Do you know what time it is? It's Ernie P. time

by Ed Valentine on Nov 20, 2009 7:00 AM EST in News Comment 18 comments

It's Friday, and that means time for my weekly swap of questions with long-time New York Giants beat writer Ernie Palladino. My answers to these same questions are over at Ernie's Giants Beat.

Ernie and I have largely been on the same page with most of our answers this season. Interestingly, The Aaron Ross question below (which was Ernie's question) is the first time I can remember where we completely disagree.

Ernie wants to see Aaron Ross at corner with Terrell Thomas moving to safety. I want Ross at safety, since Thomas is doing a good job, Ross has some experience at safety and I am afraid doing the opposite might cause problems at two positions.

I will be interested to see how you guys feel about this one.

1. We haven't seen much of the no-huddle offense this year. Do you think a return to it in spots could help the Giants' offense?

Ernie's Answer: Absolutely. This subject caused quite a spirited and divided debate at my place (http://erniepalladinosgiantsbeat.blogspot.com) on Tuesday. Remember back in '07 and '08 when they ran the no-huddle? It was so effective that it had all us reporter types asking why in the world they only use it in spots. It had to be explained to us that it's actually exhausting for the offense because the wide receivers have to sprint back to the line to set up for the next play. That makes sense, but we're not talking about using it all game long. We're talking key spots, especially when the offense appears it's about to stall. The thing about the no-huddle is that it's not necessarily a hurry-up, though some similar principles apply to the two-minute drill. It forces the defense to keep the same personnel on the field because of the possibility of a quick snap. And keeping that defense static opens the possibility of mismatches downfield. And you can run out of it. Honestly, except for the inexperience of a receiving corps that probably benefitted from the tranquility of the huddle while getting the play, I don't know why the Giants stopped using it. Maybe now that Hakeem Nicks and Mario Manningham are more experienced in the offense, and therefore more able to make those snap adjustments you need to make from the no-huddle, we'll be seeing more of it. If they're ever going to go back to it, this would be the ideal time.

2. Just how big is this game with Atlanta?

Huge. Bigger than the San Diego game. Why? Because this is a conference game that could figure into a tie-breaker situation at the end of the season. Let's say the Giants finish 9-7 and are in the wildcard hunt. A win here gives them a head-to-head over Atlanta. Plus, the division tie-breaker includes conference record as the fourth criteria. In fact, if they're going to throw away any game from here on out, the Thanksgiving night matchup with Denver would be the one. All the rest are conference and division games, and they're all basically must-win games.

3. Now that Danny Ware can carry the ball, how would you use him?

Sparingly. Well, maybe that's too strong a word. I'd throw him in there in the fourth quarter when leading to kill the clock, much as the Giants deployed Ahmad Bradshaw for the most part. Look, Ware seems like a pretty strong runner. But there is still an issue with the elbow he dislocated on the first kickoff of the season. Until the coaches stop worrying about his ability to secure the ball, I'd be very cautious about overusing him. Besides, what this offense needs is not Danny Ware, but more Brandon Jacobs. I've long held that Jacobs needs to get the ball between 20 and 25 times. With Bradshaw penciled in for another seven to 10 carries at least, there would be few carries for Ware, anyway. The fact that Kevin Gilbride and Jerald Ingram just can't wait to put the kid in concerns me. They should be more worried about getting Jacobs in there more. I'm not saying Ware won't someday become a great back. But at this point, he's an extra, not a star. And he should be used as such.

4. Assuming Aaron Ross will be able to play, would you put him at cornerback or safety?

I stick him at corner. If he'd been playing all along, I'd have switched him to safety three games ago. He played a bit there in college and, to me, seems like a good enough tackler to handle the job. But there's a learning curve that goes with switching a guy over, and having been out since the summer with that hamstring problem, putting him at safety right now would be a bit of an overload. I'd rather see him work his way back at corner, with Terrell Thomas going to safety. Remember, we don't know how much Ross can play. Chances are he's going to have to start with a limited workload -- a few snaps -- to prove to the staff he's back all the way. After a couple of games and a possible return to starter, then you can think about switching him if necessary. But I have a feeling that if Thomas goes over there, Ross won't need to move, anyway.

0 recs | Comment 18 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

CB and SS

Is it possible for someone to play both CB and safety? If Ross wins back his starting job then can TT be a backup at both next year?

Did McQuarters do that?

by MSP Giant on Nov 20, 2009 7:09 AM EST reply actions

Sure, it's possible

A guy can learn both positions.

by Ed Valentine on Nov 20, 2009 7:26 AM EST up reply actions

TT learns both positions

and becomes the nickel guy next year. That sounds like a very good thing and the type of versatility that Coughlin seems to love out of his players.

by brisulph on Nov 20, 2009 7:49 AM EST reply actions

It's a close call,

Ed, but I like TT’s move to S better, because, given Ross’s iffy status, it seems more practical. Of course, it’s true that Ross has experience at S, so….

by blue gonz on Nov 20, 2009 8:31 AM EST reply actions

Yeah, it's 50-50

I just like Ross there now because he has played it a little, and it would be a quicker adjustment to make at this point in the season. Long-term, TT might be better suited to it.

by Ed Valentine on Nov 20, 2009 8:41 AM EST up reply actions

Yes I agree with you Blue..

Given Ross is just coming back, I wouldn’t want to see him given that added burden right away..Way too much to ask from him..They’ll most likely play him sparingly anyway..Thomas has been on the field in the heat of battle all season and would probably make the best choice. Ross needs to test out his hammy..Give and take some gametime hits..I say keep him in his comfort zone at corner and let him matriculate back into the line-up..I do like the idea of both him and TT eventually learning and being able to play both positions..that would be awesome..Right now, I have my fingers crossed on Ross..Let’s hope he is 100% ready.

by Bobbiblue on Nov 20, 2009 10:27 AM EST up reply actions

Gotta say I disagree with Ernie about Ware

I don’t see why Bradshaw should get penciled in for 7-10 carries – he’s been awful the past few weeks, and you can’t convince me he’s not really hurt unless he runs like he did in the beginning of the year this weekend. I’d rather see what Ware can do – maybe he can be our Derrick Ward type of guy. And the Giants offense is definitely better when we have 2 RB’s effectively sharing the load

"[The Giants] beat us down. We were beat by a grown-man team, a team we want to be like one day. They came in here and took it to us. Out-manned us, out-gunned us. ... It wasn't even close." - Raheem Morris, 9/27/09

by cjmulrain on Nov 20, 2009 8:42 AM EST reply actions

I feel the same way

Ernie has not posted my answers over at his site yet, but when he does you’ll see that I said basically the same thing. Ware needs to get a few of ABs touches, not Jacobs touches.

by Ed Valentine on Nov 20, 2009 8:46 AM EST up reply actions

Yes

I think Ware should take some of the burden off of Bradshaw..and it will be nice to see Jacobs be allowed to run in his north/south style again..The only thing I wish Jacobs could learn is to lower his body more..He runs too straight up..I guess it is hard for a guy that big to do that, but if he could that would help keep him healthy..His shoulder pads look like two bulldozer blades..He leaves himself too vulnerable alot of times.

by Bobbiblue on Nov 20, 2009 10:35 AM EST up reply actions

agreed

but we said this when it was the earth wind and fire show. back then we asked them to get AB more touches when he was entrenched behind ward. now that AB has moved up, i’ll say it again. Get a 3 headed monster going, don’t let the D get used to any of them. and for God sakes, leave big boy in in the redzone – allow him to be rewarded for all of his hard work.

by wilddre22 on Nov 20, 2009 2:23 PM EST up reply actions

I disagree with EP

on the Jacobs 20-25 thing. The biggest reason they don’t do that with Jake..like they’ve done for a while, is that he has 2 runs in a row then gets injured. WHY bring him back out to get injured even more?

I also like the idea of Ware getting more carries. If they’re so concerned about the arm…well don’t we all have 2 (or my case…3) arms? AB’s hurt, he has a fractured foot. I can’t see how a foot injury is less concerning than an arm injury..especially for a RB and also since the arm injury is healing and the foot injury for AB just will get worse.

I also don’t like the idea of Ross playing safety. I also don’t really like the idea of TT playing safety. How about they leave Rouse as the rover type thing, he wasn’t horrendous last game against a potent Chargers passing attack.

Why not have Ross as the nickel? And have him man up with the slot or TE? Bruce Johnson as the Dime CB is a pretty strong quartet too.

And yea..I’d love to see the no huddle at some point. I’d like them to cut the bullcrap before the snap and have Eli ready to snap the ball at 10 seconds..instead of checking out of a play at 5 seconds….

"It ain't over till its over"---

by FreeBradshaw on Nov 20, 2009 9:06 AM EST reply actions

Jacobs

Sometimes you have to ride the guy. Can’t always protect him. Ten or 11 carries is not enough.

by Ed Valentine on Nov 20, 2009 9:17 AM EST up reply actions

Agree with Ed

by wilddre22 on Nov 20, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions

agreed

no sense using the Joba rules on him

by cjmulrain on Nov 20, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions

i'm a little confused as to why we're even considering moving Ross

at least right now…

I think this is a conversation that needs to be put on hold for at least 2-3 weeks.

Ross has missed 9 games and the entire pre season….let’s work him back in nickel and dime packages and just let him get his feet wet.

I think we all saw first hand what happened to Dockery when we put him out there vs. NO.

"If you don't know what you're doing... just rush the quarterback" - LT

by andiamo708 on Nov 20, 2009 10:37 AM EST reply actions

Right

i hope we don’t hold out too much hope for AR to have a player of the week type week. he’s rusty – no preseason, no reg. season. he’s not gonna start, his snaps will be limited, and he won’t be there in crunch time. if he walks off the field healthy i’ll consider that a victory.

by wilddre22 on Nov 20, 2009 2:26 PM EST up reply actions

Well..

That is exactly the point I made earlier..Ross is going to need time to get back in game-shape..and he needs to do that in the position he knows and is comfortable with..Asking anything more of him at this point is wishful thinking, not the reality of where he’s at right now..and don’t think for a second that he won’t have his hamstring on the back of his mind. In fact, I’m afraid that due to his tentativeness at first, the Falcons will be targeting him..They sure will be testing him out..I guarantee it..If his body is 100% and his mind is in synch, then they’ll fail the test, if not..We’ll get burned.

by Bobbiblue on Nov 20, 2009 10:57 AM EST reply actions