What would the Giants record be without all the injuries?

Is they're just names at this point. Might never be the same guys they were before the injuries.

Beason, for instance, played 3 games for us. And played them badly. He was not an asset on the field while in the game.

That said, Cruz, Jennings and the CBs would have helped.

would have def helped in he Cowboys game and the Seahawks games. I think we could have been at least 5-4. Jennings might have helped in the Eagles game with all the pressure up the middle. Schwartz is an unknown but I think over time he would have been better than what we have. I think we were in a tough spot vs the Colts with them coming off a bad loss.

All teams have to deal with injuries. This is a team with a bad defensive and a need to improve on the right side of the offensive line. This is one of those season that you plan for the next season. How to make improvements and do we have the right people in management to do so?

but name a team that lost their best WR, starting running back, and their top 4 corner backs?

Schwartz hasn't played a single season game with the team yet so we have nothing to compare it to. When he comes back I'm betting he will need time to gel with the line so I don't expect immediate improvement either.

Thurmond we didn't get to see too much of but I think he was the 3rd best CB on the roster. I also like McBride and as a backup. I don't think either of them are game changers but maybe. Like I said, didn't see enough of Thurmond. You didn't mention Prince and he will be a huge loss for the team. Nobody mentions him because his primary role is defend the pass and Seattle primarily ran it down our throats. However, I feel that Prince plays the run very well and sure as hell wouldn't have "made the business decision" our other DBs did.

Beason, nope. Disappointed with his play this year (the little he did play). Had big hopes for him. We need to make LB a bigger priority in the off season.

I don't think Cruz and Beckham have been on the field together this season at the same time. Absolutely Cruz would have made a difference in the last few games. His loss gets more evident as Beckham improves each game. I love the thought of Beckham, Cruz, and Randle as our 3 WRs.

I think Jennings was a major loss as well. We have not won a game since he got hurt and I don't think that's a coincidence. I like Williams but I don't think he's made for this offense. Mentioned this in another thread already.

vs the Eagles... no difference

I believe we still lose Colts game...

beat Dallas and Seattle... Offense would have scored more keeping the Defense off the field...

5-4

they have one more win. They cannot pressure the QB consistently this year. The secondary cannot all be in the correct coverage for the majority of Fewell's tenure.

In comment 11971820 St. Jimmy said:

Quote:

they have one more win. They cannot pressure the QB consistently this year. The secondary cannot all be in the correct coverage for the majority of Fewell's tenure.

It's true, but think about in the Cowboys game, they had Fenner from the practice squad covering Dez Bryant in the slot on a key third down late in the game. If that's McBride or Thurmund do they covert?

if the Giants get back their players, the opposing teams get theirs too?

Listen, every GM, every fan, can look like a genius on paper, because they assume their picks will play at a top level, and play as a true team player....then when guys you bring in, either down't play at the level you thought they would, don't play well within the framework of their new team, or they become injured, it's another ballgame.....all those variables can destroy your paper team....thus the success of fantasy leagues.....everyone can be a GM.....

I think for the most part, before the season started, everyone felt this was an 8-8, +/-1, team......

I don't see this team beating Seattle or Dallas, because this team has shown a propensity to shoot itself in the foot, week after week, and until that changes, this team will continue to plod along, and not improve...

In comment 11971826 Doomster said:

Quote:

if the Giants get back their players, the opposing teams get theirs too? Listen, every GM, every fan, can look like a genius on paper, because they assume their picks will play at a top level, and play as a true team player....then when guys you bring in, either down't play at the level you thought they would, don't play well within the framework of their new team, or they become injured, it's another ballgame.....all those variables can destroy your paper team....thus the success of fantasy leagues.....everyone can be a GM..... I think for the most part, before the season started, everyone felt this was an 8-8, +/-1, team...... I don't see this team beating Seattle or Dallas, because this team has shown a propensity to shoot itself in the foot, week after week, and until that changes, this team will continue to plod along, and not improve...

No doubt but you can't say having Cruz and Jennings on the field at the same time with Beckham now would not change our offense and the way teams defend against them.

the front office doesn't subscribe to this widespread belief that it's all the injuries. That leads to not seeing the deep problems with the roster. And it leads to band aids instead of surgery. The roster has problems. Big ones. And a healthy Cruz and Schwartz would have been awesome, but the talent level is just not there across the board.

In comment 11971832 Chris in Philly said:

Quote:

the front office doesn't subscribe to this widespread belief that it's all the injuries. That leads to not seeing the deep problems with the roster. And it leads to band aids instead of surgery. The roster has problems. Big ones. And a healthy Cruz and Schwartz would have been awesome, but the talent level is just not there across the board.

I'm not saying they don't have holes, just don't think it's as far off as it seems right now.

biggest problem right now is the LB unit. A healthy Beason wouldnt have helped that much because they are downright terrible on the outside. Besides, when Beason played this year he was not very good.

Losing Cruz and Jennings has hurt but they are on the wrong side of the ball.

Maybe they have 1 more win if all those guys were healthy; that's it.

Certainly, losing the top 4 CBs in the first half of the season was unexpected but the other lost players happens all the time.

Gaining Beckham at about the same time as losing Cruz was probably a wash but it would have been a disaster if Beckham hadn't been available because the Giants really had no WR depth.

Andre Williams didn't really step up and there was no one else to rely on. Hillis was a walking concussion case.

But I think this team was competitive with any team in the NFCE. Would they have beaten them all. Maybe not but they would have had a chance to. You only have to look at the game against Houston and the others in the three game winning streak to see the potential. And that was without Schwartz and Beckam and Beason. You just can't start 3 third stringers in the secondary and lose your top two offensive skill position players and remain competitive. Those who want TC fired or Reese gone don't want to admit this but it's true nevertheless.

Are we assuming our opponents have their injuries, or are they also at full health?

Once the season starts every team has injuries.

One where you lose the best player on a squad. That takes your difference maker off the field ad makes every player slide up a notch. This happened to the Giants three places with Jennings, Cruz and Beason. The second kind of injury that kills a team is multiple injuries in a squand that puts multiple guys on the field that don't belong there. This happened in the secondary where they lost, Thurmond, Prince, McBride, Taylor and now have street signings playing. It's an absolute mess any way you look at it.

.

with Cruz, Jennings, Thurmond, a healthy Beason, a healthy DRC, Mcbride, Cooper Taylor, Prince, Schwartz and Wilson would absolutely be better...not even a question. The only reason Beason looked bad is he was working with a bad foot...that tends to hold a LB back a bit, no? While injuries certainly aren't the only problem, anyone who discounts them as a factor is ignoring an obvious "reason" for the current situation.

Cruz and Jennings that were healthy, we could have won at least 1 or 2 more games.

We can't stop anybody, with or without injuries.

this is what they are

instead of an accurate perspective, and well-planned strategy and solutions.

This roster is very flawed, though perhaps a little improved over 2013. Is the needle truly pointing up yet? I think it's clear they need another offseason or two of talent infusion.

They should've beaten AZ, otherwise every time they've played a good to very good team over the past 24 months, they've gotten decisively crushed. Make no bones about it, bad roster.

Arizona was also decimated on defense and played the game with their backup QB. The game's not close if both teams were healthy.

In comment 11971887 RDJR said:

Quote:

We can't stop anybody, with or without injuries.

Right but you don't think having them on the field would help keep our defense off the field and score more points?

I posted this looked like an 8-9 win team, if they stayed healthy and didn't fall into the performance lulls we've seen from them since mid-2012.

8-9 wins is a "better season" than limping along to 5-6 wins, but in reality, what good is it? A few more feel good moments in 2014? I'd rather they rip the roster apart and look longer term, legit roster foundation building and smart, well-timed UFA additions delivered two rings.

Reese's current strategy isn't working.

The problem is also that we bring in and rely on guys with injury or consistency questions. If you were counting on Beason playing anything close to 16 games injury free then you weren't paying attention. Throw in a lack of consistency with other guys they brought in.

We are what our record says we are. A more talented team would have scraped off a couple more wins even with the injuries.

Another problem is we have no identity - on either side of the ball. No part of our game that we do really well that we can fall back on when things aren't going as planned. Probably a mix of talent and coaching there.

If it was McLain instead of Beason then Kennard might have been an upgrade or at least an even replacement. Or if it was Randle instead of Cruz we'd now with Beckham have a better WR corps than before. Or if even McBride and Taylor were still active how much better the secondary would be. And if Schwartz was playing maybe they would have replaced Walton with Richburg.

The roster was not good enough and would not be good enough in one off season. I was told I was out of my mind. The proof is on the field.

In comment 11971915 JonC said:

Quote:

I posted this looked like an 8-9 win team, if they stayed healthy and didn't fall into the performance lulls we've seen from them since mid-2012. 8-9 wins is a "better season" than limping along to 5-6 wins, but in reality, what good is it? A few more feel good moments in 2014? I'd rather they rip the roster apart and look longer term, legit roster foundation building and smart, well-timed UFA additions delivered two rings. Reese's current strategy isn't working.

They are likely to finish with a 7-9 record with a push for 8-8. Not because of them, but the opponents they will play.

Jacksonville and Tennessee should be two of the wins. Maybe they split the Washington/St. Louis and that is it.

So what you will have is a team that probably goes 6-2 or 7-1 against the bad teams and goes 0 for the season against winning teams.

The 7 win season in 2013 was dressed up by them playing QB's who after those games, never played another NFL snap.

This 7 win season in 2014 is going to be dressed up by them beating only a bunch of below average teams.

I'm not sure how the team is going to evaluate their finish. More than likely, they will delude themselves into thinking they had a "strong finish" because of the very soft December schedule.

What you could probably see is in Week 17 (if they need the game) the Eagles end this whole run with Coughlin the same way the Giants ended Andy Reid's tenure in Philly two years ago when they blew them right out of the building in the first quarter.

It would just be a bad visual ending to this whole thing. But it is very possible.

because the players involved off the field will be trying to save their jobs ...

Dallas without Bryant and Murray, Philly without McCoy and Sproles (Wilson) and Maclin and with them missing a few starters in their secondary.

the worst.

if cruz doesn't get hurt - he is catching that ball in endzone
he was scoring on that ball .. no doubt about it

if he scores it is a different game in dallas..

On offense, the Giants had a right guard that would actually block? A left tackle that NEVER "whiffed"? A center who did something besides snap the ball?

On defense, more than one linebacker. McClain is "respectable" in the middle. The bozos to either side, not so much. Beason playing hurt isn't very good. The secondary is half a good one (Rodgers-Cromartie) and three guys named "Who?" On the line, Kiwi isn't very good, Ayers ought to be starting, Hankin seems to clog up the middle pretty good, JPP is merely "average" this year, the other DT is "Who?" and the defensive schemes are ... say, who's the DC's pharmacist, anyway?

There are new kids collecting splinters that should be on the field collecting bruises - and experience. Maybe Tre Moore (pass rush "specialist") is fast enough to run down the running backs from behind - Kiwi isn't. On offense, Reuben is the best we got? Then fire the bench-polishers and go find somebody what can play this game.

In comment 11971958 Joey in VA said:

Quote:

The roster was not good enough and would not be good enough in one off season. I was told I was out of my mind. The proof is on the field.

Well, you are. But not for this?

In comment 11971821 TomTom said:

Quote:

In comment 11971820 St. Jimmy said: Quote: they have one more win. They cannot pressure the QB consistently this year. The secondary cannot all be in the correct coverage for the majority of Fewell's tenure. It's true, but think about in the Cowboys game, they had Fenner from the practice squad covering Dez Bryant in the slot on a key third down late in the game. If that's McBride or Thurmund do they covert?

The Cowboys game was the one game I see them winning, possibly. I have little confidence in the defense making a big stop on a third down whenever it is needed with or without injuries.

Another thing to consider is without injuries, Snee is the Giants starting right guard which was a bad plan going into the year. Richburg is still sitting on the bench.

we were a good team without injuries to begin with. We added players to our secondary but again, I don't have faith in Fewell and our system. It was good we added to the secondary, but I wasn't expecting much from the defense.

Offensively, we lacked talent to begin with. That' pre-injury and add a new system to the equation, and I didn't expect much. I expected 8-10 games before we saw any progress. That's why I am very surprised Eli is putting up the stats he does in year 1 with no fucking , talent around him.

In comment 11972172 AnishPatel said:

Quote:

we were a good team without injuries to begin with. We added players to our secondary but again, I don't have faith in Fewell and our system. It was good we added to the secondary, but I wasn't expecting much from the defense. Offensively, we lacked talent to begin with. That' pre-injury and add a new system to the equation, and I didn't expect much. I expected 8-10 games before we saw any progress. That's why I am very surprised Eli is putting up the stats he does in year 1 with no fucking , talent around him.

Agreed

9-0....what could have been....

They still would have been beat by Seattle, Philadelphia, and Detroit. They probably beat Arizona and maybe beat Dallas.