It was interesting both Reese and Tom Coughlin stressed the need for this team to “play above the Xs and Os,” meaning simply carrying out individual assignments is not going to get it done.
Who on this roster can rise above? Coughlin said, “You look around the league and you see teams that are playing superbly that maybe hadn’t been playing superbly.”
Translation: You do not have to be what your current record says you are. But this might be what the Giants are.
since the downtrend in late 2012, the lack of discipline, repeated mistakes, uninspired play, not playing above etc have all been present ranging from mild to dreadful. A lack of talent is part of the equation, as is coaching/gameplanning, but ultimately the player themselves must raise their level of performance.
RE: It's been a big issue for this team for two years Â
since the downtrend in late 2012, the lack of discipline, repeated mistakes, uninspired play, not playing above etc have all been present ranging from mild to dreadful. A lack of talent is part of the equation, as is coaching/gameplanning, but ultimately the player themselves must raise their level of performance.
Do you think its a safe bet that they've gotten the best they're going to get from Coughlin? I agree that the players need to raise their level of performance and that their effort has been lackluster. Never thought I'd say it but I wonder if whats needed is a fresh face and a new message.
I thought it was safe to say that over a year ago. Â
It could be, it also could be the players perceive the defensive scheme (and the DC) isn't keeping up with newer offensive schemes, for example. I don't know enough to say for certain, but I know enough to say we're consistently beaten and beaten badly. And, we're only defeating bad football teams, so clearly changes and building the talent are required.
We need bigger and better offensive linemen; bigger and faster receivers; a RB who is strong, fast, and durable; a few quality pass-rushers, NFL-quality linebackers, some more safeties, a new defensive coordinator, and a new special teams coach. We have a long long way to go ! Speed is a missing element throughout the team.
Amazing how the coach suddenly can't coach when his roster is full of holes and the team gets depleted by a rash of injuries. I don't know how the coach's message get old, just because the team suffers from a talent deficit.
The roster turns over every year. How many guys are still on the roster from Super Bowl 46? How does an ever rotating group of young players suddenly determine that a 2 time Super Bowl winning coach does not have enough credibility to listen to his message. I don't buy that. We just don't have a good enough roster to compete with the top teams in the league.
My biggest issue with this team - execution of simple plays Â
I'm not sure how much coaching can help players in very specific instances where they just fail to execute simple plays. Perhaps its talent level or football intelligence, but this team seems to lack the intangibles to execute.
An example of from Dallas game:
- Beatty false start on 4th and 1 - killed drive in dallas territory
- Randle holding penalty on wr screen that killed a drive - killed drive in dallas territory
- Donnell fumble in giants territory
Arizona game - the game changed on a punt return, fumble kickoff, etc...
Mistakes like this are the difference between winning and losing tightly contested games, and at this point the Giants make a lot of them.
I believe this is what Reese and Coughlin mean when they say "above the x's and o's"
We need bigger and better offensive linemen; bigger and faster receivers; a RB who is strong, fast, and durable; a few quality pass-rushers, NFL-quality linebackers, some more safeties, a new defensive coordinator, and a new special teams coach. We have a long long way to go ! Speed is a missing element throughout the team.
because that's who they are. They are doing the best they can. You can coach them all day, they still have to go out and perform. It's like teaching kids. If the kid has "C" ability, he's going to get Cs, maybe Bs with some extra effort and luck. He is not going to be "coached up" into an A student.
key people..If Beason, Schwartz, our secondary and Jennings were healthy, the topic of mediocrity wouldn't be an issue..We'd probably be 5-2 in all likelihood and these stupid headlines and posts wouldn't be an issue save for the usual idiots..
We have the talent. Sure we can use more talent, who couldn't?
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Why are so many people bent out of shape? We simply are not a good TEAM. Have some great players but not a good team. 3-4 with no real win of substance. Our drafted depth is awful. Love this franchise, but the 2014 team is poor.
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
djstat is right. I viewed this as a transition or developmental season Â
going in. If they get to December at 5-6 or with some luck 6-5, then not only do we have reason to care about playoff contention, but it would also mean that some of the younger players are blossoming. But to think they have the depth of talent to be a serious contender this year is just not realistic.
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
So true. 2008 Cards, 2010 Packers, 2012 Ravens for example
but it is certainly not too far off. Until we actually beat someone that matters, we are what we are. Do I really believe we are going to beat Indy on MNF? No. Are we going to go to Seattle - a team that has to be getting pissed off - and win? No.
Sure, we'll end the season winning against some mediocre teams and we'll end up with no play-offs and a middle of the road draft position. Then what? Do any of you see this changing and if so, HOW?
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
I haven't forgotten, I've posted about it here many, many times in detail that other posters find annoying. Regardless, the team's performance was above the x's and o's.
and just says he's outta here, that may be the catalyst for the necessary changes. Poor Eli. He has a few good years left and could get to the SB again, but not with this team. His contract is up after 2015 I believe. He can say he's not re-signing and they'll have to do something.
The league is full of mediocre teams. What we need is for the guys on this team to play extremely motivated, nasty football in order win. You see it week in and week out. The team that decides to say screw our record, we are going to fly around and knock the snot out of you is the team that wins. Unfortunately over the past few years we have been the team that looks for a place to hide after getting punched in the mouth. We need to nut up and fly around. Not hard to see.
Injuries are not an excuse in the NFL. They will happen to every team - lots of them. Still expect a base level of performance and too often we dont get it.
I want to see 2 things. One, how do they finish this season. If they finish strong and walk away anywhere from 8-8 to 10-6, I would keep him.
But, two, I want to see both Fewell and Quinn gone. This is, in my mind, imperative in order for Coughlin to stay. They are both terrible coaches who, in my estimation, have cost us a ton of games with the jobs they have done. If Coughlin is unwilling to fire both, especially if it is a disappointing season, then there is no reason to keep him as will be more of the same next year.
key people..If Beason, Schwartz, our secondary and Jennings were healthy, the topic of mediocrity wouldn't be an issue..We'd probably be 5-2 in all likelihood and these stupid headlines and posts wouldn't be an issue save for the usual idiots..
We have the talent. Sure we can use more talent, who couldn't?
Now, sure health would be good. However, we are lacking talent on both sides of the ball. That's just from a talent standpoint and not factoring scheme into the equation for both sides of the ball.
Beason and health are two terms that don't go together. The guy was injury prone with the Panthers. Comes in plays well, and after signing here gets hurt. I am not surprised by this shit. It's not like he has never missed a game throughout his career.
The OG hasn't played so not sure what he is and what he can do. Jennings in the passing game hurts us. But the OL isn't run blocking so not sure how he would do currently.
We need more talent, and true all teams can say that, but we need an upgrade across the board because we are not a talented team.
Why is it most every team in this league has injuries Â
and somehow at most times stays it course. The same mantra for a few seasons here has been injuries and it derails this team. Is it injuries or talent or a combo of everything coaching, injuries, talent, etc.
I find it very difficult to believe that there is another coach out there who could do a better job with this group. I am fairly certain that another coach would do much worse.
Coaches can only work with the roster they are given. No one could honestly say that the Giants are a loaded team right now. Granted, there are no great teams in the NFL, but within our own division I think there is a bit of a talent gap. Particularly on offense where the Eagles and Cowboys (outside of QB) have noticeably more talent.
The Giants won the super bowl in '11 with a team that was basically in decline. The '10 Giants were a better squad overall that pissed away the year with an insane number of turnovers and a historic collapse at home. In '11 the Giants peaked at the right time and won a title due to one of the greatest quarterbacking performances of all time. I loved every minute of it but I do not think anyone can truthfully argue that the 2011 Giants were loaded with talent. They had the best QB play in the NFL and an awesome receiving corps. But they did play "over their heads" and a lot of that has to do with coaching. TC does not get enough credit for that.
Late 2012 and the shit show that was 2013 finished the collapse and now the team is rebuilding. Luckily this can happen quickly in the NFL when you have a franchise QB.
In addition Coughlin has many other accomplishments on his resume. Some quick ones are the 11 consecutive road games in 2007 capped off by the ultimate road win in frozen conditions in the NFC title game. Coughlin gets way too little credit for that aspect of the run and I doubt we ever see a road performance streak like that again.
Even last season, which was by far the worst of his tenure, the Giants did not implode and even came one defensive stop away from getting back in the division race. Compare that to the Jets this year who are spiraling out of control and on their way to a brutal season. Heck, the Giants lost only two more games last year than they did during the '11 championship season.
Coughlin is a great coach and there is no reason to believe anyone could do a better job with this group. Sadly, his problem is his age. If the Giants tank this year and decide to go even further into a rebuild. I am sure ownership will ask themselves if he has enough years left to be the guy to lead it.
I find it very difficult to believe that there is another coach out there who could do a better job with this group. I am fairly certain that another coach would do much worse.
Coaches can only work with the roster they are given. No one could honestly say that the Giants are a loaded team right now. Granted, there are no great teams in the NFL, but within our own division I think there is a bit of a talent gap. Particularly on offense where the Eagles and Cowboys (outside of QB) have noticeably more talent.
The Giants won the super bowl in '11 with a team that was basically in decline. The '10 Giants were a better squad overall that pissed away the year with an insane number of turnovers and a historic collapse at home. In '11 the Giants peaked at the right time and won a title due to one of the greatest quarterbacking performances of all time. I loved every minute of it but I do not think anyone can truthfully argue that the 2011 Giants were loaded with talent. They had the best QB play in the NFL and an awesome receiving corps. But they did play "over their heads" and a lot of that has to do with coaching. TC does not get enough credit for that.
Late 2012 and the shit show that was 2013 finished the collapse and now the team is rebuilding. Luckily this can happen quickly in the NFL when you have a franchise QB.
In addition Coughlin has many other accomplishments on his resume. Some quick ones are the 11 consecutive road games in 2007 capped off by the ultimate road win in frozen conditions in the NFC title game. Coughlin gets way too little credit for that aspect of the run and I doubt we ever see a road performance streak like that again.
Even last season, which was by far the worst of his tenure, the Giants did not implode and even came one defensive stop away from getting back in the division race. Compare that to the Jets this year who are spiraling out of control and on their way to a brutal season. Heck, the Giants lost only two more games last year than they did during the '11 championship season.
Coughlin is a great coach and there is no reason to believe anyone could do a better job with this group. Sadly, his problem is his age. If the Giants tank this year and decide to go even further into a rebuild. I am sure ownership will ask themselves if he has enough years left to be the guy to lead it.
Amazing how the coach suddenly can't coach when his roster is full of holes and the team gets depleted by a rash of injuries. I don't know how the coach's message get old, just because the team suffers from a talent deficit.
The roster turns over every year. How many guys are still on the roster from Super Bowl 46? How does an ever rotating group of young players suddenly determine that a 2 time Super Bowl winning coach does not have enough credibility to listen to his message. I don't buy that. We just don't have a good enough roster to compete with the top teams in the league.
Excellent comments. Especially when you point out that his message can't be getting stale when 90% of the team hasn't been here more than a few years. And if anyone knows anything about TC it is that he is always thinking up new messages to motivate the team plus he is great at bringing in people the team can respect to add to the message.
We are currently seriously lacking talent but TC can't say that because that is counter to giving the players the confidence they need to play at a higher level.
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
So true. 2008 Cards, 2010 Packers, 2012 Ravens for example
Here are just some of the ways these analogies don't hold.
*The '08 Cardinals didn't win the Super Bowl. (Okay, that's an easy one.)
*Both the '12 Ravens and '10 Packers won 10 games each. (Including the Packers beating the Giants.)
*The Giants, of course, needed to win the battle of 8-7 teams against the Cowboys just to make the play-offs. (Having beaten the 8 win Jets in the previous week's must-win situation.)
*But it wasn't just win totals, which of course can be skewed. The '11 Giants were the first team in NFL history to reach the Super Bowl with a negative point differential. Where, of course, they became the first sub-10 win team to win it. So by some fairly objective standards, the '11 Giants weren't as good as the Packers or Ravens teams you cite.
Pretty sure you recently touted the virtues of the Giants 10-6, even though the Giants didn't "technically' make the play-offs. So, yeah. The '11 Giants team wasn't actually all that good, even though they 'technically' won the SB. (I'm just using your word 'technically' because it struck me as funny at the time.)
Of course the Giants winning that SB was still awesome and thrilling. Perhaps even more so, because the team was so flawed. But the play-off run and ultimate victory leaves some folks remembering that team as better than it was.
The Ravens clinched in week 16 and lost in week 17 by six points playing their backups for the majority of the game (against the playoff-bound Bengals, who I believe needed the game).
The Bengals did not need that game to make the playoffs.
We also had an 8-8 playoff team during 2006. Sort of bullshit to whine about the bad luck (or really, complete choke job of the team) in 2010 without mentioning the good fortune in 2006 of making the playoffs as an average team.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Trent Dilfer explains the term well Â
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
So true. 2008 Cards, 2010 Packers, 2012 Ravens for example
Here are just some of the ways these analogies don't hold.
*The '08 Cardinals didn't win the Super Bowl. (Okay, that's an easy one.)
*Both the '12 Ravens and '10 Packers won 10 games each. (Including the Packers beating the Giants.)
*The Giants, of course, needed to win the battle of 8-7 teams against the Cowboys just to make the play-offs. (Having beaten the 8 win Jets in the previous week's must-win situation.)
*But it wasn't just win totals, which of course can be skewed. The '11 Giants were the first team in NFL history to reach the Super Bowl with a negative point differential. Where, of course, they became the first sub-10 win team to win it. So by some fairly objective standards, the '11 Giants weren't as good as the Packers or Ravens teams you cite.
Pretty sure you recently touted the virtues of the Giants 10-6, even though the Giants didn't "technically' make the play-offs. So, yeah. The '11 Giants team wasn't actually all that good, even though they 'technically' won the SB. (I'm just using your word 'technically' because it struck me as funny at the time.)
Of course the Giants winning that SB was still awesome and thrilling. Perhaps even more so, because the team was so flawed. But the play-off run and ultimate victory leaves some folks remembering that team as better than it was.
Stick to digging me on, "wait until it all plays out," or on my "strong feel or sense" of how the Giants would do against the Cowboys(as though any feel or prediction isn't guesswork), as you're really effective with that ..But it doesn't matter that they won 9 or 10 games..They were all wild cards and went the distance..Sorry the Cards were a Santonio Holmes questionable catch away from winning it all..But yes, they didn't "win" which certainly "makes" your point..The Packers were lucky as hell to get in and subsequently win it all thanks to a missed Celek tackle by Phillips and a once(perhaps twice) in a lifetime blown 31-10 Giants lead with 7 1/2 minutes to play..Certainly not anywhere in the "lucky" class (the Packers, that is) that the stars-aligned Giants were..Of course not.. So yes, Teams as lucky or fortunate as the Giants are rare indeed..
And for your edification and AFTER IT ALL PLAYED OUT, The 2007 Giants won 14 games to take the championship and not 10..Final 2007 record: 14-6...2011 Giants won 13 games to win the title again..Final record: 13-7
in 2007 and 2011. Sorry that how they won it all didn't fit your or other fans parameters of how a team should perform during an entire 16 game schedule..It is a parity league and many teams are bunched with 8-10 wins..The rules have changed..Anyone can win it all..I'd rather be the mediocre Giants than the consistent Forty-Niners who having nothing to show for their recent string of success..Nothing.
Do you think its a safe bet that they've gotten the best they're going to get from Coughlin? I agree that the players need to raise their level of performance and that their effort has been lackluster. Never thought I'd say it but I wonder if whats needed is a fresh face and a new message.
The roster turns over every year. How many guys are still on the roster from Super Bowl 46? How does an ever rotating group of young players suddenly determine that a 2 time Super Bowl winning coach does not have enough credibility to listen to his message. I don't buy that. We just don't have a good enough roster to compete with the top teams in the league.
An example of from Dallas game:
- Beatty false start on 4th and 1 - killed drive in dallas territory
- Randle holding penalty on wr screen that killed a drive - killed drive in dallas territory
- Donnell fumble in giants territory
Arizona game - the game changed on a punt return, fumble kickoff, etc...
Mistakes like this are the difference between winning and losing tightly contested games, and at this point the Giants make a lot of them.
I believe this is what Reese and Coughlin mean when they say "above the x's and o's"
The good ones do their job well,the great ones do their job the best.
That about sums it up.
We have the talent. Sure we can use more talent, who couldn't?
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
When does baseball season start again?
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
Quote:
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
So true. 2008 Cards, 2010 Packers, 2012 Ravens for example
Sure, we'll end the season winning against some mediocre teams and we'll end up with no play-offs and a middle of the road draft position. Then what? Do any of you see this changing and if so, HOW?
Quote:
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
I haven't forgotten, I've posted about it here many, many times in detail that other posters find annoying. Regardless, the team's performance was above the x's and o's.
But, two, I want to see both Fewell and Quinn gone. This is, in my mind, imperative in order for Coughlin to stay. They are both terrible coaches who, in my estimation, have cost us a ton of games with the jobs they have done. If Coughlin is unwilling to fire both, especially if it is a disappointing season, then there is no reason to keep him as will be more of the same next year.
We have the talent. Sure we can use more talent, who couldn't?
Now, sure health would be good. However, we are lacking talent on both sides of the ball. That's just from a talent standpoint and not factoring scheme into the equation for both sides of the ball.
Beason and health are two terms that don't go together. The guy was injury prone with the Panthers. Comes in plays well, and after signing here gets hurt. I am not surprised by this shit. It's not like he has never missed a game throughout his career.
The OG hasn't played so not sure what he is and what he can do. Jennings in the passing game hurts us. But the OL isn't run blocking so not sure how he would do currently.
We need more talent, and true all teams can say that, but we need an upgrade across the board because we are not a talented team.
its just been too consistent lately.
I see nothing to change the existing status. Coughlin's words ring hollow at this point. He can't talk his way into the light anymore. Nobody can.
Coaches can only work with the roster they are given. No one could honestly say that the Giants are a loaded team right now. Granted, there are no great teams in the NFL, but within our own division I think there is a bit of a talent gap. Particularly on offense where the Eagles and Cowboys (outside of QB) have noticeably more talent.
The Giants won the super bowl in '11 with a team that was basically in decline. The '10 Giants were a better squad overall that pissed away the year with an insane number of turnovers and a historic collapse at home. In '11 the Giants peaked at the right time and won a title due to one of the greatest quarterbacking performances of all time. I loved every minute of it but I do not think anyone can truthfully argue that the 2011 Giants were loaded with talent. They had the best QB play in the NFL and an awesome receiving corps. But they did play "over their heads" and a lot of that has to do with coaching. TC does not get enough credit for that.
Late 2012 and the shit show that was 2013 finished the collapse and now the team is rebuilding. Luckily this can happen quickly in the NFL when you have a franchise QB.
In addition Coughlin has many other accomplishments on his resume. Some quick ones are the 11 consecutive road games in 2007 capped off by the ultimate road win in frozen conditions in the NFC title game. Coughlin gets way too little credit for that aspect of the run and I doubt we ever see a road performance streak like that again.
Even last season, which was by far the worst of his tenure, the Giants did not implode and even came one defensive stop away from getting back in the division race. Compare that to the Jets this year who are spiraling out of control and on their way to a brutal season. Heck, the Giants lost only two more games last year than they did during the '11 championship season.
Coughlin is a great coach and there is no reason to believe anyone could do a better job with this group. Sadly, his problem is his age. If the Giants tank this year and decide to go even further into a rebuild. I am sure ownership will ask themselves if he has enough years left to be the guy to lead it.
Coaches can only work with the roster they are given. No one could honestly say that the Giants are a loaded team right now. Granted, there are no great teams in the NFL, but within our own division I think there is a bit of a talent gap. Particularly on offense where the Eagles and Cowboys (outside of QB) have noticeably more talent.
The Giants won the super bowl in '11 with a team that was basically in decline. The '10 Giants were a better squad overall that pissed away the year with an insane number of turnovers and a historic collapse at home. In '11 the Giants peaked at the right time and won a title due to one of the greatest quarterbacking performances of all time. I loved every minute of it but I do not think anyone can truthfully argue that the 2011 Giants were loaded with talent. They had the best QB play in the NFL and an awesome receiving corps. But they did play "over their heads" and a lot of that has to do with coaching. TC does not get enough credit for that.
Late 2012 and the shit show that was 2013 finished the collapse and now the team is rebuilding. Luckily this can happen quickly in the NFL when you have a franchise QB.
In addition Coughlin has many other accomplishments on his resume. Some quick ones are the 11 consecutive road games in 2007 capped off by the ultimate road win in frozen conditions in the NFC title game. Coughlin gets way too little credit for that aspect of the run and I doubt we ever see a road performance streak like that again.
Even last season, which was by far the worst of his tenure, the Giants did not implode and even came one defensive stop away from getting back in the division race. Compare that to the Jets this year who are spiraling out of control and on their way to a brutal season. Heck, the Giants lost only two more games last year than they did during the '11 championship season.
Coughlin is a great coach and there is no reason to believe anyone could do a better job with this group. Sadly, his problem is his age. If the Giants tank this year and decide to go even further into a rebuild. I am sure ownership will ask themselves if he has enough years left to be the guy to lead it.
Good post.
The roster turns over every year. How many guys are still on the roster from Super Bowl 46? How does an ever rotating group of young players suddenly determine that a 2 time Super Bowl winning coach does not have enough credibility to listen to his message. I don't buy that. We just don't have a good enough roster to compete with the top teams in the league.
Excellent comments. Especially when you point out that his message can't be getting stale when 90% of the team hasn't been here more than a few years. And if anyone knows anything about TC it is that he is always thinking up new messages to motivate the team plus he is great at bringing in people the team can respect to add to the message.
We are currently seriously lacking talent but TC can't say that because that is counter to giving the players the confidence they need to play at a higher level.
Quote:
In comment 11946318 JonC said:
Quote:
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
So true. 2008 Cards, 2010 Packers, 2012 Ravens for example
Here are just some of the ways these analogies don't hold.
*The '08 Cardinals didn't win the Super Bowl. (Okay, that's an easy one.)
*Both the '12 Ravens and '10 Packers won 10 games each. (Including the Packers beating the Giants.)
*The Giants, of course, needed to win the battle of 8-7 teams against the Cowboys just to make the play-offs. (Having beaten the 8 win Jets in the previous week's must-win situation.)
*But it wasn't just win totals, which of course can be skewed. The '11 Giants were the first team in NFL history to reach the Super Bowl with a negative point differential. Where, of course, they became the first sub-10 win team to win it. So by some fairly objective standards, the '11 Giants weren't as good as the Packers or Ravens teams you cite.
Pretty sure you recently touted the virtues of the Giants 10-6, even though the Giants didn't "technically' make the play-offs. So, yeah. The '11 Giants team wasn't actually all that good, even though they 'technically' won the SB. (I'm just using your word 'technically' because it struck me as funny at the time.)
Of course the Giants winning that SB was still awesome and thrilling. Perhaps even more so, because the team was so flawed. But the play-off run and ultimate victory leaves some folks remembering that team as better than it was.
We also had an 8-8 playoff team during 2006. Sort of bullshit to whine about the bad luck (or really, complete choke job of the team) in 2010 without mentioning the good fortune in 2006 of making the playoffs as an average team.
Quote:
In comment 11946352 vibe4giants said:
Quote:
In comment 11946318 JonC said:
Quote:
He also personified playing within the x's and o's in winning the SB with Baltimore.
Eli's post-season play is an example of playing above them, the 2011 NYG played well above them. They transcended their talent level, the sum was much greater than the individual parts, etc.
Yes. Everyone enjoys so much reflecting back on the SB win, but forgetting how thin that team's margins were. Not many SB winners have been so close to not even making the play-offs.
So true. 2008 Cards, 2010 Packers, 2012 Ravens for example
Here are just some of the ways these analogies don't hold.
*The '08 Cardinals didn't win the Super Bowl. (Okay, that's an easy one.)
*Both the '12 Ravens and '10 Packers won 10 games each. (Including the Packers beating the Giants.)
*The Giants, of course, needed to win the battle of 8-7 teams against the Cowboys just to make the play-offs. (Having beaten the 8 win Jets in the previous week's must-win situation.)
*But it wasn't just win totals, which of course can be skewed. The '11 Giants were the first team in NFL history to reach the Super Bowl with a negative point differential. Where, of course, they became the first sub-10 win team to win it. So by some fairly objective standards, the '11 Giants weren't as good as the Packers or Ravens teams you cite.
Pretty sure you recently touted the virtues of the Giants 10-6, even though the Giants didn't "technically' make the play-offs. So, yeah. The '11 Giants team wasn't actually all that good, even though they 'technically' won the SB. (I'm just using your word 'technically' because it struck me as funny at the time.)
Of course the Giants winning that SB was still awesome and thrilling. Perhaps even more so, because the team was so flawed. But the play-off run and ultimate victory leaves some folks remembering that team as better than it was.
Stick to digging me on, "wait until it all plays out," or on my "strong feel or sense" of how the Giants would do against the Cowboys(as though any feel or prediction isn't guesswork), as you're really effective with that ..But it doesn't matter that they won 9 or 10 games..They were all wild cards and went the distance..Sorry the Cards were a Santonio Holmes questionable catch away from winning it all..But yes, they didn't "win" which certainly "makes" your point..The Packers were lucky as hell to get in and subsequently win it all thanks to a missed Celek tackle by Phillips and a once(perhaps twice) in a lifetime blown 31-10 Giants lead with 7 1/2 minutes to play..Certainly not anywhere in the "lucky" class (the Packers, that is) that the stars-aligned Giants were..Of course not.. So yes, Teams as lucky or fortunate as the Giants are rare indeed..
And for your edification and AFTER IT ALL PLAYED OUT, The 2007 Giants won 14 games to take the championship and not 10..Final 2007 record: 14-6...2011 Giants won 13 games to win the title again..Final record: 13-7
That's how informed fans judge an entire season..
The Packers were the only wild card of the three teams you listed.
BTW, informed fans know the '11 Giants were *not* a Wild Card team. They won the division.
Every word you typed about '07 is irrelevant to the discussion of the '11 team.
So, to answer my own question at the top, you're the only one digging here. It's your hole, though. So have at it.
The Packers lost 7-3 to the Packers with Aaron Rodgers out for a half. They lost 31-27 to the Patriots the following week without Rodgers.
Big Blue '56 : 5:19 pm : link : reply
in 2007 and 2011.
.
So...the Giants weren't mediocre in '11 (the only thing I've been discussing)...but you still prefer their mediocrity the 49ers consistency? Wha?
The Packers lost 7-3 to the Packers with Aaron Rodgers out for a half. They lost 31-27 to the Patriots the following week without Rodgers.
Lost to the Lions.
Dammit.