Land of the Giants: Mini-camp begins

by Ed Valentine on Jun 16, 2009 7:00 AM EDT in News Comment 17 comments

Our New York Giants start mini-camp today, and except for Antonio Pierce's constant Twittering, all is quiet.

Coach Tom Coughlin is, of course, thrilled by that. And by that, we mean the quiet. Not the Twittering.

It appears there won't be any distractions. Just a bunch of players practicing and fighting for jobs.

"If this is a year in which we're not going to have any of that," Coughlin said the other day of the sideshows, "then terrific."

So what does Coughlin hope to accomplish during the mandatory three-day, five-practice camp that will wrap up the team's off-season program?

"It's a continuation of where we are -- trying to take those areas we need the most work, and having already introduced it, now come back to these people for a second time and let's see how the young guys respond with that information in front of them," Coughlin said. "It will be a culmination of what we have done this spring. It will be under a magnified glass because the practices are rapid-fire and the camp is over before it even starts."

Coughlin said the veterans who have been around for a few years and were a part of the Super Bowl XLII run understand what the coach wants. The rookies -- some of whom will be asked to contribute this season -- must get a grasp of those expectations during the next few days, the coach said.

Ralph Vacchiano of the Daily News also discusses the quiet -- and looks back at just how different things are from a year ago. He mentions Plaxico Burress, Jeremy Shockey, Michael Strahan's retirement, Ahmad Bradshaw's incarceration and a host of contract issues.

There can't be much doubt that the Giants are in a much better place right now.

We spent Monday debating which defensive end is better -- Osi Umenyiora or Justin Tuck. In our poll, which is still ongoing, you guys appear to be supporting my position that Tuck is the man. Anyway, interesting that Monday I came across a Q&A that Umenyiora did with The Sporting News. Here is the money quote.

Q: When the season starts, do you plan to pick right up where you left off?

A: I would hope so. You never can tell what is going to happen, but I still feel like I am one of the best, if not the best, defensive end in football. I feel quick. I feel explosive, and I don't feel like I should be stopped one-on-one. As long as everybody else is doing what they are supposed to do, which I anticipate them doing, I am going to get a couple of opportunities (to get sacks) and I am going to win those opportunities. I feel I am right where I need to be.

I know you guys are tired of hearing about the Giants' supposed weakness at wide receiver, and debating whether or not GM Jerry Reese did the right thing by using the draft instead of trades to bolster the position. When it comes to the Giants, though, the national media can seemingly talk about nothing else. The latest examples are in Yahoo Sports! own 'Shutdown Corner,' and over at ESPN. Like it or not, wide receiver play will be a topic all season long.
ESPN's John Clayton sided with Philip Rivers recently when asked whether he would take Eli Manning or the San Diego quarterback to lead his team. Here is his reasoning.

I'd slightly favor Rivers because of his leadership and his flair for playing well in late-season games. The edge is small, though. Manning got hot at the end of the 2007 season, and he won a Super Bowl. Both quarterbacks have faced adversity, and I think Rivers has a slightly better track record in dealing with it. Rivers advanced to an AFC title game with a torn ACL that needed postseason reconstructive surgery. He's won playoff games even though his two favorite weapons -- LaDainian Tomlinson and Antonio Gates -- were far less than 100 percent for two playoff seasons. Manning wasn't the same quarterback at the end of last season without Plaxico Burress.

Blah, blah, blah. You know, we have never really debated Manning vs. Rivers directly here at BBV, and that's probably because it makes zero difference to me. They play in vastly different climates, so comparing their numbers is like comparing apples to oranges. All I know is the Giants have won a Super Bowl with Eli, and that's good enough for me.

Lots of stuff to argue about lately, even if it is June, and now The Fifth Down has given us another one. The New York Times' football blog is insisting that the Giants don't have the league's best offensive line, and awards that honor to the other team in Giants Stadium.
By the way, if you just have to have up-to-the-minute mini-camp reports, you can follow Mike Garafolo or Ralph Vacchiano on Twitter.

0 recs | Comment 17 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The head-to-head, metric vs metric methodology

used by Fifth Down does indeed demonstrate the superiority of the Jets O line to ours, but what would a unit vs unit comparison show? The strength of our O line resides in its brilliant functioning as a unit, not in brilliant functioning by individuals within the unit. Any BBV stats gurus ready to take up the cudgels to beat down this disrespect for what has been our team’s best component?

by blue gonz on Jun 16, 2009 8:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

When ti comes to these types of things

I let the results on the field speak for themselves. I have faith our line can continue to function at the high level it has been for the past few years, and prove their superiority to the Jets. I am actually more interested to see what the Eagles o-line will do as a unit, as it could be a very scary bunch… or it could be a catastrophic failure.

by brisulph on Jun 16, 2009 8:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thing's to consider to

As i was reading the comments from that article, a few thing’s were brought up. The Giant’s played a more difficult schedule. Not necessarily from an oppenents winning percentage, but the difficulty of ranked D’s. I believe one poster said the Giant’s faced 9 top 10 D’s compared to the Jet’s 2. As close as this method had favored the Jet’s overall, perhaps taking into consideration the caliber of player’s each unit (individual) had to face. Not only that, but breaking it down to common opponents.

Personally, i thought about breaking it down into results from similar (or the same) formations. Not knowing exactly how they were viewed from this comparison, i think by formation would be more of a true comparison.

Without nitpicking too much, what about down and distance? What type of pass play resulted in a sack, tipped ball or penalty?

Regardless though, it was an interesting read.

by Hootman on Jun 16, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

KC Joyner's Voodoo Math

I’ve commented several times on his columns on ESPN.com and it’s always been obvious that he doesn’t care for the Giants and enjoys finding any way to discredit their success. The only numbers that matter are the W-L and our rushing numbers against far more difficult competition than the Jets faced last year. How many times did D’Brickashaw Ferguson have to deal with Demarcus Ware? I’ll give you that Mangold is a better physical specimen of a center, but he’s not even close to the line commander O’Hara is. Seubert is the unsung hero of our line, Snee might be the best right guard in the game and McKenzie played great last year, although he may be the one player to not be above the grade of the Jets representative at that position.

More importantly, it’s the way the line plays together and there is no more cohesive unit than our New York Blocking Department. It is the best unit we’ve had since the Suburbanitesof the ’80’s. Rosie Brown is smiling from the grave about these outstanding young men.

Bleeding Blue since 1962

by sunlion333 on Jun 16, 2009 10:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It's the synergy, baby

The whole is worth more than the sum of the Jets

You play to win the game!

by Simms-McConkey on Jun 16, 2009 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Eli vs Rivers

All I know is Eli has a SB ring and Rivers doesn’t. And the Giants look to be a contender for years to come. Where as San Diego looks more like a team in flux.

by John W on Jun 16, 2009 10:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

When River's

Starts to beat the likes of Pittsburgh or the New Englander’s of the league, then MAYBE, a consideration! S.D. has had their chances. I know it’s collectively a team game, but given the chance, Eli has come through when it’s mattered. Statistically, Rivers may be better, but that’s probably where you can draw the line. For all we know, River’s could end up as another Fouts?! lol

by Hootman on Jun 16, 2009 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Where do the stats come from?

Presumably these numbers come from someone who was able to watch every play of every game and to break down the performance of each individual lineman on each play. So the stats are only as good as the person(s) doing the watching — unlike more basic statistics like yards per carry or passes completed which are easily observed and publicly reported. Also, do the stats factor in things like tight end or running back help? A weaker lineman may get more help and thus give up less sacks than the stud lineman who is always on on island. Do they factor in plays where a lineman lets himself get beat by design (screens or trap plays)? And, as sunlion has already pointed out, these numbers don’t appear to have taken into account the quality of the opposition. So I definitely take these numbers with a grain of salt. The Jets have a fine line, but the argument that it’s better than the Giants’ line is far from persuasive.

by Tucker Fredrickson on Jun 16, 2009 10:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think the o-line article is complete BS.

It is flawed from the beginning. A football game isn’t decided by matching up each player one on one and seeing who has the majority of “better” players. It is won or lost as a team. Similarly, even using the metrics that they used, it would be much better to calculate each for the entire line and compare the jets line to the giants line directly instead of player by player.
Also, perhaps worse is what ‘Tucker Fredrickson’ pointed out. The article gave us no info on which games these stats were taken from, so in addition to being against different defenses, they are completely unverifiable.

by P. Gibbons on Jun 16, 2009 11:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Giants O-Line

The key is not the individual talent. The key is that they are all good, athletic players who have been together — and healthy, knock on wood — for 2-3 years now. They work extremely well together. But, individually there are better guys.

by Ed Valentine on Jun 16, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We all agree that the head-to-head methodology is flawed, at least

to the extent that it can’t measure a more important comparison: unit to unit. Now, that’s what I cal a united front

by blue gonz on Jun 16, 2009 11:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Adjusted Line Yards

Actually according the metric FootballOutsiders use, they were pretty close last year, with the Giants getting the nod. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2008

by queler on Jun 16, 2009 11:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Gotta love FO

And those stats are more compelling, since its the play of a unit and includes opponent, situation, etc … Pretty much everything people were asking for here. So for run blocking Giants were #3 and Jets were #4. Pretty close, like you say.

But for pass blocking (adjusted sack rate), Giants were tied for 9th while the Jets were 18th. That is convincingly in the Giants favor.

by potroast on Jun 16, 2009 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd say the Giants O-line has been better

but the Jets O-line has the potential to be better. Doesn’t mean it will be, and even if it is, I’m still plenty happy with the line we have.

Also, I’ve been known to criticize Eli, but I’d take him over Rivers in a heartbeat. Rivers has never impressed me too much.

by cjmulrain on Jun 16, 2009 1:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't take Marmalard

over half the qb’s in the league. The guy can throw for a ton of yards in his outstanding climate, but put him in the NE for more than one or two games a year and see how he does. Plus it’s funny because Cutler whined his way out of Chicago everyone forgets the douche-off he and Marmalard had a couple years ago. It’s definitely a plus when your QB is calling out fans and opponents like a wrestling heel.

Homer: Aw, twenty dollars! I wanted a peanut!
Homer's Brain: Twenty dollars can buy many peanuts!
Homer: Explain how!
Homer's Brain: Money can be exchanged for goods and services!
Homer: Woo-hoo!

by bigbluethruandthru on Jun 16, 2009 6:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Rivers a Leader?

I’m sorry, John Clayton does not know the Phillip Rivers the rest of us know. Rivers is a whiny, cry baby, “me-first” tired act on the field. His antics remind me of Jeremy Shockey, T.O., Ochcinco and any other prima dona “I am the Team” type of leader. As my favorite no-nonsense coach likes to say, “Talk is cheap”. Shut your pie-hole and play the game. Someday you might become a leader. Playing hurt does not make you a leader. Throwing a tantrum on the field does not make you competitive. Pampers anyone?

by jbart on Jun 17, 2009 2:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs