a high powered offense to give you the best chance in a shootout, then getting some replacement bodies who know how to play defense is a critical part of the mix. This year it was the Ravens defensive vets getting healthy. Last year it was the Giants a mix of getting healthy and their younger guys e.g. J. Williams getting better. The Packers 2 years ago were decimated by injuries but got healthier at the end. The younger guys help get the team to the playoffs when everyone is hurt during the regular season and/or fill in at the end. The momentum issue and avoiding flatness is why the bye isn't the same advantage it should be. GB last year is exhibit A. And it's looking more that good position coaches are worth their weight in gold, with the need to get younger guys ready quickly as a result of injuries and FA.
1 year, 4 months ago on What does it take to win an NFL Championship?
They are going to miss his leadership. I hope he finds his way back, even if he only plays half the time
1 year, 5 months ago on Casualties of the Cap: Bradshaw, Boley, Canty
Today's SI.com has a detailed description how Atl DC Mike Nolan shut down the Giants' O on Sunday with disguised coveragesnfl.si.com/2012/12/19/break-it-down-atlantas-defense-does-it-again/?sct=uk_t11_a7Obviously Eli and Gilbride are going to have to elevate their game if we meet the Dirty Birds again in the playoffs. If we make the playoffs . . .
1 year, 7 months ago on ATL 34 NYG 0
The Giants defense could not stop Washington's running attack, even when they knew what was coming. Outcoached and outplayed. They still could have won with a better offensive performance, and they did pretty well in the first half. Even with the mistakes, they moved the ball well in 1H including short passes, moved the chains, ate up clock and scored enough to stay ahead.
In 2H the Skins adjusted and took away the run. Gilbride couldn't adjust and the Gmen stalled. You can't wait until 3rd down to worry about moving the chains, especially when you really need to. I know we've said it before but short passing would have helped alot. If they did it like they did in 1H they would have won.
Someone should invite Prince to line up within shouting distance of the LOS. Gutty, tough performance by Bradshaw. He got his 100, too bad he couldn't will a victory.
The DEs looked bad on the fakes and options but that's understandable with RG3. The inability to stop Morris up the middle is less understandable. Blackburn looks absent much of the time he's out there, but he manages one or two big plays a game, like causing the Morris fumble last night. At this point, I'm not sure they're worth it
1 year, 7 months ago on Redskins-17 Giants-16; Giants Fall to 7-5
@Arthuro It'd be sweeter if the G-men could actually beat them.
1 year, 7 months ago on NY Giants 38 GB 10
@Arthuro I still think it comes back to the coaches and their strategy. We have Cruz, who is pretty competitive in the slot. And we drafted Wilson in part to catch the ball out of the backfield. And we signed Bennett to give Eli a big physical target, which can be used to get 7 yards if you need it. More importantly, even if we didn't have top talent in these positions, these guys should be enough to offer a change of pace to the downfield game. GB doesn't have Sproles or Welker either. And NE uses Woodhead out of the backfield, and Faulk before that. Seems to me that if it was important enough to the coaches, and it should be, they would find a way to have the capability.
1 year, 8 months ago on CIN 31 NYG 13
@Arthuro Good research. Giants are throwing a lot of 15 yard passes when the others are throwing shorter, and to backs. As I said before I wonder how many of these are on 3d and 5 or on 1st D. If the stats are for the most recent games, NO put up 31 on Atlanta, NE 37 against Buffalo, GB 31 against AZ. If the stats are for the season, they're pretty eye popping, there is your strategy for moving the chains. And its obvious that if you're defending the Giants you're taking away the downfield stuff and daring us to throw to the backs. Seems like time to wake up
@RichConforti Eli is the Giants leader, and his presence means they are always in the game as long as they are within a couple of scores, or one score in the last two minutes. But you can't be afraid to play your second string if you need a change of pace or if the team needs to be shaken up, especially if you're down by three or four touchdowns. I don't blame Eli more than anyone else for the offensive ineptitude of the last couple weeks, but it sure looked like he began to lose his rhythm and focus against Cin, especially in protecting the ball. More positively, Carr is a professional QB who is competent to take some snaps and could change momentum. Especially if part of your problem is that everyone is playing soft. I hope and expect that the offense will be better against GB. But we're on notice now about a potentially significant slump, lasting three games. I would be prepared with contingencies if the offense does not compete with GB better than Cin.
@RichConforti I'm not convinced that having a shorter passing option on 2/3 of the pass plays is all that's necessary for smart "small ball." How does this compare to the other potent passing offenses such as GB and NE? It seems this means that on 1/3 of the plays all of the receivers are running long developing routes. How many of these are on 3d and 5? How many on 1st down? And how many of the shorter options involve backs and/or other elements of surprise? I'd love to see a comparison of the Giants' strategy for moving the chains and other teams, especially against our D. The overall point, it seems to me, is that when you go 11 or 12 quarters without a TD pass, especially in a talented passing offense without a dominant running game, it's on the coaches to figure it out, including better schemes, and if it's execution, either better preparation or substituting personnel. Or maybe we just got our asses kicked :) I'd try to get Carr a couple of reps in practice
To my mind this is on the coaches. The most striking thing was the inability to adjust during the game when an inferior team is beating you. This is the third game in a row they are underperforming, especially the offense which looks like the Jets. Over the last couple of games, the Giants are playing like a bottom quarter team.
The Giants simply have too many tools, including a talented and experienced backup quarterback, to perform like that over several games. I know that the team is tired and banged up. So is everybody else. And you’re not always going to get best effort, that’s human nature. But the coaches have to adjust to these situations, including changing schemes, keeping people fresher and substituting those who are not. Including Eli if necessary.
Andy observation re last week’s game against Pittsburgh was true again: no small ball and no effective adjustments. Downfield passing and back shoulder fades to get first downs can only get you so far, especially when the other teams begin to figure you out. Even the greatest show on turf Rams relied on Faulk and others to keep things moving until they could find someone downfield. So does Brees. Why do the Giants think they’re so good that they don’t have to?
@pdmeyerh Even if the receivers had caught all those drops, Dallas would still have gotten twice the passing first downs as the Giants. You can't win like that, especially if you're not dominating running the ball.
Focusing on the drops though raises another point. Most of those drops were not easy catches. In addition to the other problems, the Giants downfield passing scheme puts a lot of pressure on the receivers to make an athletic play to catch the ball. A lot of times Eli just throws it up for grabs, especially on deep balls, or otherwise gives the WR a chance to outcompete the DB. Typically the Giants receivers do a superior job, maybe the best in the league, at making excellent athletic catches. This is another way a short passing game would take some pressure of the rest of the downfield game
1 year, 8 months ago on NYGiants 29 Dallas 24
Right on. We'll take it, but 3-15 on 3D is not going to win with a less generous opponent. The other stats bear this out. Dallas had 21 passing first down, Giants had 7. You cannot win close games like that. Short passing game is definitely a main factor in this. Witten had 18 catches - more than the Giant total - averaging 9 yards per. The lack of a short passing game is obvious and hopefully this will be a wake up call. The pass defense could use some work too.
Good writeup. Your thought about the key to winning being getting better throughout the season and injuries helping your second line players develop is spot on; this is what made last year's playoff Giants. Jacquian etc. This year let's hope that Hixon, Randle, and some of the young DBs work out the same way. Yesterday looked like good progress for them except for the long TD pass.
Was the 240 yard rushing day an aberration against a bad team that couldn't adjust to their MLB being hurt, or the OL getting better? And the pass rush is getting to be a worry. It's gonna be a lot harder next week against SF and the rest of the year.
1 year, 9 months ago on NYG 41 Browns 27
@jfoster Yep, and especially when down by 2 and inside the opponent's 30 with less than a minute to play.
1 year, 9 months ago on PHL 19 NYG 17
Mixed message but overall it looks like they're going to keep on doing what they're doing. Pass the Rolaids
NY Giants' Tom Coughlin not ready to change offensive philosophy after letting Eli Manning throw deep at end of Eagles loss
Coach stands by Big Blue style of always going for it, but admits he might do that last sequence against Philadelphia over if he had the chance to replay it.
By Ralph Vacchiano / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/giants/coughlin-defends-deep-thoughts-article-1.1172420#ixzz28AUVBSi9
In hindsight, even Tom Coughlin admitted he was probably wrong. Maybe he should have run the ball to try to set up the potential game-winning field goal against the Eagles rather than let Eli Manning throw his ill-fated deep pass.
. . . . Just don’t mistake his confession for an apology or as a sign that his philosophy is going to change. Because as he accepted the blame for the bitter defeat and welcomed the inevitable second-guessing, Coughlin also strongly defended his aggressive nature. He wants his offense to always be on the attack, which is why he green-lighted a pass play on Sunday night with 25 seconds left and the Giants already in range for a field goal.
. . . . Yes, Coughlin said, in hindsight it wasn’t the right decision, but “that’s the way we usually play.” “What we’ve been able to do - with success - has been to continue on the attack,” Coughlin said. “We feel quite frankly with our quarterback that’s the way we should play.”
“We always say ‘Try to get as close as possible,’” added Eli Manning. “If you can score a touchdown, you try to score a touchdown. That’s the mentality that we have. You see a lot of teams get to the 30-yard line, then all of a sudden get conservative and then you’ve got to kick a 48 yarder. Those aren’t guaranteed. So you want to get as close as possible to try to ensure the win.”
That’s been the Giants’ philosophy for most of the Coughlin era and definitely since Kevin Gilbride was promoted to offensive coordinator for the start of the 2007 season. The Giants are a pass-first team that’s not afraid to take shots at the end zone.
. . . . “That’s the way we play,” Coughlin said. “We’ve been able to do that by virtue of putting the ball in the hands of the quarterback and having him make good decisions. This one didn’t work out. Would we change? Yeah, sure. Today we would. Today it’s easy.”
Very close game, obviously. The Giants hurt themselves badly with failure to contain Vick and McCoy around end, bad play calling at the end of the game, and Eli's end zone pick. You can blame Barden for the OPI but it probably saved a game ending interception. Credit for the game being close as close as it was goes to Wilson's returns and a couple of defensive stops inside the 15. As bad as it is to lose a winnable game to Philly, this is one of those games which could lead to the coaches adjusting. Hopefully it won't take a 3 game losing streak and elimination games in November. But the article in todays Daily News shows that the message hasn't quite sunk in yet.
BTW it was fun for a fleeting moment to see the faces of Philly fans after Reed called the timeout on the last kick. Too bad it didn't last . . .
3-0 Giants till late in the first half, then each team adjusts offensively and the Giants D couldn't stop Dallas after that. From there 24-14 plus the clinching first down on the last drive. All three levels of defense failed: not enough pressure or contain from the line, poor run support from the LBs and the DBs repeatedly torched. There were times Blackburn was invisible. The Jints offense came to life a bit, but your observation was spot on: they didn't have the run and needed to establish short passing to compensate. Too little too late against a Dallas team that didn't fold. (Is this a new chapter for the 'Boys, finishing outplaying a good opponent??)
It's hard to see much good about this game, except outstanding catch by Hixon. Bennett showed big pluses and some minuses, hopefully the minuses get ironed out. Too many drops from Cruz and Nicks apparently still hobbled.
Bottom line is that the Cowboys adjusted far better than the Giants, and outplayed them for the last 2 1/2 quarters, especially Dallas O v. Giants D. The Giants have retooled from far worse losses, so let's hope they figure it out.
1 year, 10 months ago on Dallas 24 NYG 17 | September
@dd704 @I Bleed Blue LOL I was at that Viking game, watching those pick 6s got to be surreal. Championship teams don't let that happen to them but . . .
2 years, 4 months ago on Thoughts on Tebow From the Giants’ Ivory Tower | March
Good for the league, the fans and the players. I think these penalties came out exactly right. Gaining competitive advantage by deliberately trying to injure players is obviously inconsistent with any fair or even civilized sport. I doubt this will eliminate targeting of players, but it will go a long way toward de-institutionalizing it the way Williams has come to represent. Football will remain violent but minus some of the Rollerball aspect that bountygate brings. And if the penalty seems unfair, the Saints brought it on themselves by lying, covering up and blowing off the league. I feel bad for Saints fans but this is a good day for the rest of us.
2 years, 4 months ago on Goodell's wrath and R.I.P Ron Erhardt | January
The nightmare moment of the year was watching Miles Austin run past Ross when the Cowgirls needed a first down to essentially end the Giants' season. Romo somehow missed him and the show went on.
2 years, 4 months ago on Aaron Ross Cashes Out | March
Jacobs was more valuable than his stats because he always had the potential to flatten defenders, especially DBs, probably more than any back in the league. That factor will be missed. The hit on Woodson was one of the signature moments in the Giants' 07-08 SB run, even if it only gained 5 yards.
2 years, 4 months ago on Jacobs Always Brought it for Big Blue | March
If MM's biggest goal is getting the ball more it's good that he's going. Me first stupid is not the best way to build a football team. I'm glad we can deal with this in the offseason instead of the middle of the year.
The Giants will need RB, JJ, DT, DH, or someone else to step in as 3d WR. This will be another test for Eli's ability to bring young receivers along like he did with Cruz.
2 years, 4 months ago on Manningham on his way out; Osi likely stay | February
@xtian Agree. It would have been an outstanding catch if he had made it. I'm very surprised Brady said he'd throw it there again. Given how badly Welker had beaten the DBs, there were certainly easier ways to make that play
2 years, 4 months ago on Saved by the turf. A look back at Wes Welker's GIANT drop in Super Bowl XLVI. | February
The pass was extremely difficult to catch, and in other circumstances the "drop" would not even raise an eyebrow. Welker had to rapidly twist as he was running downfield, jump as high as he could, and then extend as far as possible up and to his right just to get his hands on the ball. Because of all this and maybe because as Glenn points out he couldn't fully twist his pivot foot on the turf, he had zero margin for error. And in trying to grab the ball he erred by an inch or two so he missed it.
As a Giants fan I think more about the blown coverage. I know that with the SB victory we don't need to think of the bad stuff, and also that the defense is credited for improving in the last 2 games of the regular season and the postseason, but I still wonder at the totally blown coverages against key receivers. In addition to Welker, these include Jennings twice for potential TDs (Rodgers misses the first, and Osi strips the second) and Vernon Davis 2d TD 1 on 1 against Phillips who's beaten as soon as he lines up two yards outside of Davis on the line of scrimmage. It makes me wonder whether they really shed the problem which plagued them during the season.
I also think the impact of that play is exaggerated - if Welker catches that ball, NE has a first down at about the 20 with 4 minutes left and a 2 point lead. The game isn't over: If they don't score a TD, Eli still gets the ball back with plenty of time to win the game. And the Pats still had a play to go for the first down. Romo's overthrow to Austin running past Ross with 2:20 left in the first Dallas with the boys up by 5 (a few minutes after they had gift wrapped at TD for Bryant) was much more likely to have ended the Giants' season if Austin had caught it.
2 years, 5 months ago on Saved by the turf. A look back at Wes Welker's GIANT drop in Super Bowl XLVI. | February
@Arthuro They should give Rex Ryan half a share. Maybe a pinkie ring
2 years, 5 months ago on Hoisted By His Own Petard, Belichick's Strategy Backfires | January
@Arthuro They also ran off two seconds after Bradshaw scored
@TC4EVA Exactly right. There wasn't much of a choice at all. If Bradshaw gives himself up with :57 and the Pats call their last timeout, the Giants still have 3d down. If Eli takes a knee they can run the clock down to 15 seconds before kicking the field goal. No time for anything, especially with no timeouts.
In fact hoodie's strategy worked pretty well, and gave the Pats a decent chance to win the game. If Brady throws that first pass a couple of inches higher, Branch is in Giant territory with :50 left. Big trouble. Even the way it turned out, Gronk wasn't too far away from that tipped hail mary. And he would have been much closer with a better ankle.
The real problem with the call isn't that it's bad strategy, it's bad football. If Bradshaw does the right thing he goes down and doesn't score. Or better yet, wanders around for a couple of seconds, a few yards from the goal line. Until one of the defenders who's been told to let him score hits him. So the spectacle at the climactic moment of our most intense sport is the offense trying not to score against a defense trying not to stop them. This is going to start happening more, and we were discussing it, at least the offensive strategy, during the regular season when the Pack and then Romo torched our D for last minute drives from deep in their own territory after Giant TDs. Leave it to hoodie to initiate a major decorum dilemma to give himself better odds. I predict the rules committee is going to have to deal with this next year because there are too many offenses, including both in the SB, who are good enough to play this way.
@CommanderShepard@vblasi67 Actually, score a big one for the DBs, that may have been the defensive play of the game, along with the Blackburn int. Collingsworth called the sack two plays later the defensive play of the game, and it was big, but it just buried the Pats further into 4th down, which they would get out of. The Phillips tip of Brady-Branch changed everything. Branch was wide open and if the pass hits him he would have been in Giant territory with about 50 seconds left. It's easy to envision Brady getting the Pats to the Giant 20 with 30 or so seconds left. At that point it looks like the opposite of SB 42 instead of a replay. Maybe a better ending for the 100 million viewers but probably not for us. Hats off to Phillips; Eli, Bradshaw and Gilbride owe him one.
2 years, 5 months ago on NY Giants 21 Patriots 17 SUPER BOWL CHAMPIONS!!!!! | February
@CommanderShepard@dgvertz I wasn't too worried about roughing the passer either, but on second thought re Osi/Rodgers I probably should have been
@bikeupright In a lot fewer words, the 80s Jints won by taking the air out of the ball. And they didn't always win, so there was some frustration wondering if we could play with a real offense too, especially when the Eagles, Redskins, Cowboys or 49ers (or Rams or Jets to knock us out in 88, 89) passed their way around or through us.
Nobody would describe Eli/Gilbride as taking the air out of the ball. But nobody would mistake our current D for that one, even though our D line now is better. PIck your poison.
@CommanderShepard@vblasi67 Good call. Score one for the DBs.
The Giants in those eras had a different identity and Eli and Co. have re-defined the style of success as led by a dynamic downfield passing attack. This has never happened for them before, except maybe for a little bit with Fassel/Collins. The 70s were noncompetitive, the best players were the NT (Mendenhall), TE (Tucker), LB (Van Pelt) and P (Jennings). In the 80s, Simms was very good starting in 84 but the offenses under Parcells/Erhardt were not geared to pass to WRs and could be very frustrating to watch. The leading WR in 86 was Manuel and in 90 was Ingram. When they won they did so with an outstanding D let by the best LB corps ever and very good secondary and pretty good D line. The offense moved the ball by running it and passing as needed, especially in the playoffs.
The problem was the competitors offenses had advanced beyond leather helmets by the 80s. SF started the west coast offense and moved the ball at will Washington, Dallas, Miami, SD, Cin, Hou also had solid aerial games with good or excellent QBs so they could score points in bunches and score 2 minute TDs. Even the Jets with Toon and Walker. Elway could move the ball by himself. Simms could run a 2 minute drill but I don’t remember the Giants ever scoring a TD in the last 2 minutes to win a playoff game during this era. Yet for a team with probably the best defense in the league for 1984-1991 (except for 84, 85 Bears) and a very good running game and O line, they never emerged as the best team except in 86. You're right, even though we knew it could be better we were mostly happy about having a solid, tough, competitive team, especially after they won that 86-87 SB because it sucked to be so mediocre for all those years especially when Dallas was so good.
Eli is engineering a completely new era of Giants football. Giants started passing more with Fassel/Collins but were never this good. If the D can keep up and the running game can stay in support, they can be a top team for a while. Just keep the guns away from the WRs.
What we've known for a while is now obvious to most of the sports world: that Eli's leadership on the field is responsible for a large part of the Giants success, especially against the best teams in the league. This year and four years ago he has repeatedly gone up against the league's best and pulled out difficult or improbable victories, NE, Pack, Cowgirls, SF, etc. Not to mention a regular season where he carried a struggling defense with consistent production at money time.
This year we're seeing something even greater though: Eli has had a big hand in creating the WR corps that the Giants (and he) need to compete at a top level. Since 4 years ago, Plax shot himself into prison and the Jets, Toomer retired, S. Smith (and Boss) left. He got three young wide receivers who are all talented but still working out the kinks in their game. Eli has been a major factor in their growth into one of the most, if not the most, dangerous WR trios in the league. Especially Cruz. Not to mention the attitude example Eli sets. This is the group he needed to elevate himself and Giants to the highest level - throwing the ball is a team game - and the offensive record the whole year shows it.
"One of the guys who was probably at every one of those was Victor Cruz, a guy who did a lot of spot work and making decisions and reads and just talking through things," Manning said. "Obviously, he's a guy who's had a great season."
At the time, Cruz was a second-year player who missed most of his first season because of injury and wasn't even sure he'd make the team.
"It was a tough time, but I was just focused on the moment," he said. "I understood that if I go in there and just throw with Eli and kind of build his trust a little bit and understand what the routes were, understand where he likes to put the ball, I think I'd have a great shot coming in because we'd have already built a little bit of a rapport in the offseason."
It turned into the greatest statistical season any Giants quarterback and receiver have ever had. It was the first time that Manning showed some faith in Cruz, a relationship that grew throughout the season.
The scene fit well with Manning's vision: to build a strong rapport with his hodgepodge receiving unit and return to the level of elite quarterback, where he believed he belonged. "He was tired of people talking about how many interceptions he threw last year," says his father, Archie, of a career-worst 25 picks in 2010 and a second straight year of missing the playoffs. "What he was saying was, I've been around for seven years. I know I can play this game."
The makeshift camp lasted two weeks, with participants ranging from 2009 first-rounder Hakeem Nicks to former practice squad player Victor Cruz, who had ample time a year ago to launch a clothing line on the side: Young Whales. "We were tired of paying money for designer clothes," Cruz says of his venture with former Giants defensive tackle Nate Collins, "so we decided to start our own."