The Giants came out swinging in the no huddle, up tempo offense....they had the cowboys gassed and on their heels. the no huddle suits eli's strengths as he's at his best and locked in with that type of pace. there were some runs and checkdowns mixed in with the intermediate passing to keep the D honest.
and what do they do to start the second half? 'protect the lead'/try to chew up the clock with a "balanced" slow tempo run run pass punt...the result...several 3 and outs and allowing the cowboys to get right back into the game.
yet another indictment of the over-conservative, risk-averse coughlin staff. instead of continuing to go to the well, they revert to what hasn't been working this season and to a certain extent the past couple of seasons.
It is what the Giants did during their first three drives leading to touchdowns; it was a pass first run second approach.
In the second half they went away from that and only started moving the ball again when they went back to a no huddle pass first/run second approach.
Quote:
"No Huddle" offense is.
It is what the Giants did during their first three drives leading to touchdowns; it was a pass first run second approach.
In the second half they went away from that and only started moving the ball again when they went back to a no huddle pass first/run second approach.
First of all, "no huddle" does not mean pass first/run second, and it doesn't mean hurry up; it just means that the Giants don't go to a huddle so the defense can't substitute.
Second, the Giants did use the "no huddle" for much of the game, including the first 3 TD drives, but if you think they were in a pass first mode, then you were not paying attention very well.
On their first TD drive, the Giants ran the ball 6 times and passed 7 times. They ran the ball on fisrt down 3 out 5 five times).
On the second TD drive, the Giants ran and passed an equal number of times (3 each) They ran the ball on 2 out of the 3 first downs.
On the third TD drive, the Giants ran the ball 8 times and passed only 3 times. They ran the ball on first down 5 out of 6 times).
So to sum up, on the 3 TD drives, the Giants ran (17 times) more often than they passed (13 times). And they overwhelmingly called running plays on first down (10 runs, only 4 passes).
It's odd how often perception strays from fact.
He ran hard, too. The OL blocked quite a bit better in the run game, as well.
Jennings also did a better job picking up the blitz than Williams had been doing.
Second, the Giants did use the "no huddle" for much of the game, including the first 3 TD drives, but if you think they were in a pass first mode, then you were not paying attention very well.
On their first TD drive, the Giants ran the ball 6 times and passed 7 times. They ran the ball on fisrt down 3 out 5 five times).
On the second TD drive, the Giants ran and passed an equal number of times (3 each) They ran the ball on 2 out of the 3 first downs.
On the third TD drive, the Giants ran the ball 8 times and passed only 3 times. They ran the ball on first down 5 out of 6 times).
So to sum up, on the 3 TD drives, the Giants ran (17 times) more often than they passed (13 times). And they overwhelmingly called running plays on first down (10 runs, only 4 passes).
to your point, there was a fair amount of running in those drives, more than i insinuated initially.
however, on the first drive of the second half, they decided to play it safe and go back to the huddle/running the playclock down to almost zero.
the giants rushed 32 times for around 2.8 yards per carry, compared to their 300+ yards passing that was fairly efficient all night. there are some games where the run/pass ratio needs to be out of balance and last night was one of those nights where eli should have been called to pass 50 times.
bottom line, they were having success in an up tempo offense and then they took their foot off the gas and then stalled.
then why did they move away from the up tempo offense and go back to the drain the playclock/huddling to start the second half. trying to milk the clock? trying to mix things up? either way, they went away from what worked to what didn't work and when they switched back to a no huddle/shotgun they had the successful drive that was interrupted by the manning INT and then the robinson touchdown drive to follow.
Take a guess, the defense plays as well. You have to try to keep them on their heels...
Quote:
a very significant run game as part of its scheme...
then why did they move away from the up tempo offense and go back to the drain the playclock/huddling to start the second half. trying to milk the clock? trying to mix things up? either way, they went away from what worked to what didn't work and when they switched back to a no huddle/shotgun they had the successful drive that was interrupted by the manning INT and then the robinson touchdown drive to follow.
When you have a lead in the second half, like the Giants did, it is wise strategy to try to milk the clock. Staying with the no huddle but using up more of the game/play clock is a big part of that strategy.
However, despite what you may think, the Giants were in ball control mode the entire game, even if they were "up-tempo" as you put it. The first TD drive (13 plays) consumed 7:07. The second (6 plays) was only 2:53 because 43 out of the 66 yards were on one play. The third (11 plays) ate up 5:57. And if there's a fault with the last TD drive (14 plays) it's that the Giants scored too quickly, eating up 6:12 but leaving 3-1/2 minutes on the clock.
The Giants play calling was consistent throughout the game. their execution (protecting Eli dropping passes (Parker, Williams) was the change.
Take a guess, the defense plays as well. You have to try to keep them on their heels...
I agree you need to keep the D on their heels, but you also need to play to your strengths. 32 runs for 80 yards at 2.8 yards per carry - is not your strength.
The D was on its heels when they were in the no huddle which was also "up tempo". When Giants went back to huddling and letting the playclock run down to zero, that's when they reverted back to their poor play.
Quote:
In comment 11998515 kickerpa16 said:
Quote:
a very significant run game as part of its scheme...
then why did they move away from the up tempo offense and go back to the drain the playclock/huddling to start the second half. trying to milk the clock? trying to mix things up? either way, they went away from what worked to what didn't work and when they switched back to a no huddle/shotgun they had the successful drive that was interrupted by the manning INT and then the robinson touchdown drive to follow.
When you have a lead in the second half, like the Giants did, it is wise strategy to try to milk the clock. Staying with the no huddle but using up more of the game/play clock is a big part of that strategy.
However, despite what you may think, the Giants were in ball control mode the entire game, even if they were "up-tempo" as you put it. The first TD drive (13 plays) consumed 7:07. The second (6 plays) was only 2:53 because 43 out of the 66 yards were on one play. The third (11 plays) ate up 5:57. And if there's a fault with the last TD drive (14 plays) it's that the Giants scored too quickly, eating up 6:12 but leaving 3-1/2 minutes on the clock.
The Giants play calling was consistent throughout the game. their execution (protecting Eli dropping passes (Parker, Williams) was the change.
it was 11 points at the start of the second half when they started to try and milk the clock. that was way too early; and they dropped the no huddle for the first two drives of the second half.
I can't wait for the superbowl, then dealing with the coldness of february and march, and then finally good weather and draft talk. The last few seasons have just sucked some low grade ass.