Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Tiger Woods, Tony Romo Grouped Together At Pebble Beach

Michael Lombardi of the National Football Post talks Giants

I had the opportunity to chat about the Giants recently with Michael Lombardi of the National Football Post. If you aren't familiar with the Post, all I can say is 'why not?'

I enjoy Lombardi's perspective on many things because he is a former NFL personnel director. He comes at his job at the NFP, and his opinions, the way a general manager or scouting director would. Not with the outsider's eye of a columnist, but of someone who has been paid to make those judgments.

Lombardi had some strong opinions about the Giants. We discussed why the Giants have struggled to develop impact linebackers, the long-time organizational philosophy, Osi Umenyiora, and more.

What follows are Lombardi's thoughts on many of the topics we discussed.

Star-divide

Since linebacker seems to be on everyone's mind this off-season, that is where we began. Here is Lombardi's take on why the Giants have struggled to find impact players at the position.

"The Giants have always been a size, speed grading system going back to when George Young took over, and that system hasn't changed. They believe in the grading system, they believe in finding players that fit the mold and I think they're correct in how they do it," Lombardi said.

"I think there is a little bit of a difficulty specifically when you have that kind of team to be effective on third down in terms of being explosively quick as opposed to being '40' fast. I think that's the challenge that awaits the Giants. They have to work around it and they've gotta make sure that they find guys that can fit both requirements -- what it takes to win on third down in the NFL and what it takes to win in their own system."

Lombardi said Michael Boley, signed as a free agent a season ago, is exactly the type of linebacker the Giants covet.

"Boley fits their requirement. He's exactly what they want, he's a fast linebacker with size. He's gotta be able to stay healthy and stay on the field to be effective on third down, not in terms of attacking the pocket, but in terms of covering.

I asked Lombardi if he was surprised the Giants waited until the fourth round of the NFL Draft to address middle linebacker, selecting Nebraska's Phillip Dillard. He said he was not.

"The Giants are about trying to find players that fit their system, and sometimes guys don't always fit what you want to do," Lombardi said. "You can't force a round peg into a square hole. You've gotta make the best of whatever's provided to you.

"I think the Giants understand that they have to get better with some of the players they currently have on their team, not necessarily look for somebody in the draft that's gonna be magical."

We all know how badly the Giants defense was shredded last season -- statistically the second-worst defensive season in Giants' franchise history. We can talk all we want about the changes at linebacker and the additions at safety, but for Lombardi the success or failure of the Giants defense rests right where it has the past several seasons -- the defensive line.

"Everything the Giants do is going to be predicated on their ability to rush the passer and to not have to be involved in a lot of man-to-man defense. Where they can rush four and still get pressure and play zone behind it, that's when you're an effective football team," Lombardi said.

"That's how they won a Super Bowl three years ago. They could rush four and they didn't have to worry about coverage because the ball was coming out quick.

"The Giants have to get better play out of their defensive front. They didn't get it last year, the strength of their team really let 'em down."

Discussion of the defensive line, of course, led us to a couple of other natural topics.

First, the use of the first two picks in the April draft on defensive linemen, defensive end Jason Pierre-Paul of South Florida in the first round and defensive tackle Linval Joseph of East Carolina in the second round.

"Philosophically the school that I was trained in is more familiar with what the Giants do. So when they do what they do I always tend to like it because it's part of my training. You never go wrong picking a defensive lineman in the first round, especially if you have defensive linemen," Lombardi said.

"I don't ever buy into the theory that if you're strong in an area fill some other area. I think when you're strong you keep strengthening your strength."

Clearly, Lombardi believes in the Giants' mantra that you can never have enough pass rushers.

"All teams talk about it, but few teams actually implement that plan, so they're always defensive linemen short," Lombardi said. "You win the defensive front you can win the game."

Of course, we then had to discuss Umenyiora. Lombardi was blunt in his assessment of Osi -- and he asked for the one thing I have been asking for throughout the off-season. That is for Umenyiora to own up to his poor play of 2009.

"Osi has to play better. I think it starts with him, I think he has to accept the fact that he didn't play well. Denver's game plan last year [Thanksgiving night] was to run the ball right at him, 31 times in the game ... he didn't make a tackle, he didn't do anything," Lombardi said.

"That's what people had chosen to do against Osi and he has to understand that he now has a target on his chest. His play last year was reflective of the team's overall play, and I think the Giants challenge in their defensive line room is that everybody has to stop trying to become Michael Strahan and start becoming who they are and become the best players they can be."

Lombardi said not to read anything into co-owner John Mara saying "we better be" recently when asked if the 2010 Giants would be better than 2009s 8-8 version.

"That comment is not different than any other team in the NFL. There's expectations, specifically in New York. The Giants are never about a rebuilding process, they're about a reloading process," Lombardi said.

"For them not to make the playoffs is disappointing, so obviously the bitter taste in his mouth is reflective upon that last year. I'm sure he expects to get there, and I'm sure Tom Coughlin and Jerry Reese understand the expectations of the ownership."

Lombardi also had praise for Reese, and he made an interesting observation about the Giants knowing exactly what they are as an organization.

"I think what Jerry's done is tremendous in terms of following the formula that George Young laid and Ernie Accorsi kept moving forward. That's the Giants," Lombardi said. "You have to understand that the Giants are about an organization, they're not about an individual and I think that whoever runs the Giants will always adhere to the foundation that's been laid.

"Obviously every year is a different year. You're a great evaluator when you win, you're a bad evaluator when you lose. I think consistency with the Giants has always been what is most important, and I think he's been very consistent."

Finally, I had to ask Lombardi for his assessment of the NFC East. Here are his thoughts.

  • Redskins: "Have done a really nice job of closing the gap, but if the Giants defensive line dominates they should dominate the Redskins because that offensive line is the weakest part of their team."
  • Eagles: "I don't think the Eagles will be as easy a target as people might suspect because they lost McNabb. They're a very good football team who is gonna be good with Kevin Kolb at quarterback."
  • Cowboys: "Right now would appear to be the front-runners, but anything can happen."

"It's a really competitive four teams," Lombardi said. "The Giants if their defensive line is healthy and comes back and plays are as good as any team in there."

In the end, Lombardi said he believes the 2010 Giants will be a playoff team.

"I believe the offense and defensive lines redeem and I think the Giants have veterans in their lines and I think they'll play better," he said.

Comment 80 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Great stuff, Ed

Answers a lot of questions raised by a lot of BBVers

by blue gonz on May 18, 2010 6:13 AM EDT reply actions  

I tried

to focus on stuff people here were talking about.

by Ed Valentine on May 18, 2010 8:14 AM EDT up reply actions  

Fewell won't have much time to straighten out our defense.

Maybe not even two years. I’m beginning to think that Strahan was the only reason our defensive system worked so well for so long. Without Michael there any more I don’t see the 4-3 being the defensive allignment that will put enough pressure on the offense to excite the fans. Tuck is great but he has a long way to go before he can reliably dominate a game. Remember, Michael did it for years without much help.

  I hope Fewell can do the job with the Tampa hybrid defense, but I wouldn’t bet money on it. If not, look for the next defensive transition to be to the 3-4. I still think it is the most “offensive” style of defense.

We will have to score big on offense (fortunately we are capable of that) to protect our defense this year.

by giant fan since 57 on May 18, 2010 6:34 AM EDT reply actions  

'57

I know you love the 3-4. Let’s see if we can get through a season with a healthy defense. I think good health and a better coordinator go a long, long way toward fixing the defense.

by Ed Valentine on May 18, 2010 7:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

I've always thought the same of Strahan

he’s that one in a million type of player… I like Tuck a lot and I believe that he can be really good, can he be a Strahan? he has all the tools to make it for many years…lets just hope he’s healthy first. He was pretty much doing a pretty good job in 2008 when there was no Strahan, but he got beat up at the end of the season, so he def. can handle himself on that dline. I’m trying to stay straight about my expectations for this bunch. I do believe they are playoff quality on paper, we’ll just have to see how they play out the season. But, like many have said before on here, there’s really no place to go but up after last year’s craziness on defense.

I think we have capable pieces in place on the defense side, but they just need to act as 1 cohesive unit and attack. They do that and I’m sure everyone will be happy and I think FUEL fits this defensive unit better than their previous no spark and too intelligent for his own good but doesn’t know how to communicate with players, BS.

Opus smart , lascivio magis , intereo gauisus...

by 27Tango on May 18, 2010 9:04 AM EDT up reply actions  

All I am saying is that Strahan was able to make plays without much help.

On the other hand Osi and Tuck to a great degree (in my opinion) were able to make many of their great plays because the offense was mainly concerned with Michael. I’m not knocking the other guys, I just don’t think they have been able to produce nearly as well without Strahan as Strahan was able to do without them.

by giant fan since 57 on May 18, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

3-4 vs 4-3

Really, neither is inherently better than the other. It’s all about finding the right players to fit it.

If the Giants find a 300 something pound behemoth of a man to be NT, and 4 great linebackers, I’d be more than glad to have a 3-4.

We don’t have that big man, we have 1 “good” linebacker, a high potential backer, and a mess elsewheres.

When we have a bunch of pass rushers who rush with a hand in the ground, then we keep the 3-4. Would the ‘80s defense have worked so great without LT, Banks, etc.? Saying the 4-3 isn’t as good without one of the best defensive ends ever is just as silly.

Against all odds, against all circumstance were you don't have a shot, you succeed
-Michael Strahan
All you hear about is the past, the past... the past is the !@#$ing past, this is the present.
THIS IS TEMPORARY! A CHAMPIONSHIP IS PERMANENT
-Same as above

by Willgfass on May 18, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

Let's not get into the into the "we don't have the players" argument.

I happen to believe that the 3-4 defense is simply better than the 4-3 in the pass happy NFL of today. That’s why half the league has switched or are desperately trying to switch right now.

Given equally gifted players I just think the 3-4 is better right now against quarterbacks like Peyton and Drew who can pick apart the kind of defense we are building this year. And I also think they are much more comfortable facing 4-3 defenses than 3-4’s…..just my opinion though.
 

by giant fan since 57 on May 18, 2010 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

Teams switch

because they’re unoriginal and once they see one thing working, they go to copy it. I’d rather we be original or stick to what works than experiment with something else just because everyone else is doing it.

Against all odds, against all circumstance were you don't have a shot, you succeed
-Michael Strahan
All you hear about is the past, the past... the past is the !@#$ing past, this is the present.
THIS IS TEMPORARY! A CHAMPIONSHIP IS PERMANENT
-Same as above

by Willgfass on May 18, 2010 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

disagree

I totally disagree. we won the SB 3 seasons ago with a 43 vs the highest scoring team in nfl history. we held that team to 14 points. the beat defense is a 43. its better vs the run and with the right pieces will rush the passer more effectively. thats how we won the supre bowl shutting down the Pats

by FrankB03 on May 18, 2010 6:33 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

We also had the 2nd worst defensive showing last year in Giants history with the 4-3 defense, didn't we?.

There is no best defense. Only the best defense to react to current offensive trends. The reason all those teams are switching is because of the change in offensive strategy to the pass first mentality. Hell, 3rd and two is now a passing down. Guys like Manning, Brady, and Breeze have proven that without any pressure they will light you up.

Many experts seem to think that a well executed 3-4 defense is the best defense against pass happy teams. I fall into that camp. While it is possible to win with any defense on any given day I think day in and day out the 3-4 is better against the current crop of offenses we face.
  

by giant fan since 57 on May 18, 2010 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

don't know about Brees

but during the Jets-Colts AFC champ game this year they showed stats about how Peyton is especially dominant against the 34. Don’t think it means anything against your argument, just found it interesting.

in odd fronts it’s true, you don’t know exactly where the 4th guy is coming from. I talk this over with guys on our staff and others all the time, and no 43 fans can deny that aspect.
However, I think the odd front also has a couple of major flaws. Due to the type of player you get, I don’t want to drop Merriman or Orakpo into the seam or flat. If you get two receivers to a side (often in the NFL) you gotta do just that, bring a safety in the box a make your coverage predictable, or line up a McClain kind of guy on a slot- none of those are good options to my mind. The 34 is around because versatility is a rarity- it’s easier to have 2 ILB’s that can cover small zones and take on guards, an OLB who can rush and do not much else, and 3 DL guys who can take on dbl teams- everyone has a job or two, not asking a ton of versatility.
In a 43 I think you’re asking more from your guys- if you run firezone/zone blitzes, you need a DE who can rush, take on their best blocker, and drop to the seam or flat from a 3 point stance., you need a Will backer who can take on a counter block from a tackle/guard, fast flow to the front side, and cover the deep seam, middle, or the #2 and RB man on man. All that is the same with the Mike. The Sam has to be able to cover the Y, drop to Seam or flat, take on tackles and F’s through the hole, and so on… It’s just a lot more tricks they need in their bag.

But then if you get guys that have those tricks, I think the 43 can be more frustrating to offensive coordinators. One isn’t necessarily better in the overall, I just think this is the major difference between the two.

by dannymac56 on May 18, 2010 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'll admit that part of the reason I like the 3-4 is because it can

 unnerve the quarterback who always has to look out for that linebacker who might have a totally free path to him.

I think your points are valid. With a little effort I think I could come up with equally valid points about the 3-4. And I think it is worth noting that the worst game Peyton has played in recent years was against the Steelers 3-4 which totally confused him, something I have yet to see andy 4-3 defense do to him. And though he ultimately threw for nearly 500 yards against the Jets last year he did get rattled early on by the 3-4.

  Some have argued tht hybrid versions of the 3-4 would be effective. I think that is possible. With quarterback play so cerebral these days anything that breaks their rhythm should be eagerly sought after.

by giant fan since 57 on May 19, 2010 5:59 AM EDT up reply actions  

i wasn't really aiming to be anti-34

From a coaching perspective, the fact that the 34 asks less from the players is not bad- a lot of coaches prefer to keep it as simple as possible. Especially with the ILB’s, as opposed to Mike and Will in a 43, the odd makes their reads and responsibilities much easier, and asks less of them athletically. That’s not a knock on the 34, many would argue it is in fact a strength of it.

by dannymac56 on May 19, 2010 6:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

really I just think

that is the main difference between the two. The ease of playing it versus the ease of protecting against it for the offense. The 43 can be as complicated if run by a talented coordinator, but then you need more talent to successfully run it. That was what I was trying to get across.

And you’re right 57. Given time, I think I could write a serious essay on the advantages and disadvantages of each. There’s a lot there.

by dannymac56 on May 19, 2010 6:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

I'll go the other route at this level...

   And while acknowledging that either defense can be successful with the right personnel, and either can be exploited in less optimal situations, I’d prefer to have a 4-3 concept if the majority is playing 3-4 or switching to it. There are somewhat different personnel needs to the two defenses, and the more 3-4 teams there are, the more availability there will be to find players who fit in the 4-3 that are “less desired” by others.

by Cranky50 on May 18, 2010 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ok, I'll wait and try to be optimistic.

I do agree that health issues, particularly in the secondary was responsible for a great deal of our problems. My nagging concern is that our new defense scheme may be a reactionary one rather than one that takes matters into it’s own hands and makes the other team make mistakes by reeking havoc.

I do think our offense is good enough to make up for some shortcomings on the defensive side. That hasn’t been the case very often on our team. Historically
the defense has dictated the game and more than once we have heard them say as they gave the ball back to the offense, “Try to hold them, now!”

by giant fan since 57 on May 18, 2010 7:18 AM EDT reply actions  

I do believe

that the defense will be the deciding factor in the 2010 season. If they can’t hold up in the front seven they won’t win.

by Ed Valentine on May 18, 2010 7:36 AM EDT up reply actions  

My nagging concern is that our new defense scheme may be a reactionary one rather than one that takes matters into it’s own hands and makes the other team make mistakes by reeking havoc.

This is a legitimate concern, but it is reflective of the head coach, not 3-4 vs 4-3.

Coughlin ran a read and react system in JAX, and then tried it with Tim Lewis in NY

Though TC kept talking about being aggressive, his choices belied it. With Spags we got an aggressive 4-3 defense. We were supposed to get more of the same with Sheridan. We will see with Fewell, but his track record is for a ball hawking aggressive defense.

With the quantity of significant injuries to the better players, it is hard to know what last year really meant.

One ray of hope. The drafted players are all aggressive defenders, attacking DE, attacking DT, aggressive S and an aggressive MLB. Hopefully that means the brain trust sees things your way.

by trueblue63 on May 18, 2010 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions  

Reactionary

There is nothing ‘reactionary’ about rushing the passer. Any comment I have ever read from former players of Fewell’s indicates that he is an aggressive guy, who knows how and when to dial it up.

by Ed Valentine on May 18, 2010 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think that is what we are all hoping for

But I felt that way last season too, and to be fair, Sheridan didn’t have many games (or any games) with a full compliment of defenders

by trueblue63 on May 18, 2010 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions  

One guy I expect to have a good year is Boley.

I liked most of what I saw from him last year and he was playing at t disadvantage without any safety help. I predict he will have a good year.

by giant fan since 57 on May 18, 2010 7:41 AM EDT reply actions  

Boley

If he can stay healthy I think he can be a good player.

by Ed Valentine on May 18, 2010 8:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

Boley is Suspect to Me....

When I watch tape, I see a guy with speed, that really takes some bad angles at times, and sometimes loses complete sight of the ball. Honestly, some plays where he was victimized, as someone who has played quite a bit of the game and understands a bit about what his responsiblities should be, I watch what he does and have no idea what he was thinking at times.

I am beginning to think he’s a guy with the physical tools, but not the instincts or football smarts….. I hope i am wrong and he can improve.

by dubsrub on May 18, 2010 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

watching tape

its easy to get sucked into that line of thinking

But numerous pros, coaches and front office guys hazard that you don’t know what the defensive players role on any particular play is.

Often a player will see something unfold, see a teammate make a mistake and try to cover for them. Then they look like the one making the mistake.

This isn’t to say that you are wrong, just that it is almost impossible to know if you are right.

by trueblue63 on May 19, 2010 8:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think what you say is true.

But don’t you think that our poor safety support last year made guys like Boley try to do too much on his own?

by giant fan since 57 on May 19, 2010 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

Boley

like him a lot as well, and really liked what I saw from him too last year. Even with a shortened season b/c of his early season suspension and some health concerns. But a healthy Boley and participating from the get go in Preseason games…I think he’ll be more of the Boley that showed up against his former team (Falcons) more times than not this coming season.

Opus smart , lascivio magis , intereo gauisus...

by 27Tango on May 18, 2010 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

Boley was the perfect LB for 2008

He would have brought the speed to LB that would have helped cover RBs and lengthen the zone coverage.

by trueblue63 on May 18, 2010 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

good read

I always like Mike L…he’s rather informed..I like wjat he said about keep ur strength strong..

For the most part I think we will be on par with the 08 season..I just have a gut feeling on that..if I’m right and no one shoots themselves…its gonna be special.

Regroup refocus..retool...

by Mr.Williams on May 18, 2010 8:47 AM EDT via mobile reply actions  

Its all about health

that Giants DL is as good as any..probably the best in the league (homer goggles?) if everyone’s healthy, and that’s before adding the rooks.

I expect Canty to do what we got him for, stop the run and collapse the pocket. He does that, they’ll be golden on defense.

Boley too. I thought he’d be a real weapon on the D last year, but when your banged up..its tough to excel especially on a brand new team.

And Perry Fewell just seems like a dude they will buy into. Whatever they say now, it doesn’t matter. Its all about believing in the system when the games are played. But he doesn’t seem like a dude who will let people “free-lance” as Kiwi said they were all doing last year.

I hope they go to school on the injuries last year too. If a guy isn’t playing at say..90% or above, and he needs a few weeks…sit him or let him get the surgery, miss half the season….then let him come back at hopefully a greater strength.

Hopefully none of that happens and they get better injury luck then last year….

Just keep winning

by FreeBradshaw on May 18, 2010 9:04 AM EDT reply actions  

i think we need to stop assuming that they will all be healthy

I read that here so often, that once we get all our guys back, this and that will happen…when was the last time that’s been the case?

It would probably serve us as fans, best to assume injury. At some point this season, someone will go down. Its inevitable. Let’s just hope that the depth that they added, to places like the secondary, the line, wide receiver, etc., pays dividends and people step up and play like they get paid. That’s what helped us that glorious season of 07. Guys like boss stepping in, that’s what will get us back where we belong, not this fairy tale we all want to believe of having a “healthy” team. I hope for it too, if only for a few games. Let’s see what a healthy 53 will give us. But reality bites.

by wilddre22 on May 18, 2010 6:24 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

well they weren't healthy in 2007, now were they?

I guess the important part is WHO gets hurt. Like Tuck for instance?

Just keep winning

by FreeBradshaw on May 18, 2010 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

that's what i said

and IF Tuck gets hurt, then JPP or Kiwi, or Osi need to step up, like Boss did for Shockey.

by wilddre22 on May 19, 2010 8:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

Defensive line play

If we get better DL play, and I think we will, then I believe the LB corps will be impressively better. The DL played so bad last year, that, coupled with the bad safety play, the LB’s were constantly exposed, making them look weaker than they are. I think we’re all going to be surprised by their play this year.

Great article Ed and an informative read.

by Jolly on May 18, 2010 9:12 AM EDT reply actions  

Interesting interview...very informative...but...

First: IMHO Lombardi should have kept his mouth shut about Osi; once he said that “his (Osi’s) play last year was reflective of the team’s overall play.” You will never get good individual results as a player without the support system of your teammates no matter how well you play so singling out Osi was not good .

Second: I think the offense played a role in the defense’s bad play due to it limited ability to convert crucial third downs. The offense also contributed to the defense’s problems by turning over the ball through fumbles and interceptions. The defense spent an unusually large amount of playing time on the field last year as a result the aformentioned offensive mistakes. The more you play, the more fatigued you become.

Third: Totally disagree with the notion that if a team is strong in one area it should not look to improve others; to not do otherwise is absurd.

Third: If the Giants are placing all of thier marbles in one bag (defensive line) then, in essence, is what he saying is: crack the d-line crack the defense?

Finally: Lombardi admitted that he speaks with an organizational bias, so could his “objective” opinions with regards to the way that the Giants conduct business (I.e. trades, draft picks, player development, etc.)be unjustifiably favorable to executive management?

Fan's Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

by LoNJDTechnology on May 18, 2010 9:15 AM EDT via mobile reply actions  

Cracking the DL line

is the key for any defense. Whip the line and everything else goes backwards. Reverse the thought and realize that if the defense whips the offensive line, then it won’t matter how great the QB nor the RB nor the WR is. It starts at the line.

Don’t think he was saying to not improve other areas, just don’t get complacent about your strength. Continue to keep it strong.

I think if Osi had not spoken as he did, then he would not be singled out as he has been.

On balance of the season, the offense was not a hindrance.

By admitting his bias, Lombardi was indeed pointing out that he may be overly favorable to the executive management.

by Jolly on May 18, 2010 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Excellent point about the importance od the d-line.

I stand corrected.

Fan's Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

by LoNJDTechnology on May 18, 2010 9:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

Why would Lombardi need to keep his mouth shut?

He is a reporter not a Giant staffer. And if he did, and we follow that line of reasoning to the rest of the article, then we’ve got no info.

With regard to him taking an organizational bias, I’m not sure why that would taint his opinion (isn’t it equally likely for him to rip the front office if that is his focus)?

What I think it does show, is that he tends to like/agree with the way the Giants front office operates. You could call that a bias or an opinion.

by trueblue63 on May 18, 2010 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

trueblue there was more of that statement that you didn't read...

he also said that “his play was reflective of the play of the entire team.”

Fan's Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

by LoNJDTechnology on May 18, 2010 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

I'm confused

Are you upset that he criticized Osi, the team or both?? Or simply that he tried to allocate individual blame amongst a failed defense.

To me, its just a guy giving his take on what happened last year. If he were a member of the Giants front office, I would feel differently. But he is basically a reporter/analyst for NFP and NFL network, so I like hearing his thoughts.

by trueblue63 on May 18, 2010 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions  

No truelue, I'm not upset.

As I was reading Lombardi’s answer regarding Osi, I was reminded of a discussion that I had on BBV a few weeks ago. I had gotten in to debate about Boley’s play last year. I was arguing that Boley didn’t play well at all before I was finally convinced that my argument was invalid.

During the debate, I asked the question: Do you think Boley was responsible for a 66yd TD run by McCoy; RB for the Eagles during the Giants/Eagles game last season? The Fan, to whom, the question was directed, said that he/she could not answer the question because when a RB runs 66 yards for a TD, that is an indictment of the whole defensive unit not one player. I have no issue with his any of his thoughts that I didnot mention. I respect him too and I am grateful to him for the insight that he provided. Made a lot of things regarding why the giants acted as they have these past several months so much more clear.

It was that statement, and watching highlights of some games in which Boley played, that compelled me to reevaluate my stance. It was this statement alone that came to mind when I read Lombardi’s take on Osi. IMO, He was, in essence, saying the same rhing that I argued without success which is why I said he should have remained silent on that prticular question. So it is the third reason in the opening of your comment.

Fan's Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

by LoNJDTechnology on May 18, 2010 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

You are right about the turnovers

31 is too high

But it sort of feeds each other. As the defense plays worse the offense takes more chances (figuring that they have to score all the time).

So I agree about the turnovers, but I think its more of a loop than a one way affect.

by trueblue63 on May 18, 2010 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

Osi's play was "reflective" of the team's play..not Osi was the reason for the team's play

there’s a difference.

And you basically crack any team’s D-line, you can solve a defense. Once you’re running it 4+ yards per carry, or getting all day to throw…you beat the defense.

I do agree about the offense not helping the defense at times last year..but well, its a team game. One side of the ball takes a dump…the others side usually smells it.

Just keep winning

by FreeBradshaw on May 18, 2010 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

I agree that the offense played

and will play a roll this year with the defense. They need to do a better job of converting on 3rd down, especially 3rd and short. I will also throw special teams in there as well. Hopefully whoever wins the punting job will also take over as a kickoff specialist.

by Giants56 on May 18, 2010 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

be nice to get the O on the field more wouldn't it?

too many long drives…seemed like the only time the offense could get back on the field was after a touchdown.

And well, while maybe (hopefully) this year the WR and the passing game will be more quick strike so that they can come back off that, last year..they’re all young and really Steve Smith is not a quick strike, 60yd TD waiting to happen.

Just keep winning

by FreeBradshaw on May 18, 2010 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think if the O-line

is healthy and plays well our O could be really devastating. Steve Smith is going to be his usual self and with Ham and Nicks more comfortable within the offense. Hopefully our RB’s stay healthy. Mix in a little Barden maybe? Could Eli be looking at a possible 40 TD year?

by Giants56 on May 18, 2010 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

40 TD's. HA!

I wish. If he gets 35 I’ll be happy.

"Freedom is the weapon of the masses."

by Jeremy Pasker on May 18, 2010 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

I'm with Giants 56

I think that 3rd and short has been a nightmare since Plax shot himself. Perhaps because it used to be the strength of the offense.

If they fix that it improves the whole team.

by trueblue63 on May 18, 2010 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions  

I'll take 35

I’m in an unsually optimistic mood today.

by Giants56 on May 18, 2010 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

lol

yea 40, even 35 is optimistic…but I wouldn’t be surprised tho.

I’d say around 30 is a good high bet for him. Especially if the running game (re: Jacobs) returns to life.

But with Nicks developing…dude could post up like Barkley in the end zone, and hopefully Eli remembers Bossman too…not to mention Ramses.

Yea, 35-40 would be ridiculous…but impossible? Not at all.

Just keep winning

by FreeBradshaw on May 18, 2010 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

Couple points

1. Osi … the Denver game he pointed to was really what he was talking about. When a team runs at you 31 times and you make zero tackles that’s evidence right there you aren’t doing your job. He wants what I want from Osi — take responsibility for your poor play, which he has not, then go out, play better and shut people like me up.
2. The offense was not the problem. It’s not perfect, but the offense played well enough to win a lot more games.
3. Playing to your strength — He didn’t say, don’t try to improve your weaknesses. He said if you are building your team around a particular strength, make sure it stays strong.
4. Bias — Everyone has them. Lombardi thinks like an executive, and is influenced by how he learned the game. Fact is, we all are.

by Ed Valentine on May 18, 2010 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

Master of the obvious...

I think even the casual observer could see that Osi was not having a good season. So in laying some most of the blame on Osi, Lombardi was just stating the obvious.
He was either getting physically dominated or taking a way too redictable outside route to the QB. He had almost no gap control, and was easily taken out of plays.
If Osi gets healthy, and goes back to form, the Giants will once again dominate offensive lines. Until then we have to hope that new blood and better strategies push them forward.
Also… Spags to STL made two teams worse short term. That guy was ENGAGED… every team needs that, we had it and let it go… twice. It’s too bad he couldn’t wait for Coughlin to hand it over… he, and the team would have been more prepared for him as a head coach two or three years down the line.

Oh yeah… Nice read Ed. Good stuff.

NHL 500... Let the Less Filling vs Tastes Great debate begin!

by JPinVA on May 18, 2010 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

Excellent material

Very interesting insight from an insider on why the team does what it does.

by trueblue63 on May 18, 2010 9:46 AM EDT reply actions  

That's what I liked

Some insight on the thought process.

by Ed Valentine on May 18, 2010 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

I agree.

Fan's Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

by LoNJDTechnology on May 18, 2010 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yes, Kudos!

Opus smart , lascivio magis , intereo gauisus...

by 27Tango on May 18, 2010 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions  

Ed

Can we have more insight on what the heck we are doing with Osi, Tuck, Kiwi, Paul and Sintim – all edge rushers that are too small to play inside? How in the heck are we paying and leaving probably two if not three of these guys on the bench on a consistent basis with the issues we have a LB…. I still can’t believe we don’t have some kind of deal working in this regard.

by dubsrub on May 18, 2010 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

As Lombardi said above

you can only acquire what is available, and it isn’t a solution to throw players at a position.

And I expect that Tuck and JPP will both see time at DT on passing downs. A good DC figures out ways to get the best players on the field.

by trueblue63 on May 19, 2010 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions  

There’s a lot of attention being paid to the defense this year, and with good reason they were terrible. I think what’s being lost in this discussion is how good the offense was last year. The Giants basically went 8-8 with the worst defense in franchise history. If they’re average this team will win 12 games.

I believe in the 4-3 defense despite the 3-4 being the flavor of the month. Last years debacle was a product of injuries and ineptitude. When you lose Boley, Pierce, Phillips and Ross for extended periods of time, Tuck plays he entire season with a torn labrum and your DC’s ability is subpar then yea your gonna suck.The D this year is significantly younger, faster and more athletic and Perry Fewell is a good coach. If the running game is better and the D bounces back they can win it all.

by TheBXRepresenta on May 18, 2010 10:07 AM EDT via mobile reply actions  

I agree

I dont think 4-3 or 3-4 matters. Both defenses have proven to be every effective. it comes down to talent and coaching.

But if the running game can provide more balance, with the maturation of our WR’s, and an improved D we can win it all.

by Giants56 on May 18, 2010 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions  

its funny that the 3-4 is still the new "trend" out there with defenses

yet, 3/4 of the teams in the the AFC and NFC champ games were 4-3 teams. 2 of them (Indy and Minny) were Tampa 2 style D’s, and the Saints were more of an aggresive, Spags/Jim Johnson blitz you till you drop type team.

The Bills already struggled last year as a 4-3 team, and they probably struggle even more now. They don’t have a big NT unless a rook steps up. THe Redskins I think take a step back too.

They’re looking at the Packers of last year who gelled in the 3-4 quick, but they had an extremely deep (and FAT) DL as it was, and also a very deep LB corps. They also drafted well to fit that scheme with BJ Raji and Clay Matthews.

Who’d the Redskins draft? Last year they got Rak, they still got Haynesworth..but he’s throwing a hissy fit already. I dunno that they got a true NT there.

Just keep winning

by FreeBradshaw on May 18, 2010 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions  

They did get Maake Kemoeatu

But he is coming off of an achilles injury.

by Giants56 on May 18, 2010 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions  

Another point about the 3-4

Now that so many people are copying the 3-4 and adapting it, there’s less players that fit that scheme to go around. So unless we already have personnel to do the change, a change would be useless and even hurt us.

Against all odds, against all circumstance were you don't have a shot, you succeed
-Michael Strahan
All you hear about is the past, the past... the past is the !@#$ing past, this is the present.
THIS IS TEMPORARY! A CHAMPIONSHIP IS PERMANENT
-Same as above

by Willgfass on May 18, 2010 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Giants do have some pieces for it I think tho...

guys like Sintim, Kiwi and even JPP possibly are better off being stand up OLB edge rushers. Tuck could be a Leonard Marshall type DE who still gets pressure. Anvil if taught technique, has the size and strength to be a NT. Canty IS a 3-4 DE.

As for the ILB’s, Boley is a fine fit. Dillard and Goff could be SILB’s probably A-OK. Maybe even Kehl too.

Its the D-Coordinators choice. I think’d have all the parts for it right now.

Just keep winning

by FreeBradshaw on May 18, 2010 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

This from the guy that was anti Weatherspoon beacuse he wasn't a MLB

Just ribbing ya, but thats a whole lotta ifs/could bes up there

In general too much is made about 4-3 vs 3-4, it boils down to can you get pressure and can you cover. Individual on field performances. Quality of personnel.

by trueblue63 on May 19, 2010 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

Let's not forget

Canty was hurt most of the year, Alford missed the whole year, Bernard was playing hurt, and Cofield and Robbins were both coming off surgery. We didn’t have any depth in the interior of the line, and not a single player who was 100% healthy. That made us vulnerable to the run and meant that we got no push up the middle on passing plays so QBs could elude our DE’s by stepping up into the pocket.

by Tucker Fredrickson on May 18, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions  

Just a reminder of what we lost

and why brett favre gave big mike the sack record. A testament to the player and the man..

Its 45 mins long so i put in time slots you may want to stick to.11:41-16:32-22:32-35:10 and39:25

good shit!

by Troy O on May 18, 2010 10:57 AM EDT reply actions  

To link

1 Go to prefered page and select in in web address box.

2 Select word in your comment that you wish to link.

3 Select the link chain at the top of the post comment box.

4 Paste the url info in the box and press ok.

Fan's Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

by LoNJDTechnology on May 18, 2010 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions  

Another very good article, Ed..You nailed the majority of issues we all have been discussing..

..And got an informed response..As far as Osi..I have to think that he really does know that he has a target on his chest..I don’t think he’s stupid..and if I’m wrong, there is one thing you can’t fix, ever and that’s ‘stupid’..I would like to hope and think that he is like a wounded animal and will come out this year as a very dangerous person..That Denver game should have proved it to him..He had a neon light pinned to his ass..Also I think we have a pretty good set of LBs..and we sured of the DL..If they can stay healthy we should be a team to be reckoned with..As far as the East..I agree that the Eagles won’t be an easy mark..They have had our number for the last few seasons, and McNabb leaving isn’t going to change that..I’m not too worried about the Skins, but hey..they played us pretty hard with what they had..so I haven’t taken my worry beads off with them..Dallas is going to be a huge problem..So it is going to be a major shooting match..If I was our guys, I’d be worried about Dallas..If I was the Eagles I’d be worried about our guys..but I wouldn’t soften on the Skins..So when stir up this pot of sauce, I come up with the same NFC recipe..It’ll be up for grabs..Osi will be key..he needs to make people fear running at him..

"When I was a boy and had no sense I got my pecker stuck in an electric fence..Well it curled my hair and tickled my balls, and made me shit in my overalls"

by Bobbiblue on May 18, 2010 11:46 AM EDT reply actions  

Fear?

I don’t know if he can do that. But, he at least needs to make it difficult.

by Ed Valentine on May 18, 2010 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

Fewell to the fire?

   A lot of the excitement and expectation for this season revolves around adding Fewell and disposing of BS. I was wondering if Lombardi dropped any reaction to that change of the guard, any thoughts on Fewell as a coordinator and what his reactions were to the signing? Personally I like what I’ve learned of Fewell and I think he did well with Buffalo in both the roles he was given. But of all of the changes the Giants have made this year, his addition is the one that will have the most influence on the season, and I’m always interested in perceptions about it. Granted health of the team, performances by vets and rookies are MAJOr parts of the puzzle, but as I think we saw last year, you can have a lot of talented bodies on the field, but if they’re not coordinated and on a mission, they don’t necessarily accomplish much.

by Cranky50 on May 18, 2010 12:13 PM EDT reply actions  

+10000

Fan's Creed: (Play well+Win=Praise) (Play Well+Lose=Praise) (Play Lousy+Win=Criticism) (Play lousy+Lose & Bandwagon Jumpers=Off with thier heads!)

by LoNJDTechnology on May 18, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

I agree with you Cranky..

I’’ll give you +10000 and raise LoN another 1000..

"When I was a boy and had no sense I got my pecker stuck in an electric fence..Well it curled my hair and tickled my balls, and made me shit in my overalls"

by Bobbiblue on May 18, 2010 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

Osi's on NFL live today

No beer and no girls make Big Ben a dull boy

by Mother Tucker on May 18, 2010 4:10 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Big Blue View is the best independent site on the Internet for year-round news and discussion about the New York Giants.

Community Guidelines

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Landeta_small
All Time Giants Super Bowl Team
Arqamaca-p218897_small
Congratulations From a Raiders Fan
Hakeem_nicks_compartment_syndrome_leg_injury_small
The Jerry Reese Game! v2012
Nyxlvi_small
Do people not realize how good Osi is?
Pic_1_small
Here to eat some crow and talk football.

Recent FanPosts

Img_0245_small
Playoffs Fuhgeddabout it...
Snv30403_small
Rest In Peace, Whitney
1bradshaw_small
Jeremy Lin = Victor Cruz
Jjones_small
How the three man rush saved the Giants season
Small
Now that this glorious season is ova...
Small
Draft Discussion – Which Offensive Players FIT the Giants?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Get Your Giants' Gear

160x600_ny_giants_medium


Editor-In-Chief

Ed_valentine_2_small Ed Valentine

Editors

Small brisulph

Authors

Mike_farley_small Mike Farley

Meme2_small Sean Kerr