Beating a dead horse ... because they can't run, either
by Ed Valentine on Dec 2, 2009 10:38 AM EST
in News
184 comments
We have pretty much beaten to death the topic of the problems our New York Giants have had with the running game. Whether it's the blocking, Brandon Jacobs not running well, or Kevin Gilbride passing too much doesn't matter.
And I really don't mean to harp on it. But, it's pretty annoying when writers from Dallas, this week's opponent, are throwing it in the Giants face.
The Giants finished fourth in the NFLin rushing in 2007 on the way to a Super Bowl championship, then finished first last season in garnering the top seed in the NFC playoff bracket. The Giants still rank a respectable 10th in the NFL in rushing in 2009 – but it's been a tale of two seasons.
In the first five games, when the Giants ran off to a 5-0 start, New York averaged 160.4 rushing yards per game and 4.4 yards per carry. But in the last six games, the Giants have averaged only 98.8 yards per game and 4.0 per carry.
At 6-5, sitting two games back of the first-place Cowboys and a game back of the second-place Eagles, the Giants are perilously close to having their season slip away.
New York has been unable to get Jacobs untracked. He has yet to rush for 100 yards in a game and is averaging just 3.9 yards per carry. He has rushed for only three touchdowns. A year ago at this time, Jacobs had four 100-yard rushing games and 11 touchdowns. Two years ago at this time, he had three 100-yard games and 12 touchdowns.
If head coach, Tom Coughlin reads Giants.com, he would find out that even the team's own Web site is harping on the team's rushing numbers, both offensively and defensively.
The Giants have not had a run longer than 25 yards in eight consecutive games, their longest such streak since Sept. 7-Nov. 2, 2003.
In Coughlin’s career, whether or not his teams rush for 100 yards is often an accurate barometer in predicting success or failure. His Giants teams are 40-19 when they hit the century mark, 13-19 when they don’t. Including his eight years in Jacksonville, Coughlin is 91-49 when his teams rush for at least 100 yards, 30-49 when they fall short.
As Coughlin noted, the Giants’ ability to stop the run is also an issue. The Giants are 11th in the NFL, allowing 107.8 yards a game. Through 11 games last year they were sixth, giving up 84.8 yards a game on the ground. In both 2007 and 2008, the Giants allowed fewer than 100 yards per game over a full season.
Pretty obvious what needs to be done. Now we find out if this team is capable of doing anything about it.
0 recs |
184 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
This is no different
to us saying that it is December and therefore Romo and the Cowboys will fade.
The lack of a big run distorts your average per game s it only takes one 30 or 40 yarder and suddenly you are up to 130 yards a game. A better comparsion would be the number of rushing attempts – fewer attempts with a lower average means less yards.
We have known for several weeks that the Giants are out of sync and time is running out for them to correct things to keep the season going another week.
by G Fan in England on Dec 2, 2009 10:46 AM EST reply actions
You are what your record says you are!!!
ED, as much as it pains me to admit it they are right we are not a very good running team. Hopefully Bradshaw can play becuase he is our best hope for a 100 yard game. Dallas has a great D line and they are definitly going to stick 8 men in the box. Unitll the great Gilbride figures out what to do when a D gives you an 8 man front, or the O line can open a hole against an 8 man front, I don’t have high hopes for the running game Sunday. To tell you the truth I hope the Giants show up Sunday!
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 11:11 AM EST reply actions
Not sure why you think Dallas will put eight men up front.
If you are having trouble running, and they have an excellent defensive line, why would they not go with seven? The Cowboys run defence is almost identical to the Giants except in TDs allowed on the ground. The Giants have allowed fifteen [15!?!] and the Cowboys four.
I would expect that you will pass against the eight man front as opposed to running into it.
I think the challenge for the Giants will be to stop the Cowboys running attack. They are currently featuring three good backs averaging 5.3 yards per carry. Hmmmm that sounds familiar for some reason.
Best of luck beating the Cowboys. I can’t stand those arrogant bastards.
What?
You may not like the Cowboys, but this year’s group is far from arrogant bastards. They are nothing like teams in the past. Who are you referring to when you say that?
So you admit it!
In all reality, this group of cowboys is much better.
Austin Miles is awesome (and grew up in the same county as where I live), and everyone’s just shut up.
Good for them, but We’ll still always hate them.
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
Becuse 8 man front work against the Giants
The Great Kevin Gilbride has not figured out how to run or pass against an 8 man front yet even thought Plax has been gone for over a year now. Every team we have faced has put 8 in the box to stop the run and it’s worked! The NFL being a copycat league I don’t see why Dallas would not stack the box and take away the run and make us one deminsional. It’s not like our O is making teams pay for putting 8 men in the box.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 2:10 PM EST up reply actions
ironically
it seems the Giants are either stifled by 8 in the box, or 8 in coverage.
That would seem to support the theory that their offensive playcalling has been very predicatble, if teams can load up like that situationally.
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 2, 2009 1:18 PM EST up reply actions
Has the
Oline lost its ability to play physical and really beat opposing blockers?
I think they are way more injured than they are leading on which is totally understandable but at a certain point you really have to take an objective look at what is going on.
If you saw Giants Online they had Ernie P on and he was talking about Jacobs and how his first step when he gets the ball are not forward they are side to side which decreases his effectiveness right away… After i had a chance to think about this the more I agreed.
The knock on Jacobs used to be that he doesn’t wait for blocks and things to take shape in front of him he just tried to plow over defenders now he waiting for the holes and blocks to shape and they AREN’T….so maybe more of the responsibility has to fall on Jacobs now…
All that said, i think the O Line is starting to break down and there are not reliable back ups to put in there… Draft this offseason better address this..
Simply...
they gotta do it.
They continue this path, they’re shot, season’s over.
They we can all wager on when the inevitable collapse of the Saints and Vikings comes about.
Saints lose in round 2 to the fckn Eagls. Vikings…..to the Packers (LOL!!!!). This is all provided the NYG’s are not there. cuz they are in place of the Packers if they get in.
"It ain't over till its over"---
And for anyone thinking its Gilbride abandoning the run...
what is he abandoning? First down run…3 yards. 2nd down run…-2 yards. 3rd and 9. Is that what he’s abandoning?
Run and run effective. O-Line needs to get nasty. Jacobs needs to start talking shit again and get pissed.
Someone needs to STEP UP AND MAKE A DAMN PLAY.
"It ain't over till its over"---
Le'ts sneak Free into the lockeroom to give the pre game speech!!!
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
Sounds like a good idea!
"The Dallas Cowboys might be America's Team, but the New York Giants are America's DREAM team." -- Robert Tisch
I know I'd have the task of
putting some sort of strong laxative in Sheridan’s coffee or whatever he drinks (kool-aid?).
At least it get him to the booth I’d think.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Dec 2, 2009 12:02 PM EST up reply actions
The only sad point
was that we drafted Barden and Beckum to have a short passing game come the late season weather conditions.
Now the weather is starting to arrive and Beckum and Barden are no where to be seen. True we have Smith, Manningham, Nicks and Boss – but an extra two weapons would not go amiss.
I know everyone got on Beckum for the Int against the Eagles, but the last time I checked Samuel was/is a very good CB with an eye to the ball and could have easily read Eli’s eyes, so let’s not get to down on the rookie.
by G Fan in England on Dec 2, 2009 11:25 AM EST reply actions
+1
Barden is benched because he can’t contribute on special teams. Get the fuck outta here. Pardon my French, but Tom Coughlin being so set in his ways is ultimately hurt in this team. Which is funny, because in 2007, he let a lot of the rookies play — except Koets — and look at the success. The only way we can evaluate what we have is play. That’s the only way these kids are gonna learn.
"The Dallas Cowboys might be America's Team, but the New York Giants are America's DREAM team." -- Robert Tisch
Barden
Our WR’s have been pretty good, who should Barden replace? Smith, Ham or Nicks? TC sees Barden in practice everyday, so there is a reason he is not playing and it probably has more to do with his route running and catching than special teams.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
more 4-wide sets
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 2, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions
sometimes I get the feeling
the Giants have like 3 offensive looks: I-form, shotgun/3 wide, and single back / 2 wide
You rarely see a lot of looks from them. once or twice a game they should: Spread the field 4-5 wide and run; spread it just so and pass; throw from the I-form; run from the shotgun. Just one or two of each of these would diversify the offense to the point where defenses couldn’t so easily sit on a play
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 2, 2009 1:22 PM EST up reply actions
Barden not playing...is cuz like Dinner said..the WR haven't been a problem.
WHat is a rookie WR or TE going to do for the Giants?
I highly doubt he can run polished routes and find instant chemistry with Eli.
We have Hakeem Nicks learning on the job. He’s so damn good no one even notices that he’s still a rook and LEARNING.
Do we need another one or 2 guys learning on the job? When our season is still in doubt?
Maybe if/when the season is no longer in doubt…like we really are out of the playoff hunt or….(**eyes widen) lock up a playoffs spot before week 17…there’s no reason to go send out a rookie right now.
Even Goff is debatable, but since there is injuries, lackluster play and also he’s in his second year so he knows what goes on somewhat, that’s why he deserves a shot.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Dec 2, 2009 11:47 AM EST up reply actions
I was talking about
more so on the defensive side of the ball; Barden and Beckum aren’t playing for a reason.
"The Dallas Cowboys might be America's Team, but the New York Giants are America's DREAM team." -- Robert Tisch
if anything....
we put Barden in within the 20 yrd range of the endzone.. and not as a substitution but in a 3+ wr set..
Not sad, it's called a learning curve
Anything we get out of Barden and Beckum is cake right now. Don’t worry I am sure they will make an impact, but no way we can count on rookies. Look at Ham he wasn’t on the active roster most of his rookie season. A year later he has the playbook down (for the most part) and he has had an impact on some games. Besides we still don’t use Boss like we should.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 11:40 AM EST up reply actions
Using Boss
I think we use Boss to much – he is one of the best blocking TE’s in the league but really lacks the quickness and hands to be a factor in the passing game. He does have incredible toughness in the passing game that becomes and unmeasurable stat.
I think we should start using Beckham in passing downs – and possibly mix in some two TE sets with Beckum and Boss.
Darcy Johnson seems to have good size, quickness and can block well.. and is probably our most balanced TE. But he lacks the speed of Beckum which can really cause match-up issues for defenses.
Beckum is a rookie!!!!!!
Here is some food for thought.
Boss 26 rec. 381 yards 14.7 avg 4 TD’s
J. Whitten 59 rec 588 yards 10.0 avg 1 TD
Shockey 40 rec 476 yards 11.9 avg 3 TD’s
Boss is being thrown to less but put’s up compable numbers to some of the best in the game. Boss runs great routes and is fater than you think and at 6’8" makes a pretty good Red Zone target, I say he is under utilized in our passing game.
Beckum can’t block which means the opposing defense knows it’s a pass play when he is in and has not shown he is even comfortable on the field yet. Not saying he won’t turn out to be a good TE but as a rookie he is not ready to be counted on yet. His day will come.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions
He is 6-4 240lbs...
He can handle a linebacker…
Am i?
http://www.nfl.com/draft/2009/profiles/travis-beckum?id=71201
it looks like im giving him an extra inch and shorting him about 5-10 lbs.
at 6-3 250..with his speed and athleticism… if he should be able to knock every linebacker in this league off their horse.
Who says Becum can block
I have yet to see it on the field, I don’t care how big he is blocking is a mentality and he does not have it yet.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions
Beckum
Does come with the rep of being a poor blocker, something he was rarely ever asked to do at Wisconsin. It’s a skill that takes time to learn, you can’t just smash into guys and move them at the NFL level.
????
LOL!
I just can’t!
We’re all going around in circles!
Everyone’s on board to use Boss more…now they use him too much!
…BTW, I disagree 1000%, we need to use Boss even more. For real, he needs to be the #2 option behind Swiss. Not using a 6"7 former B-Ball player with great hands? This guy should have double the number of receptions!
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Dec 2, 2009 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
There's nothing to indicate the Giants shouldn't be putting up points like the Saints
several good backs. Short & slant threats like Boss & Smith. Long & intermediate threats from Manningham, Nicks, Hixon…
I realized during MNF what makes the Saints O click is the true spread of weapons… you can NOT focus on a guy like teams did vs. Plax. They have liek 6 equal weapons. I think, so do we with BJ, AB, KB, SS, MM, HN.
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 2, 2009 1:26 PM EST up reply actions
This has to be a joke post
I think we use Boss to much
Darcy Johnson seems to have good size, quickness and can block well.. and is probably our most balanced TE.
Darcy Johnson hands didn't look so good against Denver
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:25 PM EST up reply actions
btb, you're the first voice I've heard
tender the opinion that Boss has bad hands.
Serious, I have a question for Ed
apropos of nothing else….
Why do writers use the word “untracked”? It really makes absolutely NO sense. In fact, I think it’s a pure malapropism.
I think that what happened was that sportscasters used to say that they needed to guy “on track” – think of a train that wasn’t running and needed to get on the track, ie operating properly.
However, “untracked”? It makes NO SENSE whatsoever! So that means that in this case, if B Jacobs = the Train, they need to get him off the tracks? ie untracked?
Think about it. It makes zero sense.
Sorry. Pet peeve.
GO GMEN.
Maybe
they are trying to say that he is in a rut and needs to get himself out. In which case I suppose they could coin another awful term such as unrutted. Sounds like a buck deer that can’t find a doe.
And I saw that #$%^&
Ruttin on my Mayella!
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 2, 2009 1:27 PM EST up reply actions
Cody, the English language often cannot withstand the kind of
logical etymology you offer for untracked. It has come to be accepted to mean reaching a high level of performance after a lousy start. Originally, it meant the same as trackless, as in the trackless wilderness (no roads, paths, etc.)
Oh, geez
George, you are gonna make me dig out my dictionary again. Good God, did you teach English for a living?
LOL
I don’t know Bartok from Bootsy’s Rubber Band (there’s plenty to be sad about in life). but I love to probe details I consider a little loose on deck. Sight unseen. That’s a tautology. It simply means unseen. Or solipisms—it takes two to tangle. Well, just remember that if they don’t bite when they’re puppies they won’t when they’re dogs. Look before you leap, but strike while the iron is hot.
sight unseen
sort of like “ATM Machine”
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 2, 2009 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
Yikes
I had to create an account after hanging around anonymously for months just to point this out…but the word you are looking for to describe “it takes two to tangle” is actually “solecism,” not “solipsism.” Sorry to be a snoot but it seemed appropriate given the context!
by SonictheHedgecock on Dec 3, 2009 1:25 AM EST up reply actions
Welcome aboard, Sonic
(I like that handle)and thanks for the correction. Solipsism wasn’t even close. Solecism is correct, but not the word I was reaching for, which was spoonerism is not as accurate (if accurate at all) Examples:
Three cheers for our queer old dean (dear old queen, referring to Queen Victoria;) or, the Lord is a shoving leopard (loving shepherd.).
I’ve called mistakes I’ve heard over the years (not accurately mind) spoonerisms:
Impatient entrance to hospital
Rule with an armed fist
Sclerosis of the liver
He cast asparagus on my honor
It raised my shackles
Once again, solecisms (Bushisms?) not spoonerisms (Is the bean dizzy?).)
Thanks again
since it turns out
there are a handful of complete language geeks here, let me share:
http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~beatrice/humor/index.html
the most hilarious linguistic humor Web site I have ever come across. I literally cried laughing the day I discovered it.
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 3, 2009 8:14 AM EST up reply actions
I do
etymology is what Gonz was offering, not Cody. Cody was offering a morphological criticism. The former is the study of the origins of words, while the latter is a study of the minimal units of meaning within language such as “un” sometimes found within words.
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 2, 2009 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
Jolly, like Cody, your interpretation offers flawless logic.
However, looking at the origin of the word it’s a bit off kilter. All I can ofer you both is that wise old saw: “Don’t desert the sinking ship when the cock crows.” Then again, what do I know? I can’t even discern the difference between sheepshit and Tootsie Rolls.
what about
shit and shinola?
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 3, 2009 8:06 AM EST up reply actions
interesting points in here...
i also think Barden should be used more…i think he’s got great upside and his sheer size would make life much easier on Eli.
No there’s nothing wrong w/ our WR’s…but i don’t see anyone demanding a Double TEam and because of that our Running game is non existent. Coincidence? maybe…
I can’t honestly fathom why anyone would think we’re over using Boss…great size, great hands, very clutch. I think he should be used more.
However, he is a good blocker and the way our Oline’s been playing and the way teams have been stacking the box yes, he certainly helps out as a blocker. But still we got to get him MORE involved.
"If you don't know what you're doing... just rush the quarterback" - LT
You can't argue with the facts..
We are all well aware of the statistics and how they compare year to year..but and I say BUT..Brandon Jacobs is not going to have 100 yard games on 11-12 carries, period…and Jacobs needs to be told to run North/South..The O-line opens holes as the game progresses because BJ has already worn down the defense..He is not doing that and that is why we have him here..Run the damn ball into their gut and they’ll shy away after a few collisions with that monster…and our offense is completely telegraphed..I believe G Fan brought that up again yesterday..Eli goes shot-gun..Pass..Eli lines up under center..Run..Stevie Wonder could defend that crap. The offense has Zero creativity..The defense?..Sheridan has ruined it..and I think that bull about Spags saying Sheridan was his advisor goes as follows: " Bill what do you think about this?"..Then Spags would say thanks and make 100% sure he put the exact opposite in his gameplan…and it won’t change no matter where they put him, put him on another planet for all I care..He stinks..Bottom-line if we don’t run successfully and defend the run successfully we can chalk up another loss..The players ought to just go out there and play with their instincts..Whatever that jerk radios in just ignore it and hit somebody..and tell Osi he’s not allowed to rush Romo..stay home and hit somebody..It is not rocket science..It is Hit and Tackle..Run and Catch.
It all clicks
“The O-line opens holes as the game progresses because BJ has already worn down the defense..He is not doing that and that is why we have him here… Run the damn ball into their gut and they’ll shy away after a few collisions with that monster”
I think that’s a perfect reason why the O-line has been worst than we remember.
Let Brandon hit a few people, rough them up, and reap the rewards.
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
Our WR's
Steve smith is 6th in the leauge in yards, believe me our opponents our double teaming him because he is getting open all the time. Barden can’t get on the field right now because he can’t crack the lineup. and the only WR’s (Hagan & Hixon) that he can replace are good on special teams so I say don’t worry about Barden, rookie wide outs usually never provide a spark for us (Nicks is the first one I remember having an impact his rookie year).
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:20 PM EST reply actions
On a very positive note..
Smith is one very good game or two Smith-like games from a 1000 yard season. Way to go Smitty!
Steve smith is 6th in the leauge in yards, believe me our opponents our double teaming him because he is getting open all the time
this just confused me. he’s getting double teams, but open all the time? I don’t see any double teams on Smith…ever really.
even the deep pass he caught vs ATL….that was man coverage, you’d think if they’re going to double him, they would do it on a deep pass?!?!
"If you don't know what you're doing... just rush the quarterback" - LT
I don’t see any double teams on Smith…ever really.
I see teams double and rolling the saftey’s over the top on smith all the time. It’s very easy to see Smith is Eli’s favorite target and if you don’t double him he will have a big game on you. Smiths on pace for a 104 catches this year. And if you don’t think teams are doubling him on 3rd down your not paying attention.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:35 PM EST up reply actions
well i must not be paying attention than....
but for the record, it has nothing to do w/ the fact that Smith is Eli’s favorite target, and it has nothing to do with the fact that Smith is on pace for 104 catches.
Was smith doubled at all vs. ATL? was smith doubled on that 3rd down pass that sailed high when Dawkins hit him in the back?
just can’t imagine teams even having the ability to doublet team smith when they got 8 guys in the box constantly.
"If you don't know what you're doing... just rush the quarterback" - LT
Never underestimate the power of Stupid
Teams are faking us out on the line, they line up with 8 in the box and drop the safety’s. The Great Gilbride has yet to figure out an offensive plan to stop this from happening. Our running woes have more to do with the offensive line and B Jacobs running style.
In the NFL teams try and take away you best player and Smith is our best offensive player this year.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:54 PM EST up reply actions
I thought they were dropping back into more of a zone scheme
as opposed to singling out smith and doubling him.
but i hear what your saying…i’ve been screaming for sheridan to try to disguise his blitz schemes since pre season…
"If you don't know what you're doing... just rush the quarterback" - LT
Smith
said a couple of weeks ago that he is seeing double teams at times. So, it doesn’t always happen, but he is getting some of it.
It's self inflicted suicide (imo)
if you don’t double team, or at least have two guys watching him
Single team him, and he’ll almost always find the hole and be open.
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
IMO it's not suicide...
i think it’s actually very smart defensively.
we let Welker have a career game vs us in the super bowl and practically shut NE’s offense down.
Smith to me is a great slot reciever. I know after this year some may argue this, but i think he excels when he is running those slants and crossing routes and working underneath. But I don’t see him getting separation on deep balls or contesting those “Jump balls” from Eli on a consistent basis.
Ed pointed out that Smith is seeing double teams at times…I image that they are strickly on 3rd down and only in defenite passing situations.
As good as Smith is he will never make a defense respect our passing game more than our running game. Teams with elite secondaries (philly, den, GB, etc) wouldn’t be worried in the least…IMO.
Now here’s the kicker…i think Steve Smith is one of the best slot WR’s in football, and what’s he’s done this year has been terrific. But let’s face facts…Eli is throwing to him…not Peyton. Balls are gonna be high, they’re gonna arrive late, they’re going to have too much air underneath them. i think it benefits us to have a big body out there at WR…lord knows we don’t throw to Boss enough but when we do we have a high rate of success. And Boss is living proof that a guy can come from some obscure school and go late in the draft and still be very successful.
sorry i went off on a tangent lol
"If you don't know what you're doing... just rush the quarterback" - LT
Leaving a guy open to get constant first downs
Is suicide to me.
Moving the chains is important.
Maybe not suicide, but slow death by injection.
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
On a side note
Both MG and RV are reporting that Goff might be starting this week because he is getting the reps with the starters today. I guess we’ll find out pretty quickly if he’s going to be AP’s replacement or not.
I've been hoping for this
I think he’ll do just fine in comparison to what came before.
And Barden..
Perish the thought of putting him in our Red Zone offense..Shit wouldn’t want to screw that stellar success rate up..
Red Zone
If we don’t even use our 6’7" tight end in the red zone don’t exepet us to use a rookie in the red zone
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
Boss Can't catch?!?!?!
Bobbi come on the man has some of the best hands on the team and nobody holds on to the ball after a hit better than Boss. He is totally underutilized in our offense.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:26 PM EST up reply actions
I hope bobbi was joking.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Dec 2, 2009 12:27 PM EST up reply actions
I'm sorry Kevin Boss..I'm sorry Kevin Boss..I'm Sorry Kevin Boss
How many times should I punish myself?..haha
Bobbi has to buy a Boss Jersey to make amends!
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 1:03 PM EST up reply actions
Better yet
he should buy two and mail one to KG.
by Ed Valentine on Dec 2, 2009 1:16 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Had me worried for a minute, Bobbi
Boss has basketball player hands. Above all else, that’s his greatest strength. Considering he can get to balls Smith can’t, you could argue he has better hands than the little guy. WOo looking at the stats, my guess his YAC is better. He seldom goes down right at the catch. Smitty seems to do it quite often,
Actually in all honesty..George
I was making a comment about rookies who might help..and mentioned Barden in the redzone offense may very well be some help..I thought late was referring to Beckum…but obviously should have caught the height that late noted and realized he meant KB..Beckum is only 6’4"..and he can’t catch…Sorry for the scare..lol
You didn't owe me an explanation,but
thanks anyway. Now i can take my afternoon nap instead of tossing and turning with worry.
Steve is a small guy he knows its unlikely that he will break a tackle. And I wouldn’t even want to know how awful our offense would be if he got hurt as well
by mclaren_is_the_best on Dec 2, 2009 5:09 PM EST up reply actions
This from wcbstv.com
Injuries at running back could leave the New York Giants short-handed for Sunday’s key NFC East matchup with the Dallas Cowboys. Backups Ahmad Bradshaw and Danny Ware missed practice Wednesday
Here we go
I am praying Bradshaw can play, D Ware no big deal
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
I'm hoping for the opposite
I worry about AB getting more injuries.
if we loose this game there is no tomorow!
If he can play we need him for this game the season is on the line.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
I'm sure most agree with that POV.
I want him to get better and play for the Giants at least a few more years. That doesn’t mean that if he plays now he’ll sustain a career ending injury, but one injury has led to another with him. I just don’t want to risk him getting any more.
I dont know what's wrong with what the Dallas writers were saying.
They are writing for their own sites and informing their fans on what they believe the Giants struggles have been. Is it annoying that they said it or that it’s true?
Some Giants fans have been really annoying themselves in conceiding defeat. This way if you lose it doesnt matter because you knew you would, but if you win, it’s a huge upset and Romo sucks in December blah blah. I see this game no different then the first one, the only way Dallas loses is if they lose it. I don’t really see the Giants coming out and playing all that well. Last game you guys got 24 points off turnovers. Just ridiculous.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
I was agreeing with you...
until you said the stereotypical Dallass fan “Dallas only loses if they lose it”. BULL CRAP!!!!!
If the Giants win, it will be cuz the Giants were the better team that day…not cuz “Dallas lost it”.
As for the rest, yea, its perfectly fine for the writers to point out the Giants flaws.
And I can’t stand the people who want to be right about the Giants being bad and that all hope is lost…but if they win..its a great upset. No its not.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Dec 2, 2009 12:40 PM EST up reply actions
I dont say it too often
but 24 points off turnovers.. one a pick 6, one was Felix’s fumble that set up an easy td, and the other was the fluke Romo pick for another 3.. those were the worst. The other was when Romo had the sky ball that you ended up scoring off of so that technically counts but that’s more on defense. 17 points though that came directly from turnovers.. Yes in the end you drove it down and kicked the game winning field goal but it never should have gotten to that point.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
Young thats football
Last I checked turnovers are a big part of the game and last we heard dumb turnovers are some of the things Romo has done in big games. So Dallas didn’t give us the game they commited more turnovers and lost.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:47 PM EST up reply actions
"it never should of"
of course…
But Eli damn near threw a couple picks…what happened there?
Dallas got beat. The Giants were better cuz they CAPITALIZED off the turnovers.
The Giants won. Dallas Lost.
Its not just “Dallas Lost…the Giants got lucky”. That’s horseshit.
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Dec 2, 2009 12:47 PM EST up reply actions
I didn't say the Giants got lucky.
and while you could argue the pick 6 was just a good defensive scheme… not all of the turnovers were forced.. even fumbles.. if it’s a running back returning a kick it’s his fault every single time.. My point was really that I think it will come down to turnovers again. If we turn it over a lot we will probably lose
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
you didn't flat out say it...
but by saying “like the first game, the only wany Dallas loses is if ‘they’ lose it”
Did they ‘lose’ the first one? Well…if they pulled it out..they certainly didn’t ‘win it’ either.
The better team wins…plain and simple.
The Giants are fighting for their lives at this point, much like the Cowboys were at around this point last year.
If the Giants come out and play hungry and excecute…they’ll have a good chance.
Dallas has been winning, but really have been merely pulling victories out their A-holes against WAS and OAK..who both are bumbling enough that Dallas would win anyway.
If the Giants play like they’ve been playing, Dallas will rout.
If they play like they did against SD and ATL….simply, the team with the last possesion will win.
"It ain't over till its over"---
lol classic Giants/Cowboys fan argument
I think it depends on my team’s play, you think it depends on your teams play.
“If the Giants play like they’ve been playing, Dallas will rout.” Isn’t that basically what I just said just worded differently? If Dallas plays like it did the first game they will probably lose.
I’m not sure how can possibly bring up Oakland though, who was coming off a win against the Bengals.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
yeah..
it is turning into one of those arguments…
All I can say…hopefully the Giants come out and make a game of it.
They’ve been making a habit of ‘turning around’ the season for teams like San Diego, Philly and most likely Denver now…so maybe this game can turn theirs around?
"It ain't over till its over"---
Yeah and I mean
obviously because of the rivalry factor you have to predict a close game, but as we’ve seen this year, but teams are able to come out and lay a huge egg. We have been doing it lately pretty much just as much as you, so I’ll be alright with you guys playing well as long as we do. I’m not afraid of a back and forth type game as long as we don’t constantly shoot ourselves in the foot.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
both teams**
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
Any given Sunday
gotta love it. We destroy the Raiders, Raider beat the Eagles, Eagles destroy us. Just like 07, this game on Sunday will show us “Who Wants It More”.
No excuses a win is a win is a win
Nobody is conceding anything, however as a fan of your team you know when your team is playing well and when it is playing like crap. Right now the Giants are playing like crap, so people are being real about there chances. Beleive me if the Giants loose people around here will be upset. If we win we just saved the season so yes fans will be excieted.
Having said that I really don’t know what to expect Sunday, I am praying the Giants show up, but I will say this Dallas has some serious warts too and since they are our arch rival and we need this game more thatn Dallas I would not be shocked if we won
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
I've seen some comments by Giants fans
who have conceided it, spelled out that simply. I’m not saying you won’t either, but I have hard time believing you suddenly right the ship. Right now I believe Dallas is the better team so it’s there game to lose. That’s how I see how it.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
right now...
yea, Dallas is the better team.
Is it their game to lose? That’s stupidity in its essence.
If Dallas is up 17….then its their game to lose.
Right now. 0-0, on Wednesday…its no one’s game to lose or win.
They play the game for a reason and the better team, THAT DAY, wins.
They might be favored. They are playing better football….but if they lose…it will not be cuz Dallas “lost”. It will be cuz the Giants are better on 12/6
"It ain't over till its over"---
by FreeBradshaw on Dec 2, 2009 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
I disagree
The better team does not always win. The Patriots were the better team when they lost to the Colts a few weeks ago. It’s a figure of speech to say it’s the better team’s game to lose.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
The Patriots were the better team when they lost to the Colts a few weeks ago.
What are you talking about young, The patriot’s D is suspect that’s why they went for it on 4th. In the End some guy name Payton Manning led his team down the field and won the game. Thus the colts are the better team.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 12:57 PM EST up reply actions
The Colts ARE the better team
but the Patriots were the better team in that game. Look at the Cowboys win over the Redkins.. the Redskins out played us the entire game. They were the better team that day, but for one drive we were better and we won the game.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
As much as I hate the cowboys,
Young, the Cowboys were and are better than the Redskins, Does not matter who has more yards , who held the ball longer at the end of the day the only thing that matters is what the score is when the clock hits’s 00:00
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 1:07 PM EST up reply actions
ehh idk i just don't agree with that.
The Cowboys are obviously a better team than the Redskins, and I don’t know if you watched that game, but the Redskins were the better team that day. There’s no other way to say it. They just were. We got lucky.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
He's right
"The Dallas Cowboys might be America's Team, but the New York Giants are America's DREAM team." -- Robert Tisch
If the Redskins where the better team
How come Dallas scores one TD at the end of the game and wins. Man young your putting me in a really wierd space of defending the Boys… How about you give your D some credit for holding you in the game so that you can win it by scoring at the end of the game. If the Redskins were the better team that day no way do they loose like that.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
I give my d lots of credit..
despite the fact the Redskins were nearly perfect on 3rd downs, they kept them out of the endzone, which was huge.. our offense was a no show.. They were the better team for every possession but one. They outplayed us for pretty much the entire game, and even though we won on that day I have to give their team the credit they deserve.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
Again
How can you be the better team if none of your drives result in TD’s? I don’t care if they converted 100% on 3rd down. if you only score 6 points the whole game you did not deserve to win. The cowboys (the better team) won because their defense played a great game. And even if it was only one drive the Dallas O scored a TD instead of a field goal, which is more than you can say of Cambell and company.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
I see your point but..
again, I’m not sure if you watched it, and if so very closely, they were a missed field goal from icing the game, and they really were dominating the game. Even though we were stopping drives, it kind of felt like it was just a matter of time before they would score and end it if our offense wasn’t able to do anything. We could also go another direction with the play calling and settling for a field goal before the half, but there’s no need to discuss the Redskins during Giants/Cowboys week.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
You've seen that a couple of us Giants fans
see the writing on the wall, I’ve also seen BTB after a Dallas loss and how you guys crucify Romo and team so your point is moot. Am I to believe that Dallas has righted their ship or do we just sit and wait for the inevitable Dallas late season collaspe?
Dallas didn't really collapse in '07
and this team’s makeup is soo much different that last year’s. I’m not guaranteeing we come out of December with a winning record, but I’m pretty confident they at least won’t fall apart.
Some people were calling for Romo’s head, which is funny that you bring it up because it was an absolute joke that some people thought Kitna should get a shot. Anyway.. I think the two aren’t moot just because that happened after week 2 and they weren’t really conceiding the season, they thought Kitna could salvage it.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
Football is a very humbling sport
Young I know you beat down oakland pretty good, but if I were you I would be a little more worried about Dallas, they have a lot of Jeckyl and Hyde to their game. Meaning you don’t know what your gonna get out of the team. Maybe the defense plays great and the offense stinks, maybe the offense is good and the D was average. Romo you never know what your gonna get out of the guy. Point is Dallas is not an elite team.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
We're definitely not an elite team
but we’re also not the house of cards that we were last year, which is why Dallas fans are much more optimistic this year. Mainly that is on defense as they have held us in games that the offense was trying to keep us out of.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
If your not elite what are you?
You guys have won a lot over the years, why are you excieted about a team that looks like a one and done in the playoffs.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 1:19 PM EST up reply actions
As opposed to the elite '07 Giants right.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
lol we have the tools to make a run if we can put it together
we arent there yet but it can happen. In ‘07 we were the team to beat in the NFC and someone beat us. So why can’t we do that to the Saints and/or Vikings this year?
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
As Churchill so often said,
“Just give us the tools and we’ll make a mess of the job.”
We're not an elite team right now too
elite organization, yes….elite team no. Sunday’s game is do or die, maybe for both teams. For us it’s the obvious, lose and we’re pretty much done for sure. Dallas loses and their confidence has to take a big hit, it is December. There are two people on that squad that scare me and thats Ratliff and Austin. We keep those two in check and it could be a great day for us.
More than being December..
we need this win because of our remaining schedule. We’ve been preaching all year that it will take 10 wins to get the wildcard, but right now I’m not convinced of that at all.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
Whatever the number
you guys are two wins closer than we are, that’s why I’m hoping the Giants come out like a bunch of maniacs.
Which reminds me..
Did you watch the Vikings game in Green Bay? How could they let Favre come into their house and have more heart? I’m not doubting at all that you guys bring everything that you have, but injuries on defense, and Eli’s foot (I’ll give it to him, I think it’s affecting him) are things that we should be able to take advantage of, as we’ve stayed fairly healthy.
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
I was really pulling
for the Pack and Rogers in that game. I can’t knock Brett, he’s having a hell of a year.
The Golden Brett
Not suprised Farve took out Greenbay at all, He is having a great season; I have never cared for him but the fact that the guy is 40 years old and playing like that is making me root for ole Brett
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 1:48 PM EST up reply actions
Kinda reminds me of boxing's Bhop
Guy hit 40 and is better than he was at 26 or 27. Sick. Gotta give props to Green Bay’s line for protecting him all those years and props to Minny’s line this year. With only 3 picks, he must be getting all the time in the world.
B Hopkins & B Farve are my hero's
I’m 42 and I play in an adult hockey league, the next morning after a game I can barely get out of bed I am so sore, couple of times I had to call in sick. Those guys are amazing to go out there and play better than they did in their prime. Kind of like ole Clay Matthews that guy was around forever.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 2:31 PM EST up reply actions
Of the Elite Triumvirate
(Brees, Manning, and Favre)
He’s been sacked the most. Something like 22 times iirc.
Which is worlds better than the Pack’s, but it hasn’t been a picnic back there
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
I think you said Favre
where you meant to say Brady
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 3, 2009 8:08 AM EST up reply actions
The first time we played..
Our pass defense was horrible.. which is why you were able to have success throwing the ball in max protection, therefore negating our pass rush. Our defense is much improved and is able to get pressure with less bodies and the db’s have been pretty solid. So llike I said a minute ago, I think it come down to turnovers — I won’t say that the winner of that battle wins because Dallas really doesn’t force a lot of turnovers, that’s why I focus more on how many turnovers Dallas has. If they keep it under 2 they should be fine IMO
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
that's always the case...
was Dallas’ pass defense bad…or was the Giants pass O that good?
I guess we’ll see.
They still gotta protect Eli and negate that pass rush.
I don’t think it matters if the Dallas pass coverage is any good…if the Giants protect Eli, he can pick you apart.
"It ain't over till its over"---
Are we back here again? lol
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
I think it does matter though..
there’s a difference between protecting Eli against a 4 man rush and protecting Eli against a 5,6 and 7 man rush. Eli can really hurt us if we send rushers and can’t get to him, but I feel a lot better about it this game than the first one. Scandrick has found his role in the slot ( he was starting at right cb against you the first time) and Jenkins is really coming around at right cb
"I’m ready to go here, all right? It’s like R. Kelly at recess."
"You will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
-Ari Gold
it does.
this is what Denver did, send 3-4 and send a whole bunch into coverage.
Its on the coaches to realize that teams are gonna do this…and run routes accordingly.
Its why a lot want Gilbride gone…he can’t see the stuff it takes most of us to see after the first 2 offensive plays.
"It ain't over till its over"---
This time hopefully
we won’t settle for field goals.
Which is why I think it’ll be a good game again.
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
It looks like
Johnathan Goff’s going to start over Chase Blackburn.
"The Dallas Cowboys might be America's Team, but the New York Giants are America's DREAM team." -- Robert Tisch
Can't hurt
worse comes to worse we put Chase back in.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 1:52 PM EST up reply actions
LOL
Goff is not hurt I was just saying it’s can’t hurt starting him and seeing what he’s got. If he plays bad we can always put Chase back in, we know what we are gonna get out of Chase.
by Late for Dinner on Dec 2, 2009 2:26 PM EST up reply actions
Anybody worried
that after outplaying Philly and Dallas for about 55 minutes apiece, the Redskins will finally put together a 60-minute effort against the Giants ina few weeks?
I am.
You play to win the game!
record with 100 yards rushing
Perhaps someone’s already commented on this, but the “record when team rushes for 100 yards” is one of the more meaningless in football. Teams that are winning any particular game run more and accumulate more rushing yardage because they’re running out the clock, while teams that are behind tend to throw more than they run to try to catch up. I.e., winning tends to produce 100-yard rushing games, not the other way around.
Get the old jerseys back!!!!
HS jerseys look better then the ones they’re wearing now. Reachin a bit but Eli looks uncomfortable and bad. You play good when you look good.
by Last year in Sec 127 on Dec 2, 2009 5:30 PM EST reply actions
Wrong...
The 80’s giant jerseys are horrible in comparison to the modern jerseys.
(to me anyway, I bet a lot of people are going to disagree)
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
Well to be honest..
I don’t care if they play in their underwear, as long as they win..
eh...
http://slanchreport.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/andre-smith.jpg
Tell me if fat guys playing in their underwear would be a good idea
Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.
I like the home jerseys
But I liked the old away ones better – with the blue number
by mclaren_is_the_best on Dec 2, 2009 5:43 PM EST up reply actions
AB and DW look like they may not be able to go..
That leaves us with Jacobs, Hedgcock and Gartrell..We are screwed..
More ...
More COWBELL Gartrell!
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Dec 3, 2009 8:10 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on Big Blue View
Related FanShots on Big Blue View
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Get Your Giants' Gear
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
