As I've said before, the problem is that both units tend to swing for the fences - which is great if it works on both sides. But when only half the team is clicking, you get tight games. And things can spiral away fast if you get a situation where there's an offensive turnover, then a blown defense leading to a score, then a three-and-out that gives the opponent the ball with good field position. Suddenly you're in trouble.
The defense definitely had issues last year - but they were also put in a fair number of bad spots by the offense.
Locklear at RT and instead of with DD is night and day. With Locklear in there Eli had plenty of time to wait for the Receivers to get open, and our offense was ran much better.
With DD in there, Eli had no time for this receivers to get open and our offense stalled, because he needed to get the ball out quicker.
Our O is a vertical, low % passing game that needs snaps. Not much ball control there.
Our D (at least last year) let the other teams go up and down the field, and while they may have been held to 3 points, the damage was done as they were gassed by end of the game.
I am alone in this thinking, but I feel like a lot of the Vets got very complacent last season after winning the SB (especially Corey Webster). I expect the hunger to be back to an extent and the complacency to be rooted out after the disappointment of last year.
defensive rankings look nice in the papers and all, but what I want to see is for us to stuff Alfred Morris and guys like that in the 4th quarter, like we used to in our recent Super Bowl years
I don't have a problem with a bend or break defense
Mike Patterson looks very out of shape. He's round. I know he's short for a defensive lineman, but he just looks fat.
Pugh is one of the smallest O lineman out there.
Sure, without our #1 WR and a hurt Eli, we had issues in some games. But offense wasn't the problem. We were middle of the pack in running the ball and one of the top passing offenses again.
Defense 31st. Yards do matter. It's not just points. If the other team holds the football, you don't get a lot of possessions. There were games last year where the offense had three possessions in a half.
E.. and it goes both ways. You keep opposing offenses off the field and unable to score if your own offense can sustain drives and hold a significant time of possession edge.
particularly turnovers near your own end zone. And for the sake of all that is holy please if you do get a turnover, tackle that man immediately. No more, oh damn we turned the ball over on our 20 yard line and stopped them on the 5 yard line, please defense make a stop just like their defense did when you got a turnover for us earlier in the game.
Yeah that Boley interception and return with the offense going 3 and out still pisses me off.
No matter what happens, each team gets the same number (+/- 1 -- the team that gets the ball first in each half can get one more, but it won't be the same team in both halves). The game is not decided by whether each team gets 10 or 12, but by what they do with them. The only caveats here are 1) that if team thinks that they should score more points per possession than the other team, they will want to increase possessions, and 2)a team that is ahead in the second half may want to limit possessions.
of the offense and or defense not getting the job done.
The defense constantly couldn't get off the field on 3rd downs, constantly gave up long pass plays, constantly couldn't stop the run. It was brutal how poorly they played at times, they were often an embarrassment.
It was a Super Bowl hangover and a lack of want to, it was injuries, it was getting their arses kicked physically, it was repeated mental errors, it was giving up an incredible number of big plays, it was suspect (being nice) gameplans by PF.
You could easily assemble a countering list of examples for the offense too.
was a major issue even if it was decent in points allowed. There were 4 games when they needed to get a stop to give our our offense a chance to tie or take the lead and they failed each time. And there were 3 games where we only had about 3 2nd half possession. You can't let that happen. Team we completely allowed to dictate the game because our defense couldn't get off the field.
Nicks being hurt was the biggest thing on Offense. Defense were able to control Cruz because there wasn't another threat. Plus Cruz had some key drops, led the league or was close to it... right? The Offensive line wasn't that good, Deihl was like a rusty gate and Snee and Baas were nicked up. Hopefully Nicks stays healthy this year and I'm liking what Randle has shown so far. Meyers should be a threat in the short to midrange middle opening up alot for Cruz to work his magic.
All three units on the D were horrible last year. But I'm optimistic from what seems to be a new attitude so far. Last year we signed Rivers a top 5 pick and this year we added Curry another top 5 pick. Can one of these guys live up to thier original hype?
I know I'll get killed on my opinion but I don't think Webster was as bad as he was made out to be. It came out recently, or at least I hadn't heard it before, but he had somewhat of a groin problem. I'm sure it contributed to some of his problems. But also how many times was he responsible for the oppositions top receiver and how many of those times was he one on one without help. No I dont have proof and I observe from a Sports bar and I don't, in many cases, have the opportunity to go replay the game. But like I said my opinion.
I do not think it is fair to not include turnovers when evaluating
a defense. If the other team drove 50 yards on you and then you picked off a pass and returned it for a TD, I would think that is a good defensive series. However, if you only look at yards, then it would be a lousy series because you gave up 50 yards.
Conversely if Eli threw for 400 yards but had three interceptions of which two were returned for TDs, I doubt that you would think that he had a good game.
The point is if you do not include turnovers when evaluting a defense the numbers become misleading.
It's a different era, though. You're not going anywhere in todays NFL if you don't have the offense.
Yes, there are more defense-centric teams.. but teams like San Francisco and Seattle took the next step when they started getting dynamic play from their QB's. It wasn't until the Redskins got RGIII that people started taking them seriously. The Patriots are in the mix every year because they're always an elite offensive team.
High octane offense is basically vital in todays NFL.
You can win Super Bowls with an elite offense an an average defense now. It's much, harder to do it the other way around. Teams like the Bears were never really contenders because despite being outstanding defensively, they weren't good enough on the other side of the ball.
So....anything good happening at practice right now?
Art Stapleton @art_stapleton 5m
Crisp break by Louis Murphy on comeback route from Eli Manning during passing drills. He's been quiet but steady so far #NYG
Conor Orr @ConorTOrr 37s
Still haven't seen Nicks let it rip full speed yet. To me, seems like 3/4 speed. #nyg
slight correction, his issues had to do with a broken hand he revealed after the season. When Torrey Smith dominated him, Webster was in position for the most part, but looked very poor in tracking the ball.
or if RG3's fumble doesn't bounce right back to him, the tone of this entire offseason would be very different.
That's just who the Giants of this era are...they're always one game away from being in or out. I still think last year's team was better than the 2011 team.
To a large extent, it's a game of chance. I think you'll find if you look at the stats that there are wild swings year to year. The Giants could do everything the same this year but have many fewer turnovers, and they'd really be in trouble -- the coaches know that 12 in points could easily have been 30th.
After all, a team can have no more than one more possession in a game than their opponent. It's what they do when they have posession (or what they do when the opponent has possession) that matters.
If a team has noticeably more offensive possessions than their opponent, say 20 or more in a game, it correlates to a meaningfully improved chance to win.
The Giants fell last season to 31st in the league in offensive plays per game (60.5) and managed only a league-worst 50.0 per game in their final three. We have to do better sustaining drives and stopping them.
for the old chestnut, "the only defensive stat that matters is 9-7. The 3 units are all inter-related, so really hard to separate out the defense, but your eyes told you the defense wasn't that good last year, and so the other old chestnut, who ya gonna believe, the 12th in points allowed, the 31st in yards allowed, or yer lyin' eyes?
That's a great stat -- it surprises me, actually, that they've been that consistent -- I think it's unusual. Has the breakdown between fumbles and interceptions been similar?
Let's hope that Kiwi or Moore can replicate Osi's strip-sacks.
Art Stapleton @art_stapleton 48s
Run package with 1st team defense: Cullen Jenkins to DE for Justin Tuck, Shaun Rogers at DT with Linval Joseph. Kiwi at other DE #NYG
Ohm Youngmisuk @NotoriousOHM 21s
Prince just is a nice breakup on a pass for Randle.
that's true, but if you have fewer possessions, there is much more pressure on your offense and defense to perform.
We don't have a grind it out offense. We have a big-play, down the field offense. It's not three yards and a cloud of dust.
On the reverse side, this isn't a good Giants' defense. So the other team often drives the field, resulting at best, our offense having to go 80 yards, at worst, having the other team put point on the board.
More than that, how many times has this defense given up a 4th quarter lead?
As I've said before, the problem is that both units tend to swing for the fences - which is great if it works on both sides. But when only half the team is clicking, you get tight games. And things can spiral away fast if you get a situation where there's an offensive turnover, then a blown defense leading to a score, then a three-and-out that gives the opponent the ball with good field position. Suddenly you're in trouble.
The defense definitely had issues last year - but they were also put in a fair number of bad spots by the offense.
With DD in there, Eli had no time for this receivers to get open and our offense stalled, because he needed to get the ball out quicker.
Our D (at least last year) let the other teams go up and down the field, and while they may have been held to 3 points, the damage was done as they were gassed by end of the game.
Just a bad pairing last year.
We improve that, we can easily be a Top 10 defense. And I think the DL depth we have right now is a great first step in that direction.
Two axioms of football: run the ball and stop the run.
It really still holds true today, if you can do those two things you'll win a lot of games.
Diehl is the #1 RT at the start of camp, Pugh is #2.
Brewer is the RG with Snee out.
I think no matter how much this game evolves, winning the trenches will always be paramount.
Pugh is one of the smallest O lineman out there.
Always great to see legendary #giants TE Bob Tucker at practice...still looks like he could play
Football is really a game about possessions. If the other team limits the number of possessions you have, you can't score a lot of points.
#giants #nicks moving much better today...guess groin is ok
Defense 31st. Yards do matter. It's not just points. If the other team holds the football, you don't get a lot of possessions. There were games last year where the offense had three possessions in a half.
Yeah that Boley interception and return with the offense going 3 and out still pisses me off.
If our offense has a bad game, we're screwed. That wasn't true of a lot of Giants teams, including some really bad ones in the mid 1990s.
The defense constantly couldn't get off the field on 3rd downs, constantly gave up long pass plays, constantly couldn't stop the run. It was brutal how poorly they played at times, they were often an embarrassment.
It was a Super Bowl hangover and a lack of want to, it was injuries, it was getting their arses kicked physically, it was repeated mental errors, it was giving up an incredible number of big plays, it was suspect (being nice) gameplans by PF.
You could easily assemble a countering list of examples for the offense too.
Nicks being hurt was the biggest thing on Offense. Defense were able to control Cruz because there wasn't another threat. Plus Cruz had some key drops, led the league or was close to it... right? The Offensive line wasn't that good, Deihl was like a rusty gate and Snee and Baas were nicked up. Hopefully Nicks stays healthy this year and I'm liking what Randle has shown so far. Meyers should be a threat in the short to midrange middle opening up alot for Cruz to work his magic.
All three units on the D were horrible last year. But I'm optimistic from what seems to be a new attitude so far. Last year we signed Rivers a top 5 pick and this year we added Curry another top 5 pick. Can one of these guys live up to thier original hype?
I know I'll get killed on my opinion but I don't think Webster was as bad as he was made out to be. It came out recently, or at least I hadn't heard it before, but he had somewhat of a groin problem. I'm sure it contributed to some of his problems. But also how many times was he responsible for the oppositions top receiver and how many of those times was he one on one without help. No I dont have proof and I observe from a Sports bar and I don't, in many cases, have the opportunity to go replay the game. But like I said my opinion.
Conversely if Eli threw for 400 yards but had three interceptions of which two were returned for TDs, I doubt that you would think that he had a good game.
The point is if you do not include turnovers when evaluting a defense the numbers become misleading.
Yes, there are more defense-centric teams.. but teams like San Francisco and Seattle took the next step when they started getting dynamic play from their QB's. It wasn't until the Redskins got RGIII that people started taking them seriously. The Patriots are in the mix every year because they're always an elite offensive team.
High octane offense is basically vital in todays NFL.
You can win Super Bowls with an elite offense an an average defense now. It's much, harder to do it the other way around. Teams like the Bears were never really contenders because despite being outstanding defensively, they weren't good enough on the other side of the ball.
Crisp break by Louis Murphy on comeback route from Eli Manning during passing drills. He's been quiet but steady so far #NYG
Conor Orr @ConorTOrr 37s
Still haven't seen Nicks let it rip full speed yet. To me, seems like 3/4 speed. #nyg
That's just who the Giants of this era are...they're always one game away from being in or out. I still think last year's team was better than the 2011 team.
Justin Pugh in with the first team ... he's tackle eligible on left side in jumbo package #NYG
It's not an accident that they were 3rd, 5th and 1st in turnovers the last 3 seasons. This defense is built to force them and they do.
Gilbride laying into Adrien Robinson about something.
After all, a team can have no more than one more possession in a game than their opponent. It's what they do when they have posession (or what they do when the opponent has possession) that matters.
If a team has noticeably more offensive possessions than their opponent, say 20 or more in a game, it correlates to a meaningfully improved chance to win.
The Giants fell last season to 31st in the league in offensive plays per game (60.5) and managed only a league-worst 50.0 per game in their final three. We have to do better sustaining drives and stopping them.
Let's hope that Kiwi or Moore can replicate Osi's strip-sacks.
Run package with 1st team defense: Cullen Jenkins to DE for Justin Tuck, Shaun Rogers at DT with Linval Joseph. Kiwi at other DE #NYG
Ohm Youngmisuk @NotoriousOHM 21s
Prince just is a nice breakup on a pass for Randle.
We don't have a grind it out offense. We have a big-play, down the field offense. It's not three yards and a cloud of dust.
On the reverse side, this isn't a good Giants' defense. So the other team often drives the field, resulting at best, our offense having to go 80 yards, at worst, having the other team put point on the board.
More than that, how many times has this defense given up a 4th quarter lead?