The guy is tied for 5th in touchdowns, has nearly a 3:1 TD/INT ratio, a better completion percentage than Tom Brady, and 1% less than Andrew Luck.
An argument can be made that his numbers are this good because the coaching staff has been smart about using him in this offense. I agree, but he knows this offense now. It's time to unleash him. We can keep playing it safe and hoping run after run breaks free, but I think its time to tie the Giants to Eli and drag them into the playoffs.
Does anyone really have faith in this running game? Maybe it gets better coming out of the bye, especially with the return of Jennings. I hope it does, but if not, there is no shame in abandoning the run game in the second half and asking Eli to throw 40+ a game.
I know some are saying "but he will get killed back there." None of us want that. However we have Indy, Seattle, 49ers, and Cowboys coming up next. Without offense through that stretch this teams playoffs hopes are the ones getting killed. It's time for the air raid sirens to go off at Metlife. It's time for Coughlin to read from the Book of Eli.
Also, these 1st possession 3 and outs on 3 run plays are confusing the hell out of me. I'm trying to stay calm but c'mon McAdoo.
This head coach will never allow it. He's the problem.
He personally ripped apart McAdoo's playbook and approved every single playcall we have.
Our offense is even more vanilla now than it was under Gilbride, and all the evidence you need for that is that McAdoo called the same exact play 3 straight times in a game vs Houston; and it was covered up with the rationale of "well we were having success with it" instead of "not only were we successful running this specific play, but we also installed new variations off of it to disguise it"
Quote:
but, fuck, I didn't imagine a neutered Eli in this offense. Imagine Peyton playing under Coach Coughlin. Enough already. Fucking uncuff Eli. They used the "east coast offense" under Gilbride to set up the run by throwing bombs. I understand the offensive line won't hold like before, but put Eli in shotgun and let him fucking throw the pigskin.
This head coach will never allow it. He's the problem.
He personally ripped apart McAdoo's playbook and approved every single playcall we have.
Our offense is even more vanilla now than it was under Gilbride, and all the evidence you need for that is that McAdoo called the same exact play 3 straight times in a game vs Houston; and it was covered up with the rationale of "well we were having success with it" instead of "not only were we successful running this specific play, but we also installed new variations off of it to disguise it"
Complete BS. There was no "McAdoos playbook". The playbook was put together by McAdoo and TC from scratch. That was always the way it was going to be developed (and the way all play books are developed) no matter who became OC. And if it's so vanilla what accounts for Eli's success? Such stupid stuff from our #1 stupid poster.
Oh, that's right, you pulled it straight out of your ass. Never mind.
This head coach will never allow it. He's the problem.
He personally ripped apart McAdoo's playbook and approved every single playcall we have.
Our offense is even more vanilla now than it was under Gilbride, and all the evidence you need for that is that McAdoo called the same exact play 3 straight times in a game vs Houston; and it was covered up with the rationale of "well we were having success with it" instead of "not only were we successful running this specific play, but we also installed new variations off of it to disguise it" [/quote]
Wait are we saying that GIlbride's offense was vanilla? I think our WR's must have missed that memo last year.
If you add Schwartz and move Richberg to C it may get better but Watlon and Jerry should not be considered long term answers. Both tackles have been u[p and down. Eli isn't the issue by a long shot.
Lack of enough quality around him is.
If they weren't going to do it with their season pretty much on the line, with how they chose to put the game in the hands of Andre Williams and Peyton Hillis over Manning (24 runs to 20 passes, until they were all but done and had no choice but to chuck it to close things out), there's no reason to think they're suddenly going to do it now.
Last season seems to have scarred them, fairly or unfairly.
Also, these 1st possession 3 and outs on 3 run plays are confusing the hell out of me. I'm trying to stay calm but c'mon McAdoo.
I'm of the same opinion but I think (and I stress that I have nothing to back this up with) that Eli is limited on what he can audible to or how much he can change plays at the LOS. I can't honestly believe Eli looked up at the snap in Cowboys and Eagles games and thought "8 in the box, half back dive, sounds good." In years past in the old offense he would audible to a pass or at least change the run play to one that stood more of a chance. Maybe he is doing that and the blocking is that terrible, I don't know. Just pure speculation on my part.
I just question why the Giants would opt to run in many of the fronts they saw the last two weeks, especially given the success they were seeing. They do need to keep teams honest but if a team sells out to stop the run that should playing into the Giants favor elsewhere and be exploited.
The Giants response against Dallas: 14 runs on 1st down totaling 40 yds - that inlcudes the 22 yd run.
Before Eli TD in the 4th, they threw on 7 1st downs - 5-7 1 TD
they expected runs on 1st down and the Giants accomodated
And yes, % is up, ints are down, because of "safe" passes....Trailing by 10 in the fourth quarter, throwing 2 straight underneath passes, is not going to get it done....might as well just take a knee so no one gets hurt....but those two completions did bring his % up from 61 to 64 %....
Especially in the Eagles game in theory that should have actually helped the Giants. Having Cruz and Beckham outside with 8 guys in the box presents an opportunity for a lot of big plays or even short passes where they are thrown behind the line of scrimmage or even 5 yards down field and those two are allowed to try to make plays. If those two can't make the first guy miss or get 4-5 yards on a quick pass then the Giants really don't have an offense anyways.
First off, who's going to respect a playaction pass when you can't run? That said, when you're getting penetration up the middle as badly as we are, what good is a playaction if there is a guy in the QB's face as soon as he turns around?
Secondly,
And now you're finally starting to understand the argument that people were trying to make when people were sh-tting all over Eli when comparing his statistics to other QB's for the past ten years.
The system has a lot to do with a QB's stat line.
Unfortunately (or fortunately), Eli could have a sh-tty game, statistically, in our old system that could translate to a win. Now, we're losing, but he has great stats, which seems to be the only thing that people used to care about when discussing our QB.
In our old system, if I'm looking stats alone, where Eli was 22-33 for 250 and 3 TD's, no INT's, I'm thinking that's a win pretty much 9/10 times.
If you add Schwartz and move Richberg to C it may get better but Watlon and Jerry should not be considered long term answers. Both tackles have been u[p and down. Eli isn't the issue by a long shot.
Lack of enough quality around him is.
If as you say Schwartz is moved to RG and Richburg to Center who plays left guard?? Jerry?
I think the Better line at this point starting from the
left would be Beatty, Richburg, Walton, Schwartz and Pugh. I think Walton over Jerry is the lesser of the two evils, not the optimal but better.
His passer rating is solid, but unspectacular (9th) because he's not turning the ball over and the Giants, for perhaps the only time in his career, are actually efficiently throwing the ball inside the 10/20 (something even when they were a decent RZ team, they weren't good at usually under Gilbride) and he's putting up good TD numbers (5th, at least before the bye)
Further more, his by far best statistical game of the year was against Washington -- the best offensive game of the season and a blow out win for the team. He had very good or at least solid stat lines against both Atlanta and Houston -- two more wins. He had bad to awful stat lines against Philadelphia and Detroit -- two humiliating losses and embarrassing offensive outputs for the team collectively. He played significantly better than the numbers indicated against Arizona (IMO, at least), but his line that day was mediocre at best -- they lost.
The anomaly is, yes, Dallas (though it makes sense, when you weigh how pussy the game plan was -- people may have pondered Manning's stats, but no one ever wanted to turn him into Alex Smith 2.0 like Coughlin seems to have been scarred into right now to some extent), but don't kid yourself: there were games where Eli played well or put up decent stats in the previous system where the team still lost.
[Massive disclaimer: This post was not an attack or criticism of Eli, like I know I'd be accused of if I didn't say this -- I think he's pretty much fixed himself as well as anyone could ever have expected after being as broken a player as he was; the team should be asking more of him and his supporting cast isn't good, but that's not his fault. It was just about Britt's mostly straw grab point.]
Brett - I think the disaster in Philly basically made them go a bit conservative, and not put Eli back there to get battered, and start forcing the ball.
Look at the first series, rather than drop Eli back on third and long, they actually opted for a third straight running play....rather than have Eli go down and perhaps start the entire cycle over again from the previous week.
I don't think it's Eli they don't trust, it's the OL.
Having said that, there comes a point in the second half where you need to abandon the run and go with your strength which is Eli and the passing game.
I don't think they got conservative in Philly...Philly basically ruined any game plan by planting themselves in the backfield on every play.
That performance led to a more conservative game plan for a road divisional game....which I don't disagree with entirely.
its a rookie with no training camp or pre-season, an underperforming 2nd round pick, and a guy off last years practice squad starting at this time
backed up by a new sign fresh off his couch, and another couple of undrafted practice squad players
not exactly murderers row at the wide receiver position, folks
Jennings is absolutely crucial in this offense. We have no one else on the roster with his skillset.
Cruz is obviously massive in his own right and losing him was awful but if I had to choose between having one or the other for the rest of the year, I'd actually pick RJ. Parker is clearly a downgrade from Cruz but I think Beckham will gradually start playing inside more and I think the loss can be adequately accounted for. We have no way to account for losing Jennings with this personnel. We desperately need him back.
The O line needs another year to gel. The new offense is a work in progress getting better. ODB is a beast. Jennings is a solid. Williams will be good. Eli is proving that he can be our QB for at least five more years.
Chill out folks. The good times are coming back. 3-3 is not as bad as 0-6 where we were last year. Imagine we finish like we ended last year and boom your 10-6.
It's not that it's his fault - the offense is disjointed with o-line issues and now the top RB out and top WR out, not to mention Beckham not there at the start of the year.
Quote:
Its the play calling and the lack of Jennings. Williams may develop int a much better RB but he's limited and the OL is just not very good despite what the PFF ranking zealots say.
If you add Schwartz and move Richberg to C it may get better but Watlon and Jerry should not be considered long term answers. Both tackles have been u[p and down. Eli isn't the issue by a long shot.
Lack of enough quality around him is.
If as you say Schwartz is moved to RG and Richburg to Center who plays left guard?? Jerry?
I think the Better line at this point starting from the
left would be Beatty, Richburg, Walton, Schwartz and Pugh. I think Walton over Jerry is the lesser of the two evils, not the optimal but better.
Maybe. I've just seem Walton totally over powered at times. I also think Richberg's future and upside is greater at C. Neither he or Jerry are long term answers IMO. I assume When Schwartz is back we will find out sonner than later whom is the weaker link because that's the guy who will he sitting