clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Discussion: How Do You Define A Good Season For The New York Giants?

New York Giants defensive end Justin Tuck was once again talking dynasty Wednesday after the team's OTA at the Timex Performance Center. True, Tuck was prodded by a question about his previous claim that the Giants could become a dynasty, but the team's defensive captain refuses to believe it can't happen.

"Why wouldn't I feel that way?" Tuck said. "I don't need to be playing the game if I'm not thinking about winning a championship every year.

"I feel very confident in this team's talent and in this coaching staff, and I believe we have that shot. Me saying it is that going to make it happen? Absolutely not, but we do have a shot at it."

Yes, the Giants have two Super Bowl titles in five years. But they did go just 9-7 during the regular season in 2011 and had back-to-back seasons before that where they did not make the playoffs.

Can they really be a dynasty?

I doubt that. In all honesty building a dynasty in today's game with the player movement and the number of teams in the league is unlikely. The New England Patriots have come close, but can't be considered a dynasty with those two Super Bowl losses to the Giants.

Here is a question, though. Tuck is talking about building a dynasty. Coach Tom Coughlin spoke Wednesday about trying to "raise the level of how we do everything so that it is championship level."

Have the Giants, with those two titles, raised the bar so high that for the remainder of the Coughlin-Eli Manning era that only years ending with Super Bowl titles can be considered good seasons?

I don't subscribe to that belief, but I am certain that some people do. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on that.