...but when I've seen screens executed better this year than in the last 10, and the offense lining up in a new 4-man bunch formation specifically to get Beckham open quickly, I've become a tough sell with regards to criticism of this offense by KG.
If there was ever going to be a change, it needed to be last year. Gilbride said Manning is a QB that is going to beat you with his brain, and not his feet, and that all of the fault lay at the feet of the O-line. I agree with that, but...
I also have to put some of the fault at the complexity of the sight adjustments by every single reciever, on every single play. If guys aren't on the same page, high INT's happen.
High INT's definately a product of the system, at least a contributing factor anyways... I really wanted to see what Eli looked like in a new offense that relied on higher percentage throws and less miscommunication. We've seen both of those in the new offense. Last year was now or never. Reload for the rest of his career in the same offense, or blow it up and get it back together so he can have a closing act in a new offense.
I guess we'll see how it shakes out over the next five years.
"People knew what the problem was. You can’t ask that guy to stand here and take the pounding that he took last year.
That's what you did. You asked him to stand back there, refusing to budge on your offense despite it being clear that the offensive line couldn't protect.
This team still can't run a simple screen play. There were a few more successes this year than last simply because they ran more, but overall they still really suck at it.
Part of the reason for the offensive scheme change was because of the large number of slow developing medium and deep routes in the prior offense. The bad offensive line made that a glaring problem. Moving to an offense based on quick reads and getting the ball out quickly is designed to help mask that and keep Eli from getting killed. However, the running game gets no better.
Gillbride's offense would be fine if he had an NFL quality line the last few years. The offense itself didn't suddenly become outdated. The problem was the personnel deficiencies were more fatal with that offense.
we made the change. I had been an advocate for a change prior to last season. I would have hated to see Eli stuck in the same god damn system for his whole career. Other QBs were able to play in different systems, and I am glad, finally Eli has the opportunity to play in this system.
Despite all of the personnel deficiencies, being without Jennings for a handful of games, losing Cruz, not having Odell until Week 5, etc.. we are middle of the pack offensively this year. Which, I think most of us would have signed up for last year.
This offense on last years team would have certainly had us better than 0-6 to start and probably in the playoff hunt later on in the year. It was the terrible, completely inept offense last year that kept us from even being a competitive football team.
We are not lighting the world on fire this year but only 4 teams scored less than we did last year. We were pitiful. This offense has been more competitive with a couple of crappy exceptions.
If there was ever going to be a change, it needed to be last year. Gilbride said Manning is a QB that is going to beat you with his brain, and not his feet, and that all of the fault lay at the feet of the O-line. I agree with that, but...
I also have to put some of the fault at the complexity of the sight adjustments by every single reciever, on every single play. If guys aren't on the same page, high INT's happen.
High INT's definately a product of the system, at least a contributing factor anyways... I really wanted to see what Eli looked like in a new offense that relied on higher percentage throws and less miscommunication. We've seen both of those in the new offense. Last year was now or never. Reload for the rest of his career in the same offense, or blow it up and get it back together so he can have a closing act in a new offense.
I guess we'll see how it shakes out over the next five years.
Britt, spot on but don't forget Gilbride's 3rd and short 30+ yard passes. How about his 3rd and long draw plays? Drive killers.
How does he explain the increased red zone efficiency? Â
But I don't think it's arguable that Eli and this offense have benefitted from a scheme that encourages getting the ball out faster.
TTH,
If I remember correctly, we started going more 3 step after 4 games.. Somewhere between4 and 6 games. Before that we were still trying to run our 5 and 7 step passing concepts.
The system was a boom or bust system. It was either very good, or very bad. I still remember that Denver Thanksgiving game where we looked like the team hadn't play together ever.
i.e. the O line, then he probably could have saved his job by changing his scheme to mask the obvious problems. To me it was a coach being married to one way of doing things and stubbornly so.
I've posted this before and I must say it again... Â
how can you possibly scapegoat a guy who ran a very good offense for a long time that won two Super Bowls and not apply the same logic or questions to those who run the defense and special teams...areas that have been notoriously weak, especially special teams. I know life is not fair but I would have thought the front office had more intelligence than that.
That being said, Gilbride is both right and wrong. The offense was broken but it was broken due to a GM who failed to rebuild an aging offensive line. The template was there on how to do it as the late George Young did in the late 1980's. All Reese had to do was follow that template. No question Gilbride was a scapegoat but the move to the west coast up tempo offense had to be made because our offensive line was so bad. It was the only offense that could help out a weak line and allow Eli to not get the shit beaten out of him every week.
No question KG was a scapegoat and everyone knows here I have experience with Gilbride here in Ottawa and have never been his biggest fan. Still, you cannot deny the success he had when we had a decent offensive line and could run the ball. I know Mara is the owner and can do what he wants but I would have loved to be in the room and been involved in that discussion. I surely hope someone told him that the problem was our OL was terrible, not the system.
We had lots of injuries this year but would we be any better had Schwartz played all year? I can't see it when you have a guy like Walton at center or Jerry at the other guard position. We still need vast improvement from the offensive line in 2015 if we are going to do anything. But that still doesn't cure the problems on defense and special teams. I don't buy the last two games against lousy opponents...our D has a long, long way to go and the system there is definitely broken and the guy running it has had problems year in and year out...even when we won the Super Bowl in 2011.
I appreciate what he did when he was there but I don't miss all the frustration that came with people not being on the same page frequently. Despite continued terrible OL play this year, Eli looked better to me. Hell, the offense looked more functional and not like a bunch of misfits (despite trying to run the ball too much.)
RE: How does he explain the increased red zone efficiency? Â
It was time for change, personnel was the issue both in terms of talent, and certain players (Randle, for one) not consistently grasping the complex system of reads/options/routes.
RE: RE: How does he explain the increased red zone efficiency? Â
But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone.
But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone.
I was concerned about your CBA point as well in 2011, but then we went out and won the Super Bowl. I actually think the biggest impact has been on Special Teams, where play league-wide has been fucking awful in the early part of the year.
In his last two season (IIRC) McAdoo was responsible for installing their weekly red zone offense. Good to see he brought the success GB has in the red zone to NY.
i.e. the O line, then he probably could have saved his job by changing his scheme to mask the obvious problems. To me it was a coach being married to one way of doing things and stubbornly so.
Great point! I had issues with KG play calling, but you have to give him his due. The Giants had a prolific attack for most of his tenure. That said, as a responsible coordinator, if he recognized that the OL couldn't hold up he should have adjusted in order to protect his Eli. Simplifying and shortening routes, more max protect, shorter drops.
In comment 12039149 Joey in VA said:
[quote] But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone. [/quote)
This^^^^^^
It's also hurting Fewell and his complicated defensive schemes too.
which we talked about at length once the CBA was ratified, there wasn't a ton of roster changes from '10 to '11, and Eli/JPP/Cruz and the pass rush got white hot at the right time.
lost me when he called a number of 30 yard passes on 3rd and 1 in the last couple of years. he was too rigid and did not adapt his approach until it was much too late
But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone.
I was concerned about your CBA point as well in 2011, but then we went out and won the Super Bowl. I actually think the biggest impact has been on Special Teams, where play league-wide has been fucking awful in the early part of the year.
That was year one though, when we had veterans who knew the system inside and out. I think as guys came into the league with only that short window for practice and tried to master this offense it got harder to do. We are now in year 4 of this and most of the players we have save the over 30 crowd have never had those long 2 a days in the NFL and countless hours watching film. We finally got on the right side of the ledger from a system standpoint but I still think some things need to be altered in how we operate.
TC has moved to a more cerebral approach to compensate for the time he doesn't get on the field but I think the opposite should be happening. I think the time allotted should be used to go full speed with the plays you have and get guys used to the tempo and get them trained up for the season. They need a physical tune up in practice, it should be max physical effort (not in pads that much obviously) when they have practice time. You have to teach obviously, but I'd rather see our guys going 100MPH and overwhelming opponents with that.
That's one of the big advantages college coaches now have, they are used to restrictions and know how to fine tune the players to that. It's another adjustment TC has to make. It's not a coincidence that college coaches usually flamed out when moving to the NFL, but lo and behold, new CBA, far less practice and Pete Carroll, Harbaugh, CHip Kelly all of the sudden are geniuses in the new NFL landscape.
If Gillbride thought changing was a good idea, he'd have done it Â
prior to getting fired. That was kind of the point, he didn't adapt the offense to the times and the personnel they had. That's why it was pretty bad for 3-4 years with Plax, Shockey, Toomer and then Eli had his best years when they transitioned to guys who got more separation and were better after the catch in (Smith/Manningham/Nicks/Cruz).
I've liked what Mcadoo's offense has tried to do and certainly the results have been pretty solid as it relates to Eli, and pretty impressive when you consider the lack of talent & injuries. In any game they've protected him Eli has played well.
But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone.
I was concerned about your CBA point as well in 2011, but then we went out and won the Super Bowl. I actually think the biggest impact has been on Special Teams, where play league-wide has been fucking awful in the early part of the year.
That was year one though, when we had veterans who knew the system inside and out. I think as guys came into the league with only that short window for practice and tried to master this offense it got harder to do. We are now in year 4 of this and most of the players we have save the over 30 crowd have never had those long 2 a days in the NFL and countless hours watching film. We finally got on the right side of the ledger from a system standpoint but I still think some things need to be altered in how we operate.
TC has moved to a more cerebral approach to compensate for the time he doesn't get on the field but I think the opposite should be happening. I think the time allotted should be used to go full speed with the plays you have and get guys used to the tempo and get them trained up for the season. They need a physical tune up in practice, it should be max physical effort (not in pads that much obviously) when they have practice time. You have to teach obviously, but I'd rather see our guys going 100MPH and overwhelming opponents with that.
That's one of the big advantages college coaches now have, they are used to restrictions and know how to fine tune the players to that. It's another adjustment TC has to make. It's not a coincidence that college coaches usually flamed out when moving to the NFL, but lo and behold, new CBA, far less practice and Pete Carroll, Harbaugh, CHip Kelly all of the sudden are geniuses in the new NFL landscape.
Were a little outspoken at times about the personnel and some of the comments Reese was making.But the bad coaches,they didn't really have much to say,so once again they are back to perform there December magic shows.
I like the look and feel of McAdoo's offense better. With a poor offensive line and relative unfamiliarity this offense is putting up similar production to Gilbride's groups at their peak.
There are fewer extreme degree of difficulty throws now. Go back and look at 2011...Eli was making ridiculous H-O-R-S-E throws all year. Inch perfect fades to the back of the end zone, slants and hooks to Nicks with DBs draped all over him, Ballard in New England, the Nicks sideline throw in Dallas, Manningham TD in SF, Cruz TD in the Super Bowl, Manningham in the Super Bowl...these are ridiculous throws that often necessitated ridiculous catches in tight quarters.
We see less of that now, with the obvious exception being the Beckham catch.
Despite all of the personnel deficiencies, being without Jennings for a handful of games, losing Cruz, not having Odell until Week 5, etc.. we are middle of the pack offensively this year. Which, I think most of us would have signed up for last year.
This offense on last years team would have certainly had us better than 0-6 to start and probably in the playoff hunt later on in the year. It was the terrible, completely inept offense last year that kept us from even being a competitive football team.
We are not lighting the world on fire this year but only 4 teams scored less than we did last year. We were pitiful. This offense has been more competitive with a couple of crappy exceptions.
You can not tell me Dallas has more talent on Defense than us.
But with the right scheme they win.
A aggressive DC would have won at least three more games. Maybe more.
Aside from 2013, Gilbride's offense was one of the most consistently good offenses in the NFL.
He was a great OC for the Giants and should not have been forced into retirement.
it was not consistently good - even pre-2013 it was wildly inconsistent; there were a number of games where we put up 40+ points and other games where we got blanked or nearly blanked. the scheme ran very hot/cold.
and his red zone play calling was atrocious as demonstrated by the stats above.
If he and the system was so great, why is he unemployed?
The system was stale, dated, and unnecessary in an offense-friendly NFL. It was like pulling teeth. Meanwhile, we see receivers running free all over the league.
Here's why I hate red zone efficiency as a stat...if you are a big play gaining team, chances are many of your scores come from outside of the 20 yard line, which don't factor into any of the stats.
It was either the 2011 or 2012 season, the Jets (who also stink) were #2 in the NFL in red zone efficiency.
The Raiders (yes, the Raiders) are #1 in the NFL in red zone offense THIS season. We know they are not any good.
I don't know what to make of red zone numbers. If the Raiders and Jets can top the league in that stat, are we really suggesting they know something the Packers and Patriots (who currently are ranked lower in RZ% this year) don't?
I find that very difficult to believe. Which I why judging the Giants offense based on red zone numbers is a faulty argument. Scoring is scoring no matter where it comes from.
Aside from 2013, Gilbride's offense was one of the most consistently good offenses in the NFL.
He was a great OC for the Giants and should not have been forced into retirement.
He had the benefit of an elite offensive line for about six years, in a league heavily slanted to offense and scoring.
Let's not make him into Bill Walsh.
Eli's completion percentage is at a career high, INTs are looking very manageable, and with some better blocking, the Giants offense will be right back in the top 10 without KG.
He did not endorse keeping Coughlin or the staff. He just said he was "too close" to the situation to comment. Presumably too close to be objective or to want to make a statement.
Kinda surprising that he did not say something like "Of course, they should keep Coughlin" Or "It would be foolish to even think about firing a man who won you two Super Bowls."
I don't know what to make of red zone numbers. If the Raiders and Jets can top the league in that stat, are we really suggesting they know something the Packers and Patriots (who currently are ranked lower in RZ% this year) don't?
I find that very difficult to believe. Which I why judging the Giants offense based on red zone numbers is a faulty argument. Scoring is scoring no matter where it comes from.
Bottom line with Gilbride's offense: When it was working well, it moved crisply from 20 to 20. After that, field goal attempt.
It was not only very vertical, it was so damn complex that the players that were not great learners had a very hard time remembering their assignments, resulting in pick after pick.
Again the LOW probability 3rd and short 30 yard passes and 3rd and long draw plays were just....fvcking stupid. Gilbride was a smart play designer, but not considerate of several facets of an offense.
People bring up the successful seasons he had on offense in his defense. Well folks, those years we had great Olines, Eli Manning and good backs and/or receivers too. A guy like McAdoo would have more likely than not done better than Gilbride with those seasons.
The proof will come when the Oline is back to "average" level. I'm glad Gilbride is gone. I hope Fewell is "retired" next.
In comment 12039149 Joey in VA said:
[quote] But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone. [/quote)
This^^^^^^
It's also hurting Fewell and his complicated defensive schemes too.
Fewell's defense isn't complicated. It just sucks.
were 7 under Gilbride with countless wasted timeouts b/c the play didn't get in on time.
The Giants have only 4 this year and haven't wasted nearly as many time outs.
Not to mention, the entire NFL fan base could call out the inside handoff prior to the snap of the ball. The monotony of Gilbride's play calling had to stop.
Many defensive player have commented on how in this system things are reversed from other systems and how they have to understand who covers who or where in the zone. How many times have we heard guys say I missed my assignment.
how do you "fire the scheme" and then turn around and go on a massive free agent spending spree?
was it the coaches or the players? if they thought it was both, that's bogus imo
don't field a shit OL and then turn around and blame Gilbride when it (predictably) fails
If there was ever going to be a change, it needed to be last year. Gilbride said Manning is a QB that is going to beat you with his brain, and not his feet, and that all of the fault lay at the feet of the O-line. I agree with that, but...
I also have to put some of the fault at the complexity of the sight adjustments by every single reciever, on every single play. If guys aren't on the same page, high INT's happen.
High INT's definately a product of the system, at least a contributing factor anyways... I really wanted to see what Eli looked like in a new offense that relied on higher percentage throws and less miscommunication. We've seen both of those in the new offense. Last year was now or never. Reload for the rest of his career in the same offense, or blow it up and get it back together so he can have a closing act in a new offense.
I guess we'll see how it shakes out over the next five years.
That's what you did. You asked him to stand back there, refusing to budge on your offense despite it being clear that the offensive line couldn't protect.
Part of the reason for the offensive scheme change was because of the large number of slow developing medium and deep routes in the prior offense. The bad offensive line made that a glaring problem. Moving to an offense based on quick reads and getting the ball out quickly is designed to help mask that and keep Eli from getting killed. However, the running game gets no better.
Gillbride's offense would be fine if he had an NFL quality line the last few years. The offense itself didn't suddenly become outdated. The problem was the personnel deficiencies were more fatal with that offense.
I'm not a KG basher, but if you can't see the benefits of the new system, then you're not paying attention.
And if KG and his system was so great, why is he unemployed?
That's right, he "retired"
This offense on last years team would have certainly had us better than 0-6 to start and probably in the playoff hunt later on in the year. It was the terrible, completely inept offense last year that kept us from even being a competitive football team.
We are not lighting the world on fire this year but only 4 teams scored less than we did last year. We were pitiful. This offense has been more competitive with a couple of crappy exceptions.
If there was ever going to be a change, it needed to be last year. Gilbride said Manning is a QB that is going to beat you with his brain, and not his feet, and that all of the fault lay at the feet of the O-line. I agree with that, but...
I also have to put some of the fault at the complexity of the sight adjustments by every single reciever, on every single play. If guys aren't on the same page, high INT's happen.
High INT's definately a product of the system, at least a contributing factor anyways... I really wanted to see what Eli looked like in a new offense that relied on higher percentage throws and less miscommunication. We've seen both of those in the new offense. Last year was now or never. Reload for the rest of his career in the same offense, or blow it up and get it back together so he can have a closing act in a new offense.
I guess we'll see how it shakes out over the next five years.
Britt, spot on but don't forget Gilbride's 3rd and short 30+ yard passes. How about his 3rd and long draw plays? Drive killers.
I'm not a Gilbride basher, but he had his limitations for sure.
TTH,
If I remember correctly, we started going more 3 step after 4 games.. Somewhere between4 and 6 games. Before that we were still trying to run our 5 and 7 step passing concepts.
The system was a boom or bust system. It was either very good, or very bad. I still remember that Denver Thanksgiving game where we looked like the team hadn't play together ever.
I was tired of that.
That being said, Gilbride is both right and wrong. The offense was broken but it was broken due to a GM who failed to rebuild an aging offensive line. The template was there on how to do it as the late George Young did in the late 1980's. All Reese had to do was follow that template. No question Gilbride was a scapegoat but the move to the west coast up tempo offense had to be made because our offensive line was so bad. It was the only offense that could help out a weak line and allow Eli to not get the shit beaten out of him every week.
No question KG was a scapegoat and everyone knows here I have experience with Gilbride here in Ottawa and have never been his biggest fan. Still, you cannot deny the success he had when we had a decent offensive line and could run the ball. I know Mara is the owner and can do what he wants but I would have loved to be in the room and been involved in that discussion. I surely hope someone told him that the problem was our OL was terrible, not the system.
We had lots of injuries this year but would we be any better had Schwartz played all year? I can't see it when you have a guy like Walton at center or Jerry at the other guard position. We still need vast improvement from the offensive line in 2015 if we are going to do anything. But that still doesn't cure the problems on defense and special teams. I don't buy the last two games against lousy opponents...our D has a long, long way to go and the system there is definitely broken and the guy running it has had problems year in and year out...even when we won the Super Bowl in 2011.
I'm not a Gilbride basher, but he had his limitations for sure.
Do you have statistical proof of this?
Or are we going by the dreaded "eye test?"
Quote:
During his entire tenure, the Giants sucked in the red zone. Now they don't.
I'm not a Gilbride basher, but he had his limitations for sure.
Do you have statistical proof of this?
Or are we going by the dreaded "eye test?"
Red zone scoring stats are thankfully not that hard to find.
http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/red-zone-scoring-pct?date=2010-02-08
Touchdowns only %
2014: 62.75 Good for 7th in the NFL.
2013: 47.22
2012: 54.84
2011: 54.93
2010: 57.41
2009: 48.21
2008: 48.61
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone.
2013- #30 overall: 47.22%
2012- #13 overall: 54.84%
2011= #9 overall: 54.41%
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone.
I was concerned about your CBA point as well in 2011, but then we went out and won the Super Bowl. I actually think the biggest impact has been on Special Teams, where play league-wide has been fucking awful in the early part of the year.
2013- #30 overall: 47.22%
2012- #13 overall: 54.84%
2011= #9 overall: 54.41%
In his last two season (IIRC) McAdoo was responsible for installing their weekly red zone offense. Good to see he brought the success GB has in the red zone to NY.
Great point! I had issues with KG play calling, but you have to give him his due. The Giants had a prolific attack for most of his tenure. That said, as a responsible coordinator, if he recognized that the OL couldn't hold up he should have adjusted in order to protect his Eli. Simplifying and shortening routes, more max protect, shorter drops.
The talent is not the reason Eli is having a career year statistically and our red zone efficiency is at it's highest in Coughlin's tenure.
[quote] But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone. [/quote)
This^^^^^^
It's also hurting Fewell and his complicated defensive schemes too.
Quote:
But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone.
I was concerned about your CBA point as well in 2011, but then we went out and won the Super Bowl. I actually think the biggest impact has been on Special Teams, where play league-wide has been fucking awful in the early part of the year.
That was year one though, when we had veterans who knew the system inside and out. I think as guys came into the league with only that short window for practice and tried to master this offense it got harder to do. We are now in year 4 of this and most of the players we have save the over 30 crowd have never had those long 2 a days in the NFL and countless hours watching film. We finally got on the right side of the ledger from a system standpoint but I still think some things need to be altered in how we operate.
TC has moved to a more cerebral approach to compensate for the time he doesn't get on the field but I think the opposite should be happening. I think the time allotted should be used to go full speed with the plays you have and get guys used to the tempo and get them trained up for the season. They need a physical tune up in practice, it should be max physical effort (not in pads that much obviously) when they have practice time. You have to teach obviously, but I'd rather see our guys going 100MPH and overwhelming opponents with that.
That's one of the big advantages college coaches now have, they are used to restrictions and know how to fine tune the players to that. It's another adjustment TC has to make. It's not a coincidence that college coaches usually flamed out when moving to the NFL, but lo and behold, new CBA, far less practice and Pete Carroll, Harbaugh, CHip Kelly all of the sudden are geniuses in the new NFL landscape.
I've liked what Mcadoo's offense has tried to do and certainly the results have been pretty solid as it relates to Eli, and pretty impressive when you consider the lack of talent & injuries. In any game they've protected him Eli has played well.
He was a great OC for the Giants and should not have been forced into retirement.
Quote:
In comment 12039149 Joey in VA said:
Quote:
But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone.
I was concerned about your CBA point as well in 2011, but then we went out and won the Super Bowl. I actually think the biggest impact has been on Special Teams, where play league-wide has been fucking awful in the early part of the year.
That was year one though, when we had veterans who knew the system inside and out. I think as guys came into the league with only that short window for practice and tried to master this offense it got harder to do. We are now in year 4 of this and most of the players we have save the over 30 crowd have never had those long 2 a days in the NFL and countless hours watching film. We finally got on the right side of the ledger from a system standpoint but I still think some things need to be altered in how we operate.
TC has moved to a more cerebral approach to compensate for the time he doesn't get on the field but I think the opposite should be happening. I think the time allotted should be used to go full speed with the plays you have and get guys used to the tempo and get them trained up for the season. They need a physical tune up in practice, it should be max physical effort (not in pads that much obviously) when they have practice time. You have to teach obviously, but I'd rather see our guys going 100MPH and overwhelming opponents with that.
That's one of the big advantages college coaches now have, they are used to restrictions and know how to fine tune the players to that. It's another adjustment TC has to make. It's not a coincidence that college coaches usually flamed out when moving to the NFL, but lo and behold, new CBA, far less practice and Pete Carroll, Harbaugh, CHip Kelly all of the sudden are geniuses in the new NFL landscape.
Good point. Thanks.
NFL Team Red Zone Scoring Percentage (TD only)
2007 super bowl year
54.93%
2010
57.41%
2011 super bowl year
54.93%
2012
54.84%
2013
47.22%
2014
62.75%
this is first year of offense and it has a much higher percentage of red zone success than any year of KG offense including the two super bowl years
There are fewer extreme degree of difficulty throws now. Go back and look at 2011...Eli was making ridiculous H-O-R-S-E throws all year. Inch perfect fades to the back of the end zone, slants and hooks to Nicks with DBs draped all over him, Ballard in New England, the Nicks sideline throw in Dallas, Manningham TD in SF, Cruz TD in the Super Bowl, Manningham in the Super Bowl...these are ridiculous throws that often necessitated ridiculous catches in tight quarters.
We see less of that now, with the obvious exception being the Beckham catch.
This offense on last years team would have certainly had us better than 0-6 to start and probably in the playoff hunt later on in the year. It was the terrible, completely inept offense last year that kept us from even being a competitive football team.
We are not lighting the world on fire this year but only 4 teams scored less than we did last year. We were pitiful. This offense has been more competitive with a couple of crappy exceptions.
The line was far worse last year than this year.
But with the right scheme they win.
A aggressive DC would have won at least three more games. Maybe more.
He was a great OC for the Giants and should not have been forced into retirement.
it was not consistently good - even pre-2013 it was wildly inconsistent; there were a number of games where we put up 40+ points and other games where we got blanked or nearly blanked. the scheme ran very hot/cold.
and his red zone play calling was atrocious as demonstrated by the stats above.
If he and the system was so great, why is he unemployed?
The system was stale, dated, and unnecessary in an offense-friendly NFL. It was like pulling teeth. Meanwhile, we see receivers running free all over the league.
2013- #30 overall: 47.22%
2012- #13 overall: 54.84%
2011= #9 overall: 54.41%
Here's why I hate red zone efficiency as a stat...if you are a big play gaining team, chances are many of your scores come from outside of the 20 yard line, which don't factor into any of the stats.
It was either the 2011 or 2012 season, the Jets (who also stink) were #2 in the NFL in red zone efficiency.
The Raiders (yes, the Raiders) are #1 in the NFL in red zone offense THIS season. We know they are not any good.
I don't know what to make of red zone numbers. If the Raiders and Jets can top the league in that stat, are we really suggesting they know something the Packers and Patriots (who currently are ranked lower in RZ% this year) don't?
I find that very difficult to believe. Which I why judging the Giants offense based on red zone numbers is a faulty argument. Scoring is scoring no matter where it comes from.
He was a great OC for the Giants and should not have been forced into retirement.
He had the benefit of an elite offensive line for about six years, in a league heavily slanted to offense and scoring.
Let's not make him into Bill Walsh.
Eli's completion percentage is at a career high, INTs are looking very manageable, and with some better blocking, the Giants offense will be right back in the top 10 without KG.
Kinda surprising that he did not say something like "Of course, they should keep Coughlin" Or "It would be foolish to even think about firing a man who won you two Super Bowls."
I don't know what to make of red zone numbers. If the Raiders and Jets can top the league in that stat, are we really suggesting they know something the Packers and Patriots (who currently are ranked lower in RZ% this year) don't?
I find that very difficult to believe. Which I why judging the Giants offense based on red zone numbers is a faulty argument. Scoring is scoring no matter where it comes from.
Bottom line with Gilbride's offense: When it was working well, it moved crisply from 20 to 20. After that, field goal attempt.
It was not only very vertical, it was so damn complex that the players that were not great learners had a very hard time remembering their assignments, resulting in pick after pick.
Again the LOW probability 3rd and short 30 yard passes and 3rd and long draw plays were just....fvcking stupid. Gilbride was a smart play designer, but not considerate of several facets of an offense.
People bring up the successful seasons he had on offense in his defense. Well folks, those years we had great Olines, Eli Manning and good backs and/or receivers too. A guy like McAdoo would have more likely than not done better than Gilbride with those seasons.
The proof will come when the Oline is back to "average" level. I'm glad Gilbride is gone. I hope Fewell is "retired" next.
[quote] But it was an offense that would simply not work without longer routes and better protection. The ball didn't come out quickly as a rule and the dimwit WRs we had were all sad with the sight adjustments.
I still think the CBA shortening practice time was one of the things that doomed this offense and Gilbride. His route adjustments and offense were complex and took a lot of time to learn and with the enormous amount of time removed from training camp and practices you just don't have the luxury of that time. It's a newer game, it's a simpler game and this change had to happen because of that alone. [/quote)
This^^^^^^
It's also hurting Fewell and his complicated defensive schemes too.
Fewell's defense isn't complicated. It just sucks.
The Giants have only 4 this year and haven't wasted nearly as many time outs.
Not to mention, the entire NFL fan base could call out the inside handoff prior to the snap of the ball. The monotony of Gilbride's play calling had to stop.