Run, Giants run! Or, why can't the Giants run anymore?
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 7:00 AM EST
in New York Giants News
Email
PrintWhat is wrong with the New York Giants' running game? Everyone seems to have an opinion, so here is mine.
I think the answer is two-fold.
- The offensive line is not playing as well as it has the past couple of seasons.
- Philosophically, the Giants are now a pass-first team and not a 'punish the defense with a physical ground game' first team.
First, let's lay out the numbers.
The Giants are averaging 126.8 yards rushing per game, ninth in the league. That is waaaay down from the league-leading 157.4 per game they averaged in 2008. It is also their worst rushing performance since they averaged just 119 yards per game in 2004. Not coincidentally, that is also the last time the Giants missed the playoffs.
On a per-carry basis, they average 4.3 yards. Respectable, but hardly the dominant 5.0 per carry they ripped off last season.
They have a paltry six rushing plays for 20 or more yards, none for 40 or more. In 2008, they had 24 runs of 20+ and three runs of 40+.
The Offensive Line
We have talked about the offensive line's troubles before. We need to do it again, though, because the disappointing work by the guys up front is a big part of why the Giants have been unable to run consistently. I turned to my newfound favorite stat site, Pro Football Focus, for data on the play of the Giants offensive linemen. As of Saturday, these numbers are still through only 10 games. Yet, good enough to give you an idea what is going on.
The chart below gives you PFF's run-blocking scores for each lineman for 2008 and 2009. I put Madison Hedgecock and Kevin Boss in there because they are key components of the run-blocking schemes.
| Player | 2008 | 2009 |
| David Diehl | -4.5 | -0.2 |
| Rich Seubert | +18.3 | -4.9 |
| Shaun O'Hara | +7.5 | +13.5 |
| Chris Snee | +21.2 | +14.0 |
| Kareem McKenzie | +7.7 | +9.7 |
| Kevin Boss | +5.1 | +12.9 |
| Madison Hedgecock | +0.3 | -0.9 |
Anyone else see what I see? Look at Rich Seubert's numbers. Using PFF's method of a zero for doing what is expected, gaining points for doing more than expected and losing points for doing less than expected, Seubert has dropped more than 23 points from last season. Is he hurt? I don't know. I do know Seubert has not been good.
David Diehl is slightly better in 2009 than 2008, but still in negative numbers. So, basically, that means the Giants cannot run to the left. Watch the clip below, and you will notice that Brandon Jacobs likes running left. If the Giants can't block that side, that is a huge problem.
Look a little deeper. I have had the impression that Hedgecock, the blocking fullback, has not been having a great year. PFF's numbers confirm it. When you have a blocking fullback whose numbers as a blocker are below average, that is another huge problem. Even Chris Snee, acknowledged as the best lineman, has good numbers. But, not as good as 2008.
So, the left side of the Giants line is below par in run blocking. And they are not getting good work from the blocking back. A pretty ugly combination.
The philosophy
After Thursday night's blowout loss to the Broncos coach Tom Coughlin had this to say.
"Football to me is that you have to run the ball and stop the run. Those are the first things you do have to do to put yourself in a position to be able to take advantage of the various aspects of your plans and your talent."
I think, overall, Coughlin is a terrific head coach. He has a Super Bowl ring, and I hope he coaches the Giants as long as he wants to. To be brutally honest, though, you have wonder sometimes if those are just words to the veteran head coach. At least in terms of how the Giants approach offense, that is.
I really hate to do this, but I can't help it. Because I can't stop thinking about it. Turn the clock all the way back to 2006, back to the days when Tiki Barber was openly challenging Coughlin and openly questioning the strategy being employed. What was Barber's chief complaint in those days, when John Hufnagel was calling the plays?
His chief complaint was that the Giants abandoned the run too quickly, failing to take full advantage of their best player. Which happened to be Barber.
Fast forward to 2009. What was O'Hara saying to reporters the other day? That he feels the Giants are abandoning the run too quickly.
"I think really as a unit we are probably frustrated with the run game. It has come so easy for us the last few years. Running the football has really been an afterthought. Yeah, we will get six, seven yards, no big deal. We’ll get 150 yards rushing without even blinking an eye. Things are a little bit tougher; it’s tougher sledding.
"The only way, in my eyes, to get back on track is to keep doing it and do it more. I think, as offensive linemen, we are always going to complain that we aren’t running the football enough. That is kind of our M.O. We want to run the ball more. Quarterbacks and receivers, we are going to have discussions with them every single day, they want to throw it, we want to run it. That is a constant battle. I am not going to be happy until we have 35-40 carries in a game."
I will bet you a nickel Tiki enjoyed reading that.
The overall stats leave little doubt that the Giants have gone from balanced to pass happy. They show that the Giants have run the ball an average of 29.8 times per game this season vs. 31.4 last season, a slight difference. Pass attempts, though, are up from 30.7 attempts per game last season to 34.4 per game in 2009. So, in 2009 the Giants are passing the ball 54 percent of the time. In 2008, they passed 49 percent of the time.
It doesn't seem like a big difference, but in truth it is.
Here are the numbers during the last six games, in which we know the Giants have won just once.
| Opponent | Passes | Runs |
| New Orleans | 36 | 19 |
| Arizona | 37 | 26 |
| Philadelphia | 39 | 32 |
| San Diego | 33 | 28 |
| Atlanta | 39 | 26 |
| Denver | 40 | 16 |
Total them, and that is 224 pass plays, and just 147 running plays, or 60.3 percent passing plays. A far cry from the balance the Giants have always said they strive for in their offense.
Now, a small percentage of that can be explained by the Giants trailing big late in a couple of those games. Yet, that isn't the whole explanation.
During their five-game win streak at the beginning of the season, the Giants ran the ball 180 times and passed it 154, or 54% of the time. Yes, slightly skewed by the blowouts against Tampa Bay and Oakland in which the Giants were running out the clock at the end of the games. Yet, to me, clearly an indication that the Giants are better served when they remember to run the football.
It's plain to see that the Giants have become a team that uses the run to protect the lead, but not to go and get it. Coughlin and Kevin Gilbride quite obviously want to put the ball in the air when the game is in doubt.
What is the big problem with that? The NFL is clearly now a passing league, and analyst after analyst will tell you that you have to throw to score touchdowns.
Sure, except the one offensive player the Giants have who is feared by opposing defenses is the 6-foot-4, 270-pound Jacobs. The guy no one in the league likes to tackle.
During the past six games, Jacobs has averaged just 12.3 carries per game. Sorry, but whether he is running as well as last year or not, offensive line struggles or not, Jacobs cannot do what he is paid to do with that puny workload.
Jacobs' job is to wear out defenses. To set a physical tone and tire out defenders, making it easier for Ahmad Bradshaw or D.J. Ware to find holes late in the game. And for Eli Manning to throw without pass rushers draped all over him.
The Giants are not allowing him to do that. And failing to give Jacobs 18-20 carries per game means they are not playing to their strength, as much as I love Eli and the receiving corps. Remember, too, that Jacobs alone is doling out that physical punishment this season. Derrick Ward was 230 pounds and could also punish defenders. Bradshaw can make them miss, but he can't make them hurt.
TC has been talking a lot lately about winning the physical battle. Well, to do that TC and KG have got to remember to take full advantage of the Giants most physical player.
146 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Interesting stats, ED
Only Boss, O’Hara and McKenzie surpassing last year #S. O & M a surprise because most BBVers seem to include them in their laments re O line play. Snee usually escapes criticism, but he has definitely tailed off. Seubert’s a disaster. Several have mentioned that he has an injury. Do you know what it is? It seems a no brainer to replace him with Beatty. As for Hedgecock, if BJ is used properly, H’s performance will improve (as a battering ram for BJ up the middle.) As for Diehl, he’s a great Guard and a mediocre LT. He has to go back to his natural position. Can B handle handle the LT spot? Geez, let’s see how he can do replacing S first. Last year I wanted an OLT to be our #1 priority in the draft (or through FA.). I’ll probably feel the same for the ‘10 draft. As for the Giants morphing into a pass first team, we don’t have the personnel for it: Eli ain’t YA, and all our receivers together don’t add up to one Del Shofner (in terms of making D’s pay him special attention.) Eli will never be a YA. Nicks might turn into a Del Shofner threat but he’s a long way from that now.
Seubert
had a shoulder injury that kept him sidelined a lot in the pre-season. My guess is he still does. Of course, a shoulder injury would affect your strength, and consequently your ability to push a 300-pound defensive lineman where you need him to go.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 9:21 AM EST up reply actions
PS, looking at those BJ reruns,
it really does look as though he must shoulder the blame for the decline of the running game (about 65% BJ; 35, OL.) A lot of those holes he cut into last year were no bigger than some he has had this year but didn’t cut into. Call it tiptoeing, thinking too much, or whatever, he’s not running the way he did last year.
That could be
Yet, I still think he needs more opportunities. Could also be that, with less effective blocking, he isn’t “trusting” that the hole will be there.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 9:22 AM EST up reply actions
I agree with both of these ideas...
he’s not cutting and running hard like he used to. but it also could be cuz he’s not in rhythm.
Maybe they just need to come out next Sunday and call a whole bunch of runs.
The lack of play action is because of this. I always thought Eli was excellent at running the play action…I’ve rarely seen it this year. Its partly cuz of the run being bad…but you can run the play action with the running game not working. As long as they think they are gonna run the ball.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 6:08 PM EST up reply actions
Nice post Ed great stats, heres my take
Players or coaching? We’ve gone back and forth but I think in this area it’s a combo of both in regards to the running game
The line is showing age and Seubert is injured. Snee is not having a good year for whatever reason. I know were talking about run Blocking but teams seem to be getting a push rush up the middle this year which indicates some problems with the guards. Your Dead on on with Hedgcock I wathced the replay of the ATL game and he missed a bunch of blocks. And in my opinon Jacobs is being exposed for being good but not great. He needs great blocking to be consistatnly effective. He’s always been a guy who tip toes in the backfield, thats why he’s never been a great shortyardage guy, but when he sees the hole he starts running like a Mack Truck and plows guys over and gets 7 or 8 yards. The holes are not as big nor open that long this year and he can’t adjust his style to get going.
Coaching, I refereced an NJ.com article by MG a few days ago that mentioned how the Giants are calling streatch running plays for Jacobs that they used to call for Ward. Why? I don’t get it? It makes zero sense, call the plays you’ve always called for BJ and let him and the line do there thing. I also believe in their hearts TC and KG are passing guys. They stuck with the run for two reasons in 07 and 08: 1.) It was working so easily they were getting 7 yards a run, it made passing easier and even a passing guy cant argue with that. 2) There jobs were on the line in the 07 playoffs and they wanted to minimize mistakes with Eli so they simplified the O which ment more running and short passing to move the sticks. You referenced the Tiki era and we saw some of this back then it seems as if the running game is not comming easily they abandond it and go right to the pass even though they’ve never been a pass first team even with Plax
In defense of the coaching I think the Giants have fallen behind big quickly so they feel a need to catch up. I also believe they like us have no faith in the D so they feel they must score 40 to win and they can’t be paitent with the running game becasue by the time it gets going the game might be out of reach by then but that has not always been the case as we saw in Denver Thursday night. But if you look at the SD game the D kept them in it and they stayed with the run and you can’t get on the coaching for the ATL game and Dallas game they just could not get any push and the passing was working.
Overall in regards to coaching it has not been awful but I have to agree with guys like NYGIANTSBASEBALL that TC and KG have been stubborn and unwilling to change the philosphy at times kinda what they did in the TIki era when Huffnegal was calling the plays. I really like TC and runs a tight ship as a coach but his biggest problem is his slowness to adapt and change especially with his coordiantors and we’ve seen a bit of that this year.
Stretch play
I don’t mind the ‘stretch play.’ Jacobs has run it well in the past. It gets him pointed upfield and, if it’s blocked, out of the traffic in the middle.
I do think TC and KG, though I believe in them, have to take a hit for not using Jacobs enough.
The biggest problem on this team remains defense, however.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 9:38 AM EST up reply actions
True The D stinks
If you could play good D your’re in any game. How many 13-10 games did Pitt win last year?
The ‘stretch play’ they are running though I think is a play they ran with Ward and even some of the other running plays that were designed for Ward they are asking Jacobs to do. MG has documented this a couple of times this year thats why I’m brining it up. Jacobs has ran well to the outside but from some of the info I’ve been reading I’m not sure if it’s always the plays he’s ran successfully in the past.
Defense
To me, the defense is another reason to rely on the running game. Milk the clock and keep your own defense off the field.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 10:00 AM EST up reply actions
True
but if the running game takes a lot of time to get going and you try to stick with it you run the risk of a lot of 3rd and longs which will lead to 3 and outs which is putting the D right back on the field so I think the coaches feel they need to pass early to move the ball and they never get into a rythm running it. I think we’ve seen a lot of games this year where they run on 1st and 2nd down and then are stuck with a 3rd 9 coaches do not want to be in that situation. The offensive coaches have been in a bit of a now win situation this year in this regard.
If the D could just hold the oppnet to FG’s the O could be a bit more patient but they are allwoing 7 points on almost every redzone trip
Like you said Ed the D is the biggest problem it needs to be adressed more than the o-line in my opinion this offseason. Brandon Spikes from Florida in the first round!
the D could be helped out by a running game.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 12:58 PM EST up reply actions
Disagree on one point
Yes the Giants have fallen behind but during their losing streak they’ve started the game passing before falling behind.
An example, in the Denver game in their first series 4 passes with 2 runs. After a Denver 3 and out in the Giants second possession 2 passes 1 run. After a Denver drive allowing a FG the Giants next possession. A 3 and out with 3 passes. The Giants first 3 possessions. 9 passes with 3 runs.
Against Atlanta in the Giants first possession. 5 passes 2 runs. Second possession 6 passes and runs. Third possession 5 passes 2 runs.
This has been the theme this season.
Your right
They could do a better job and Denver & Arizona were the two games where I thought the coaching staff got away from the run way too early and went too much to the pass but in some of the other games they have to pass especailly if they are loosing yardage or getting no gain on first down.
I would love to see what the Giants are averaging on first down runs this season. It seems like every first down run puts them in second and long. My point being is if you loose 2 yards or gain nothing on first down well then you might have to throw it on second and third down.
I agree
they do seem to get themselves in lots of 2nd and 8 or more. My guess is they haven’t been very effective on running plays on first down.
Revealing Stats..
I agree with Blue about BJ abandoning run running style…He definitely needs more touches, but he needs to be told to run straight ahead..He’s not doing that this year..Also, we have had a slew of near misses in the passing game, and a ton of overthrown balls..Add to that all of the drive-killing penalties..Throw that into the “pot” of stats you provided, stir it..and we have a big pot of molasses.
Two Thoughts
First an unscientific recollection is many of BJ’s run were to his left. I didn’t realize this until you pointed it out. I often utilize PFF is get a better understanding as to WTF is going on wtth this team. One can formulate their own opinions on PFF but the numbers don’t lie. The coincide from what I’ve witnessed on the field.
Second, while the run/pass ratio might be skewed due game conditions but the blowout wins and the losses match. In the end they even out. We’ve become a pass happy team. Also, almost every game we’ve come out passing.
After watching the video
is it my imagination or is BJ running more upright this season vs. last season?
Could be
There is a consensus that he isn’t the same. I’m not totally convinced, but there might be something to it. Still think he needs more opportunities, though.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 10:06 AM EST up reply actions
He does seem to be running a little more upright..
I think it is part part him not lowering his shoulder and part defenders getting real low on him..Nothing 26 carries/game couldn’t fix.
It's simple:
The O-Line is old, slow, and figured out. BJ is slower and the holes aren’t opening fast enough. doesn’t take a genius. This has been apparent since game one. But we genuflect and look for answers because we love the team so. But the fact is, they are just not the team they were rumored to be, or good for that matter.
On either line. End of story. All she wrote.
I don't have the answer to this problem, but here's some observations...
Last year we had two 1000 yard rushers and everyone in the league figured out that if you want to beat the Giants, you have to stop the run by stacking the LOS. Passing is suppose to be how we get them out of the box, but that hasn’t worked.
Doesn’t BJ come off the field hurt during ever game??
We can’t replace Ward’s production as easily as we thought we could.
You can’t run 35 – 40 times when you can’t make first downs and end up going 3 and out all the time.
Watching Bradon Marshall haul in passes sailing over his head sure made me wish we had a 6’6 WR (i.e. BARDEN) on the field to do the same for Eli. That would do wonders for getting 8 men out of the box. ( It’s funny, I don’t remember seeing MARSHALL making any great plays on SP???)
Amani Toomer called it quits this week, but during the Denver game I said we’ve
found our Amani Jr. in Manninham after making another of his toe tapping sideline catches just like Toomer did for us for years!!. So there’s one positive to come out of this season atleast!!
Ward's departure
I’m not convinced if Ward was still with the Giants it makes much of a difference. The past few seasons the Giants could plug anyone in the backfield and have success. Tiki, BJ. AB, D Ward etc. If the O-line is not creating any holes there’s not many backs that will be successful.
I'm pretty much 100% convinced we miss Derrick Ward.
He was the RB for the 2nd and 3rd quarters, and the Giants have been horrible running the ball in those quarters.
He was a do everything back. They really do miss D-Ward. Maybe the Bucs cut him and he comes back?
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 5:17 PM EST up reply actions
What we had with BJ, DW and AB worked great
Danny Ware was suppose to be Ward’s replacement. The fumble AFTER a nice run, only gives the coaching staff a “see, I told you he couldn’t be trusted with the ball…”
Before the ball was punched out, that was the best thing the running game had done. Slap him up the side of the helmet and send him back out there!!! Don’t go “see, I knew the kid would cough it up; bench’em”
Yes I saw that news on Amani..
Cut Sinorice, and bring him back..That is a ton of experience we get back and a role model/teacher for our young guys.
If We wanted a great and experienced wide out there were plenty of oppurtunities
At this moment in time we have a pretty good core of young wide outs. Manningham and especially Smith have been good or even better this season and Nicks looks like he could be a no.1 wide out one day. But In my view this past off season the giants shouldn’t have got a rookie wide out in the draft but gone fishing for a veteran, there were plenty out there. Giants could have made a bid for T.J Houshmanzadeh or Torry Holt even though he may be past it. Or they could have tried to get the trade For Braylon Edwars done which is what i would have done. Yes Nicks is good and has a lot of potential but with Edwards Is he could have stepped in and filled Burreses role right away. And okay he drops a few now and then but like Burress he has big play potential and can jump up and make some great end zone catches and GET FIRST DOWNS! Marshall on thursday was brilliant he is brilliant, but i wouldn’t blame his performance on Corey Webster because from the highlights i saw Webster on most occasions did every thing right but Marshall just made a excellent catch. So yes this offseason GIANTS GET A STAR WIDE OUT!!
Wide receivers
Talking about bringing in star wideouts is a waste of time. That’s the least of the Giants problems. In fact, it’s not one at all. Smith, Nicks, Manningham and Barden are going to continue to get better and better. The Giants don’t need anybody else.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 11:17 AM EST up reply actions
I'd go further, Ed.
I don’t think we should have gone for a wr as our first draft choice this year. It’s pretty clear now that we had more urgent needs.
Well ...
it sure wasn’t at the time. I think JR thought he had plugged the defensive needs via free agency. Unfortunately, Bernard and Canty have not contributed. I have no problem w/Nicks as the first pick — he is a heckuva player. I think we all thought Sintim would contribute more, and I still have high hopes for him.
To me, the biggest problem on this team is still that the defense is soft right up the middle — tackle, MLB and safety. And I think the only one you might have questioned at all entering the season is MLB.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 12:21 PM EST up reply actions
"...wasn't at the time."
With all humility, I submit that (probably by sheer luck) I was right. It just didn’t seem reasonable that our jerrybuilt O line could, against all odds, have another miraculous year. Love ’em, a bunch of lunch bucket guys who individually are no more than average (with the exception of Diehl, an All Pro as a guard) who found a magical sychronicity to transform themseolves into one of the best O lines in football. Something had to go wrong and did.
True
But, that is why Beatty was drafted. I think we all knew sooner or later the law of averages had to catch up to the line at some point.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 12:58 PM EST up reply actions
Dissagre a bit Blue Gonz
O’hara Snee Mckenzie and Deal have all started together since 04 and played well since then this is there first really dissapointing season since 03. I agree with you the LT tackle situation has make things a bit sticky.
A lot of O-lines are built with luchpal type guys. Centers and guards are usually never drafted in the first couple of rounds, there kinda of like fullbacks they’re grinders you could find quality C and G’s really cheap and late in the draft. NE has built their O-line the same exact way we have. LT is the only glamor position and the Giants have not really adreesed in the draft since Pettigout in 99 and in FA since Lomas Brown in 2000. Maybe they bring in a stopgap vetern next year to transition Diehl back to the middle and start giving Beaty a shot at right tackle.
I have no problem with
any of that, L. +1.
Well, to be fair with all things that have gone wrong
Hindsight is 20/20 and with all things that have, gone wrong, one bright spot that had the most question marks, is actually what has gone right!
I agree that the received wisdom was that
our greatest weakness was at WR. Once again (I hope i’m not being unbearable) I didn’t see it that way. I did see the D problems and thought JR addressed them adequately with the draft and FA signings. I still believe that most of the choices he made will work out just fine over time (emphasis on “most.”)
Right, George
Remember, they say it takes three full seasons to judge a draft. Too early to tell on guys like Beatty, Sintim, Beckum, Barden and Bomar. Geez, what is with all the ’B’s’, anyway?
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 12:59 PM EST up reply actions
Thats why you still have to feel good about JR
not a great offseason but he knew DTackle was going to be a bigger problem than WR and he would of had to give up a player or pick to bring in a vetern WR while there were some D-Linemen available in FA. Sure he messed up with the amount of money he gave Bernard and Canty he probabbly could of gotten lesser guys for cheaper that would of contributed just as much but he thought these two guys would live up to their reputation, they have’nt.
Good point, Landeta
He correctly identified all the areas where there were potential problems. In a couple of cases the guys he brought in to shore up those areas have not yet worked out. I think long-term Canty will be OK. I also still have high hopes for all the draft picks.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
isn't it funny...
that the WR position is pretty much solved, just young at this point in time, but sovled with a possesion guy and 2 deep threat/playmakers in Ham and Nicks?
Before the season, the O-Line, the D-Line, the running game and the overall defense…that was all the strength of the Giants and the question was whether the WR would be their downfall.
….well they’re not. Its the complete opposite.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 1:38 PM EST up reply actions
STAR Wide Out for what?
WR is the strength of this team. Smith is a pro bowler. Nicks and Manninghams are stars in the making. I no longer would trade any of our receivers straight up for Edwards or Boldin.
I'm pretty sure the Browns wanted Smith in addition to a #1 Draft pick
No way in hell I’d make that trade in retrospect
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
Jerry Rice
we could have put Jerry Rice in his prime out there. It wouldn’t have helped our running game or inept defense.
This is why we didn't pursue any WR FA's...
I think it’s pretty self explanatory. Besides, you have to take into consideration their salary. The Giants are getting way better production to salary ratio!
WR should be the last thing the Giants get.
The only thing I could see them doing is drafting Golden Tate, cuz he’s simply a great football player regardless of his position.
Get a star WR? We HAVE 3 start WR. SMith, Nicks and HAM are all stars in the making. Smith will make the Pro Bowl.
Every single move they didn’t make for a WR in the offseason was the absolute correct one.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
running game
The problem with the running game is not that the number of runs, but the lack of yards gained. If they can´t move the chains with the run, then you have to throw. Whatever the problem is, they need to fix it first. Running the ball just for the sake of running the ball is not going to win games if you can´t pick up enough yards for a first down.
But don't you agree...
But don’t you agree trading for Edwards would have improved this giant offense
OLT
is the second most important position on the offense. IMO, a premier LT would have helped the O more…and we would have been better able to establish the run. Of course getting one from the draft is never a sure thing. Jake Long hasn’t exactly been setting the NFL afire.
Disagree 1000%
Couldn’t disagree more. The current WRs have great chemistry. Why bring in a malcontent like Edwards.
No offense intended. I’m shocked any Giants fan would suggest making any moves at the receiver position. We have 3 young studs.
Or, looking at it from the opposite side of the coin,
a premier WR would not have provided Eli with more protection, something he sorely needs. On the other hand, a premier OLT would have improved the running game and given Eli more time to throw (I swear, I won’t strike this dead horse with so much as another stroke.)
Braylon Edwards sucks...
it really helped the Jets O out didn’t it?
Oh wait…they got WORSE.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 12:53 PM EST up reply actions
If we got Edwards
We wouldn’t have Steve Smith and Hakeem Nicks.
We wouldn’t have either.
I don’t agree
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
I’ve been saying this for the past two seasons, Gilbride was the architect of the chuck n’ duck offense with Warren Moon and the Oilers. He was in charge of developing Ryan Leaf and Kordell Stewart. The guy does not have a great track record and he is Mike Martz lite. He doesn’t embrace the tradition and philosophy of true Giants smash mouth football. Remember when he had Eli chuck the ball 52 times in 40 mph winds against the Redskins in ’07? Same old pattern with this guy and Coughlin takes a hit for not recognizing this and getting his “guy” under control. I see another moment where Coughlin is forced to fire a guy or lose his job again. Why are we always here???
Remember, though
TC signs off on the offensive plan. If he wants more runs all he has to do is order KG to give him more runs. By the way, I think you are down on Coughlin too much. We are nowhere near him losing his job. What, once every five years a team is not allowed to have a bad year?
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
Ed, you completely misunderstood me. I do not want Coughlin to be fired. I am not down on him, just saying that he is possibly loyal to a fault (Hufnagel?). Teams have bad seasons all the time of course, but we keep doing the same things over and over again. You said it as well, how long does it take to realize we need to run? The defense needs to get it’s communication down?
i think running it might be an option now
it looks like eli’s foot injury just got a lot worse. It looks like he has or could have a stress fracture in foot, ending his season. so get ready to see more run plays in their future.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4697862
oops I crapped my pants!
More worrisome news...
Will it ever end this year?…Our team looks like a “Mash Unit”..
apropos
just another chapter in a forgettable season.
That's what happens with a bad foot.
Maybe now they’ll put AB on IR so that he can get the medical attention he needs more quickly and be ready to contribute from the first day of our next training camp.
Seubert could be Ruegemer
Make him a super-sub G/C. Dump McKenzie. Put Diehl and RT and play Beatty at LT. Then draft or acquire a guard to replace Seubert because that person is not on the roster.
Problem is
we don’t know if Beatty can cut the mustard at OLT. I’m confident he’d do a decent job on the right side after getting acclimated to the pro game.
I thought about Beatty at LT too
But i think it might depend on how he may grade out as a LT. If he truly is a RT by trade, and being a rookie with some playing time at RT already, i might worry about the transition?
Beatty at LT
is an experiment that should be tried in training camp.
If we lose to Dallas / Philly
I think we put Beatty at LT for the reminder of this year and if he thinks that he can’t get used to it then he goes to RT for next year and we draft a LT this year in the 2nd / 3rd round. That is what the Vikings did (with Phil Loadholt) and it has worked out great for them
by mclaren_is_the_best on Nov 30, 2009 12:00 PM EST up reply actions
What I’m saying is we can’t wait to see if Beatty will like playing LT until training camp we need Diehl @ LG ASAP because Seubert is past it.
by mclaren_is_the_best on Nov 30, 2009 12:02 PM EST up reply actions
Diehl's
future is at RT, not LG.
The Vikings did not draft Loadholdt to play LT…he is too big and slow to do so anyway, they drafted him to be their RT.
Beatty has the athleticism and size to be a LT eventually.
If anything, he may start at RT at some point this year.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
Yes Loadholdt is a RT but the point is he was a 2nd round tackle and he is playing well as a rookie.
I’m not sure Beatty is big enough to play LT – most LT’s are at least 315 – 330 pounds but if he has good technique I’m sure size wouldn’t be a problem
by mclaren_is_the_best on Nov 30, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions
and my point is...
a RT is easier to find in the later rounds than a LT, a much more important position.
And yes, Beatty is certainly “big enough”. Its a crock to think a OT should be a certain size, as long as he’s strong enough and has long arms. Beatty had the longest arms in the draft. He’s 6"6 and ~315lbs anyway..just about the same size as Diehl.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, I find it hilarious that people think a six foot six three hundred and fifteen pound guy is small.
I heard that same stuff from many other pundits and fans. There is a lot more to blocking than just being a huge lump. The best ones are very athletic and have very quick feet.
All I’m saying is that its easier to bull rush a guy that weighs 315 lbs than a guy that weighs 340.
FreeBradshaw I don’t know why you think Diehl should move to RT since most teams move their better run defense end to the right side and he is already struggling with blocking as a tackle on the left.
And who would play LG if not Diehl? Seubert is getting old and is clearly not as effective as he was a few years ago.
by mclaren_is_the_best on Nov 30, 2009 4:37 PM EST up reply actions
Diehl is too athletic to move back to OG.
He is a big guy who’s better as a run blocker anyway, pass blocking is not his best trait. RT makes sense for him cuz as a pass blocker he wouldn’t have as much responsibility.
I’d rather get a whole new LG if Seubert really is shot. He is injured, so maybe he can bounce back.
I’d like to get a big fat for the LG spot. Not sure who, but I’d like for the Giants to get bigger and Seubert is the ‘smallest’ OL on the team.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 6:06 PM EST up reply actions
That could work as well. We can draft a standout OG in the 2nd – 3rd round to compete for the job with Seubert and then for next year have our line look something like this
Beatty NewGuy O’Hara Snee Diehl
by mclaren_is_the_best on Nov 30, 2009 6:55 PM EST up reply actions
I'd like to see more of Beatty at RT this year before
ceding him the LT slot. IMO, there are two positions on D and two on O where having an elite guy really pays off. OLT and QB on O; MLB and S on D. If you have elite players at those four spots (and who does?), all you need is good, solid lunch bucket guys to fill out the rest of the roster to have a perennial playoff team and SB contender. Can you win w/o out one or all of the four? Well the Giants record of getting into the playoffs recently proves you can.
Sintim at MLB
He would be a monster.
Dump Clark, Wilk and AP and put Kehl at SAM if he can handle it. Or draft/acquire LB help.
Keep Canty, Alford and Cofield, dump Robbins and Bernard. Draft a DT.
Sintim has never played MLB
He was a passrushing OLB in a 3-4 at Virginia. He has a better chance of playing D-End than MLB.
Robbins is a FA he will not be back. Cofield is a FA too, if somebody offers him a lot let him go but if you could keep him on the cheap bring him back he’s still young and might bounce back. Cut Bernard and sign a FA DT.
I don’t know what they really think of Goff as a future MLB if they belive in him draft another D-Tackle in the first round if not take Brandon Spikes from Florida. I know the draft is a crapshoot but Spikes seems like one of those guys that would be a sure bet and be really good right away. Probabbly becasue I’ve watched a ton of Florida games the past 4 years but he’s an absolute animal the kind of playmaking LB the Giants have missed since Armstead. Size, speed, insticts, intensity, he’d make a real difference.
You may be right about Sintim
but I have read several who think it might make sense. My point is, if he COULD play MLB he has the right physical tools. It might make for a good training camp experiment. In the meantime, I see no sense in NOT getting a look at Goff. This year is over – mail it in. Play hard but take some calculated risks and play a few younger guys.
The thing is that McKenzie
is having a good year, a better one than last year according to the stats Ed provided. I feel terrible about Freddy. Last year He played through injuries that would have kept a lesser man on the bench and now it looks like he could be through. I’d like to see him in training camp again to see if he can come all the way back. I’d dump Cofield before Freddy, although I’d like to see him get a shot in training camp as well.
McKenzie
Having a good year run-blocking. Pass-blocking is a different story. Thru 10 games he had given up two sacks and 21 QB pressures. Diehl is second having given up 12 pressures. So, McKenzie is a statue as a pass blocker.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions
Ah, thanks,
I should have noted that. Damn, one more thing to fix on the O line. I really think that…no, I said I wouldn’t mention OLT again.
Yeah McKenzies passs blocking..
The league should test him for Formaldahyde he’s so stiff…
You know
that sounds ridiculous, but I thought about that, too. I really don’t know.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 29, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions
not sure
because after the Giants cut him so did the Pats so maybe there was something really wrong with his performance. Why would the Giants keep Darcy Johnson over him if he was their only blocking TE?
I just think that since
he was about 300lbs, just that extra OT that pushed the O-line over the edge and helped them get those stretch plays going.
He really was an advantage on the outside cuz he moved like a TE but was the size of a OT.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions
I think they kept Darcy as the backup
cuz they wanted a better receiver, which unquestionably Darcy does have better hands and athleticism.
Its just…..do we need that with Boss and supposedly Travis Beckum on the roster?
I mean I’m not sure if Matthews took a step back or somthing like that in training camp.
But if he’s just a FA right now (?), why not sign him?
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 1:36 PM EST up reply actions
Well they use Beaty
as the blocking TE a lot I think thats part of the reason they cut Mathews they thought Beaty could handle it. I really could’nt tell whether or not he’s been good I don’t get much opportunity to break down game film.
too much money at the time.
You don’t pay a backup TE what he’s getting to start over in Minny.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
I was just going to say
Everything does seem to add up. I quickly glanced at our recent TE’s that were drafted and came to this conclusion.
Back in the late 90’s, we had Dan Campbell and shortly after that, we drafted Shockey in ‘02 with VS being drafted in the third round a year later. Assuming he was taking over for Campbell leaving as a FA (which i think he did)? But, knowing how rookie contracts are structured with which round they were drafted in terms of years, VS probably had atleast a 3-4 year deal making him elgible around ’05-06’. Thus letting him go in FA because we already had Shockey and then in ’07, we got Boss!
You guys are making so many great comments and observations..
That I think I’ll just read them today and refrain from typing any…Don’t see much I can add to the mix..lol
I gotta add also...
no one is making any observation on the Denver air.
Not enough needs to be said on how that screwed them up before that game.
They went there WEDNESDAY.
In order for your lungs to compensate in that climate, you need to have at least 2-3 days, or else you’ll be fatigued quick cuz you can’t breathe nor get oxygen to your muscles.
THAT is how they looked.
Now, if they play the same way against Dallass…they’re shot anyway.
But if they go out and play like the Giants, you need to point at nothing else other than that for the debacle on Thanksgiving.
"It ain't over till its over"---
SD and Pitt acclimated pretty dam quickly the
earlier this year. I think it was more of the fact it was a short week and they did not want to be there.
Yes I didn't anyone checking themselves out of the game and heading for the oxygen tanks
But the way they played maybe they should have..I think we simply witnessed a very poorly played game..and a very poor coaching showing..
NO team...
went up to Denver ONE DAY before they played.
Think about it. When you are lightheaded because of lack of Oxygen getting to your brain and weak cuz of your muscles not getting oxygen…and you feel like you can’t breathe…its damn near impossible.
Is this the reason they came out and played like crap? Sure as hell seemed like it.
I think if the short week was in NY or in somewhere other than Mile High…at least the Giants would’ve played better.
Giving oxygen’s not really gonna help either. It might be able to help in order to recover on the bench…but being out there on the field its not going to help. Its more of a physiological thing where your blood and lungs have to adapt.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
I want to believe you're right
But that doesn’t change the fact we lost.
Right now, the only two numbers that matter are that we’re 6-5 with 5 games left.
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
no...its doesn't.
its an excuse….I don’t like excuses…but an excuse that says that EVERYONE is physically impaired and can’t play up to their ability…kind of explains what we saw Thursday doesn’t it?
Yes, the only thing that matters is that we lost and that we must beat Dallass next week.
But I can really see why Mara and the team were pissed at this game. It wasn’t the short week. It was the fact they had to go to Denver on the short week.
I don’t know what their travel plan was, but in hindsight if they traveled earlier than ONE DAY before the game….
They go out and smack around Dallass (not counting on it…) then I’m blaming the stupidity of traveling too late to Denver.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 5:19 PM EST up reply actions
I know what you're saying
and I hate excuses too.
If we beat dallas, and don’t make the playoffs, I won’t be as upset if we lose to dallas and miss the playoffs
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
You have to admit
Or anyone actually. In all seriousness, how many teams have gone to Denver on a short week? I don’t care about any teams record etc… I’m not using this as a basis of why the Giants lost, but more of a schedule oddity that perhaps our owner was pertaining to?!
Isn’t bad enough on a week or bye weeks notice to go there? Let alone on four days? The NFL needs to re-examine their scheduling!
Actually the NFL is horrible with schedule making for the giants.
If you compare this years and last years schedule, they’re pretty much exactly the same, but with a few changes.
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
I'm not going to
blame the Mile High Air Free. If the air is or was an issue, the team should have boarded a plane Sunday night and flew right into Denver. There is no excuse to be found for this game, just the 5th loss and 3rd ass whooping of the year.
From the get go
it appeared the Giants were disinterested in the Denver game.
Reese4President!
Glad someone else noticed. I don’t even see how Denver gets to play any Thursday night at home. The players did look like they lacked energy and I predict a lot more fight against Dallas, Philly, and the rest of the schedule. Somebody is going to have to step up on the field and be a leader or it’s gonna be a short season. If I am wrong and the Giants play horrible games against Dallas and Philly then I’ll admit I’m wrong and they sucked in Denver because they just suck. But something tells me that any team would have had some serious issues having to travel in to play at Mile High on short rest.
by Giantskick@on3 on Dec 2, 2009 12:10 AM EST up reply actions
Run man Run
With manning hurting the giants have to run a lot more. Maybe it,s a good time to see how good our backs are.Kilbride has to stop thinking pass and give Eli. a brake. And maybe pass more in the red zone
everyone keeps talking about run run run.....
well…maybe if the run ACTUALLY WAS WORKING…we wouldn’t have this problem wouldn’t we?
Its easy to say run run run…but when the run is a big pile of crap right about now….there is no other choice now is there?
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 29, 2009 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
Jacobs is low on confidence
Yes against Denver are run game was attroshish but i pin point that on solely the domination of denver’s D-lne. There tackles were overpowering, so when we gave BJ the ball there were no holes for him to run through so he went looking for some which didn’t help his stats either. This season the giants have averaged 4.3 yards per carry, respectable. But this is far from last seasons dominating 5 yards per carry and i think this has knocked Jacob’s confidence and this has shown in recent weeks when his numbers have been down and there haven’t been many holes so he’s been looking for some, getting tackled and teams have been noticing this and exploitng it
I asked this question earlier in the year on this site....
Link: http://www.bigblueview.com/2009/8/27/1004309/comfort-level-with-your-run-offence
and got a lot of “what the hell are you talking about!” comments. My personal opinion is that you guys miss Derrick Ward more than you can measure. That and a subtle change in your play calling to emphasize the pass more than the run this year.
Ward????
Looks like you’re shopping for more of the
"what the hell are you talking about!"comments. You can’t possibly think that Ward would be a huge difference maker. He’s not exactly killing it down in Tampa with his 200 yards rushing and 3 yard per carry average (and this is for the season, not a single game).
Okay, with Ward you had the best RB group and run game in the NFL.
Without him, you have……..the tenth or so best running game. Yes, there could be a drop off due to your offensive line play, but I think your lack of depth at the RB spot has really hurt the run game performance. The popular theory is that a good passing game is supposed to keep the safeties back and keep eight out of the box. It does not seem to be working out that way.
I am not sure why Ward is not doing very well in Tampa, although playing from behind all the time and with three different [Leftwich, Josh 1, and Josh 2] QBs could have something to do with it.
I just know that he was very, very good for you guys.
NOTE: While I like the ProFootballFocus site, I would take their player ratings with a grain or two of salt. They have Jeff Backus of the Lions rated as the third best LT in the NFL. He is behind only Joe Thomas of Cleveland and S. Vollmer of New England. While I am a Backus defender here in Lionland, I do not think he is the third best LT in the NFL this year. Tenth or so maybe. There is some sort of disconnect between overall results and the rankings.
The Tennessee line is ranked [left to right] 45, 31, 27, 60 and 9 yet have the best run offence and the second least number of sacks. Go figure.
by NorthLeft12 on Nov 30, 2009 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
it just would've been too much money.
At the time, re-signing Jacobs was the obvious decision. We had 2 other RB’s to take his spot and drafted another.
Ward was essentially replaced.
If all the guys were healthy and the problem was still there…then I think you could say we really miss him.
Bradshaw has a cracked foot. Ware had a separated elbow, Brown is out for the year, Jacobs has been pussified by his contract. We couldn’t have seen any of this.
Who’s to say Ward wouldn’t take a step back or get injured too?
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 12:04 PM EST up reply actions
Other factors...
With Ward, we also had Plax and didn’t have teams stacking the box. This Ward thing is kinda like the Osi thing, you know how Osi’s rep is based off the 6 sack game. Look at Ward. Take away that one 215 yard beast that he had against Carolina and Ward is not getting half of his praise. Without that game, he is well under 1000 yards for the season and does not average 5.5 yard per carry, still respectable though, he would have had around 800 yards and just under 5 a carry. Wards stats mirrored Bjakes (rushing), so I’m not so quick to think that Ward would change much. He did catch more balls but he was no Tiki. We’d be in the same boat with Ward….6 and 5.
He did better as #2 last year than AB is doing this year.
And AB was doing better as #3 than he is as #2. I know he has had that injury but that is even more reason why Ward is missed. If AB was coming in in the 4th instead of giving Jacobs breathers in the 1st he might not be hurting so much.
And you can never take the power of the swing pass dump off of screen pass for granted. I bet Eli wishes he had someone reliable to dump off or throw screens to.
by Giantskick@on3 on Dec 2, 2009 12:18 AM EST up reply actions
its not exactly..."miss Derrick Ward"
as much as Andre Brown, Danny Ware and Ahmad Bradshaw…being hurt.
Also combine that with the fact of the pussification of Brandon Jacobs….
Derrick Ward would’ve been that steady influence…but only in hindsight do we miss him,.
We all thought you were nuts cuz no one expected what’s become of the RB ‘stable’ we had.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
Andre Brown had an injury history before you drafted him.
He was a risk which I guess you guys thought was covered by Danny Ware.
My point before was that you guys seemed to be fixated on upgrading the WR corps while ignoring your main weapon…..the run offence.
by NorthLeft12 on Nov 30, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions
that's what I'm saying...
its just…who the hell thought the run offense would be a problem? You had Jacobs coming back, Danny Ware seemed to be the next Derrick Ward story for them, Bradshaw would get a more prominent role, something many of us wanted to see..and they Andre Brown really was that 4th guy (tho he was beating out Ware in Training camp).
Its just…with what? How could we have upgraded or even know that it needed an upgrade?
Carrying 5 RB’s is what they would’ve had with Ward.
No one could’ve known that in upgrading the receiving core….EVERYTHING else would take about 10 steps back.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 12:01 PM EST up reply actions
Why did you think I asked the question back in August?
I saw that you lost your second best and most versatile RB, leaving you with an injury prone power back and a change of pace speed back, depending on an O line who were together for all sixteen games in 2008. You drafted an injury prone back in the fourth round and had a player who had pretty much no NFL carries to step in and account for Ward’s 1000 yards. I think there was a lot of wishful thinking there. In your managements defence, picking up William Beatty was a shrewd long term move. If you would have completed the trade with Detroit for the #20 pick and taken Micheal Oher I would say Reese would have been an effing genius. By the way I thought at the time [and still do] that when the Lions passed on Oher that it would be a big mistake. Oher is looking like a future Pro Bowler at RT or LT.
There was a commentor [ZILLOG] who predicted the lower performance of the O line and the resulting problems that would lead to. I thought he was too pessimistic [as did all the Giants fans], but he may be dead on right.
yea..
I said that about Oher and a few Lions fans killed me for saying that. Pettigrew might be a future pro bowler at TE they say…an Oher is not playing LT..yada yada…
The thinking was not Brown, nor Ware of replacing Ward. It was Bradshaw. Everyone thought that he has the talent to be much better than Ward…which he does.
He’s hurt.
We re-signed Jacobs to do what he did before…which he’s not.
Thinking about it….Ward would probably do nothing for the Giants. Jacobs is doing nothing, and Ward based a lot of his production after Jake did his damage.
Ward isn’t exactly an iron man either, he was out for the SB run in 2007.
I don’t know what they will do with the RB situation. There’s a few RB’s in the draft that would be nice…but they have 4 on the roster (tho…Ware is essentially expendable).
Its just…they did make an attempt to replace Ward. The fact they all got hurt (and pussified like Jacobs)…you just can’t predict that
Zillag is our resident pessimist…but really, no one really had a basis for the line declining to what it is now.
Its not really the line either…its the fact that WE DON’T HAVE our earthmover anymore.
Jacobs is the problem…not the lack of Derrick Ward.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 3:44 PM EST up reply actions
all in all...
its just a case of the worst possible scenario imaginable occuring for the Giants running game right now.
all 3 backups are injured or coming back from injury (Ware). And Jacobs is essentially no the same dude.
No one expected this. At the very least, ONE could’ve steped up.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 3:45 PM EST up reply actions
Just gonna have to be patient with the backs.
AB should have his explosiveness return since now he’s gonna have to do something about the ankle. Ware has looked good and I hope he gets another chance after fumbling. I wonder though with all the focus being put on Manning gelling with his young WR’s, if the coaches neglected to put enough focus on getting the RBs up to speed with getting involved in the short passing game and understanding their pass protection assignments. I noticed nobody has given Ward his props for being a pretty good extra protector for Eli when he was here.
by Giantskick@on3 on Dec 2, 2009 12:46 AM EST up reply actions
Risk
Yeah, but you know pretty much every player is a risk of some sort. By the time you get to the middle rounds you take those types of gambles.
by Ed Valentine on Nov 30, 2009 4:06 PM EST up reply actions
I hear where you are coming from Ed, I just thought an RB was worth a higher pick.
Considering the importance of the run game to the Giants, and the loss of Ward, a second round pick [like LeSean McCoy or Shonn Greene] may have been warranted. I know this is second guessing but I have always admired the Giants for their dedication to a simpler, purer brand of football. Build high quality lines and run the damn ball. I thought they were getting away from that by drafting all these WRs early the last four years [1+3,3, 2, 2] and leaving later picks [2+4,0, 6+7, 4] for O linemen and RBs.
Although in the Giants management defence, they loaded up on defensive linemen in free agency and now that did not turn out to be the dominating unit everyone thought it would be. Can’t win sometimes.
no..you can't win.
There was no reason at all to spend a higher draft pick on a RB. Nicks is going to be great. Sintim the jury’s out on, cuz he’s been hurt too, but from what most have seen, he can be a starter at least in the NFL.
Will Beatty will be the Giants starting LT or RT sooner rather than later.
So who would they get? Andre Brown might have been injury prone in college…but that didn’t indicate he’s tear his achillies in training camp.
Where they drafted in the third round, there was no RB available who would’ve made sense, other than Andre Brown.
Yea, maybe they could’ve drafted another one in the later rounds….
but again…I don’t know why your harping on this.
We had FOUR RB’s on the roster who according to most fans who know who they are and from what we’ve heard from the coaching staff. were all good enough to make up for and do better than the Giants RB’s last season with Ward.
NO ONE could have predicted what’s happened with these guys.
There was no reason whatsoever to get another RB. Andre Brown was an excellent pick, and still may be (tho he may also never play a down).
The Giants have been BURNED by drafting RB’s in the 1st and 2nd rounds…I had no problem when they passed on McCoy and Greene
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 6:12 PM EST up reply actions
McCoy hasn’t impressed me for Philly. Other than the big game against us hes been average at best – hes at 4.3 ypc right now on the season
by mclaren_is_the_best on Nov 30, 2009 6:41 PM EST up reply actions
As much as I love Nicks, I agree that
we should not have used our # 1 on a WR this year. It was, however the overwhelming choice of most BBVers (absent getting a top flight FA) and of Giants’ management as well.
Giants have a history of not drafting high for RB's.
The three highest I remember in the last 30 years have been Joe Morris (mid 80’s, late second round), Rodney Hampton (89 24th pick), and Tiki Barber (mid second). Not counting the Ron Dayne thing BTW, although that provides one more reason not to use a high pick for RB, when you can use lower ones with superior scouting to draft and develope or pick up unknowns and develope.
Jacobs – 4th round
Bradshaw – 4th round
Ward – Picked up from practice squad of Jets
Here’s a blast from the past: OJ Anderson – cheap free agent pick up from the Cardinals who would be 89 comeback player of the year, litterally the wheels on the bus trip to Super Bowl 25, and the MVP of Super Bowl 25.
There is a history of great scouting and coaching for the RB core and if you have that why waste picks or money on high profile players.
by Giantskick@on3 on Dec 2, 2009 12:58 AM EST up reply actions
I understand what you are saying Gk@, but.....
At some point you have to decide if your situation warrants a change in strategy. In this case, I see the Giants as legitimate Super Bowl contenders and in need of some final pieces of the puzzle. After the loss of Ward, and looking at what you had and what you needed and who could give you an immediate impact to get you back into the big game, I think a second round RB was a good fit. Normally, rookie WRs do not do all that well and you had some great young talent at WR that just needed a chance to play.
Note: Bradshaw was a seventh round pick, not a fourth.
The pussification of Brandon Jacobs
That is just what I needed. That’s some funny crap and oh so true. I think that he breaks the pussification spell if we just keep feeding him the ball. 20+ carries so that he and the O-line can get into some sort of ryhthm. We are not going to wear defenses down with Bjake only getting 11, 12 carries and Bradshaw and Ware are not going to be effective against fresh defenses.
I agree with you that a key to your past success was the emphasis on the run game......
which led to the wearing down of the opposing defence.
by NorthLeft12 on Nov 30, 2009 11:56 AM EST up reply actions
Couldn't agree more...
In our first five games of the season we were up against some crap secondary’s an Eli thrived which made Gilbride think that we could be a successful pass happy offense like the Pats. So we neglected the run and yes against the raiders and the chiefs you can win by passing or running but against better secondary’s we need to get back to giant football. Which is running the ball 35-40 times in the match which would get our hole offense and o line into a rhythm and set up the play action pass.
People want to talk about the "crap" the Giants faced....
yet Oakland beat Philly, KC damn near beat Dallas, TB beat GB, Washington damn near beat Philly AND Dallas..and we beat Dallas.
Yea, they almost beat those teams, but those are the contenders the Giants are up against…and the Giants beat the hell out of those teams.
Their records say they are crap…but if they really were crap, how come the other contenders that are supposedly so much better than the Giants couldn’t really handle them?
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 4:00 PM EST up reply actions
Good point...
i suppose people are calling those teams the giants faced “crap” to fit in with the trend of the season
they are...
and it is somewhat justified, but it also makes no sense to look at it that way.
You gotta beat who’s in front of you. If those teams the Giants beat the hell out of were so bad…then the other contenders the Giants are dealing with should’ve beat the hell out of them too..and the Giants would already be out of the playoffs.
You gotta beat who you play. Doesn’t matter who it is you gotta take care of buisness.
If the outcome of the Saints game was the opposite…your could’ve said the same thing about them beating up “crappy” teams.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Nov 30, 2009 6:14 PM EST up reply actions
I think thats part of the reason he bounces to the outside looking for bigger gains
than he sees up the middle. That two to four yards starts looking real unappealing when you know that the next time you see the ball may not be until the following quarter. When you know you are only going to get twelve carries the whole game, I can see how desparation to contribute can cause you to do stupid things like go outside or over read the blocking trying to see extra yards that probably aren’t there. I have seen plenty of games before this season where Jacobs only got a couple yards the first few carries. But they kept feeding him and by OMG, his yards per carry would go up with almost every carry, because all he has to do is run full speed at someone (even these gigantic DT’s that the Giants have faced this year) a few times and even if they were able to tackle him at first, they either can’t tackle him later on or they lose the intensity and will to tackle him head on. We need to let Jacobs open the game the way he used to, looking for someone to hit. Look at the NFC championship against GB. Woodson was never the great CB that he usually is in that game and a lot of that has to do with that first hit that Jacobs put on him. If the Giants want to win, they gotta start beating people up again on defense, but especially on offense and a big part of that is Jacobs 20 plus carries per game. Even in our wins you don’t see that look of litterally having the snot and $__t kicked out of you. Some of these teams look like they could play another game after playing the Giants.
by Giantskick@on3 on Dec 2, 2009 1:14 AM EST up reply actions
I agree
Bradshaw is a good runner but he should’ve been used less even when he was healthy. Jacobs should be out there on the field on every first and second down unless he is absolutely gassed and needs to take a breather
by mclaren_is_the_best on Dec 2, 2009 2:22 AM EST up reply actions
Given Jacobs' injury history, that would be a recipe for disaster.
The way he runs I think you need to limit his carries during the regular season so that he is fresh and ready for the playoffs. That is why Derrick Ward was so important. He was a physical runner who dished out some serious punishment too. He was also a great blocker and pass catcher. I assume he is not doing that well in Tampa due to their overall offensive issues [three QBs with two rooks] and playing from behind most games.
I might be mistaken,
but I don’t remember Jacobs ever getting hurt when he just ran into people head on. With those long legs as a target lowering the boom probably is the way for him to extend his career.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Get Your Giants' Gear
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
