that was just as dominant (if not more) than the Ravens defense at it's best. Watching the greatest Defensive Player ever have his best season.
That defense was so good, it was a shock when other teams made a first down. Where QB's were getting ko'ed on almost a weekly basis. It was brutal, smashmouth football, especially in the NFC East.
The offense was Joe Morris off tackle, and a seam pass to Bavaro.
I loved the playoff run in 2007, but there's no comparison for the whole season. We were the best team in 1986. The only thing that might have topped it was if the 2008 team finished the deal.
You definitely missed out, but for me, 2007-2008 was the best run. That is definitely my favorite SB win, although I know many of my fellow old timers disagree. I expected them to beat Denver, but I didn't think they had more than a 20% chance of beating NE. I wish my father had lived another 8 months to see it.
He wasn't loved until late, that's for sure. The emergence of the suburbanites featuring Brad Benson's cut nose matched the intensity of Rambo/Bavaro and the momentum grew after the Minny game.
After so many awful teams, just unbelievable. Loved defense in those days and our 3-4 was so fun. After watching so much success for the Steelers, Cowboys and others, we finally got our first one. Pure elation.
My office was near DFW. I would drive to the airport to get NY papers to get some Giants news. There was also a newsletter, forget the name now. It was typed and copied.
You just knew that they'd win--all season long. After growing up as a fan during the dark ages, it was just unimaginable.
BUT, nothing will beat that '07 run for me. The surprise of it all. In fact, it was the opposite of '86; each win was a "I'll be damned" kind of thing.
Oddly enough, I divorced my first wife in 2006 and married my second wife in early '07, just after SB 42.
When we went to get my second wife's Green Card in late February 2009, the adjudicator had a signed photo of Brandon Jacobs on his desk. My wife gets all excited and starts talking about the Super Bowl and I am convinced her enthusiasm for the Giants proved our marriage was legit and prompted the adjudicator to stamp my wife's passport on the spot.
The New York Football Giants: my team.
The Giants weren't dominant much of the '86 season. Â
It wasn't a Bears-'85 romp through the season. There was a lot of concern about the offense, which sputtered a lot. Remember, they started with a loss to Dallas, and then they seemed to be scuffling. But they kept on winning and winning.
Then things really went to another level with the famous Minnesota 4th-and-17 play.
By the time the playoffs came we expected them to win, but it was the Giants, so nobody took anything for granted. On the whole, that season was incredibly satisfying, but it wasn't obvious how good that team was until late, and the playoff run.
It was very different from the Tom Coughlin championship runs. The '07 and '11 teams weren't that great in the regular season, but the '86 team won the division with a great record. The '07 miracle playoff & Super Bowl run was like nothing else I've ever experienced as a Giants fan, but the '86 season was more satisfying end-to-end.
I wouldn't mind having that feeling again.
At the time, I thought the '85 Giants team was better (They gave the Bears more of a fight in the playoffs than anyone else, remember, and who knows what might have happened if Landeta hadn't whiffed on that punt.) but in retrospect, I don't think I can justify that opinion.
Oddly enough, I divorced my first wife in 2006 and married my second wife in early '07, just after SB 42.
When we went to get my second wife's Green Card in late February 2009, the adjudicator had a signed photo of Brandon Jacobs on his desk. My wife gets all excited and starts talking about the Super Bowl and I am convinced her enthusiasm for the Giants proved our marriage was legit and prompted the adjudicator to stamp my wife's passport on the spot.
Season as I was 7 when we won, the '90 and '07 seasons were far more fun to watch for nothing else than the sheer drama. The '86 Giants were absolutely the coast best team.
'90's drama was easily the best (and in my opinion the better team) and '07's was fucking spectacular. I might have a different perspective if I had been around for the terrible teams prior to '85, but 86 was just the best team winning
i bet you 75% of the people here and other amonger Giant fans prob say eli maning sucked because before his 2007 playoff run i think he sucked in 2007 regular season too hahaha 5 interceptions vs minnsesota??
Right? The funny thing is, I had planned on being a life-long bachelor. I had always had too much fun bouncing around from woman to woman. When someone would ask me, "When are you going to get married?" My stock reply was, "When the Giants win the Super Bowl." As a fan since '63 (seven years old) I figured it would never happen.
Next thing I know...
When was the last time the Giants were the best team? Â
We were10-0 in 1990, and then lost to the 49ers in SF. Simms got hurt and we finished 3-2. I guess we weren't the best team in the NFL going into the playoffs, but for much of the season we were pretty awesome.
1986 was amazing to witness. We'd been okay '84 and pretty good in '85, but I certainly didn't expect to dominate teams defensively the way we did in '86. The funny thing is that the offense was actually pretty mediocre for much of the season: we won consistently, but we didn't exactly blow people out. Then came the playoffs.
For me, though, 2007 was much more satisfying. Beating Dallas in the playoffs would've been enough to make me happy, but then beating GB in an historic Championship game and then handing NE their only loss of the year (and in convincing fashion, IMO) made it truly a dream season.
Into 63 Giants were a upper echelon team. Then 64 to 80 happened. An era where meaningful games pretty much ended by mid Oct. An era when you would see shows o tv about great teams and games of that era and not even be able to imagine the Giants on such a show. An era where season after season you felt like they had no chance against the powers of the league.
Then came 81 and LT a playoff team a play off win. Then came Parcells and 86. Unlike some here the scars of 18 years of lousy football did not allow me to be confident the Gants would win the Super Bowl.
They trailed at half, I wasn t surprised I was use to losing. They dominated the second half, they won, my best moment as a Giants fan, 07 close behind.
In retrospect I see how great that team was But the Super Bowl unto they won, seemed too good to really happen for a Giants fan.
just after I turned 18 and moved in with my dad, a huge Giants fan. We spent the season driving on Sundays down to Pawtucket RI to the Holiday Inn just over the MA RI border to be able to watch games that weren't on TV in Boston. We were in heaven all season.
We still talk about that season and playoffs to this day. Such a great team all around. Loved the smashmouth style of the offence and that punishing D that killed QB's all season.
Such great memories!!
That team was epic! I was 26 years old and I remember being so Â
hyped pretty much all season after our game 1 loss to Dallas. I remember 4th and 17 vs. Minnesota. Simms could basically do no wrong and Morris was a beast behind that killer OL. Lawrence Taylor was pretty much unstoppable and the D had such a great swagger led by Jim Burt's "wild wild west" walk and crazed smile.
I remember they rushed out a video similar to the Bears 85 Super Bowl Shuffle that I still watch to this day for its campiness....."We are the New York Giants, Don't you know we're Great!....." Mark Collins, Andy Headen, Herb Welsh, etc in coats because it was freezing.
This team became a steamroller at the end of the season and carried it right through the playoffs. It was an amazing time and the sky was the limit for 87 and beyond.....but the strike took the wind out of their sails a bit.
to be a Met's and Giant's fan. Sandwiched between the Mets World Championship and the first Giants Superbowl win, I got married. The ONLY thing that could have made it better would have been the trifecta... the Rangers winning the Cup (unfortunately, that won't happen again in my lifetime).
No Giants fan I know could really believe it until it was all over.
As you can tell from my handle, I preferred '90, because the NFC Championship and the SB25 were the two best "games" in that they played their hearts out, got a few devine breaks to win a championship that could have just as easily gone to either of the other two very good teams.
42 was even more improbable, but it still seems like a fairy tale, and truth be told, we weren't really that good. And 46 was similar, less the David vs Goliath drama.
and this season was discussed at length last night during "A Football Life: Bill Parcells".
One of the things I found totally amazing was that during the fourth game of the season against New Orleans, Mark Bavaro had is jaw broken in the first half. He had it wired shut during in halftime, and as the second half is about to begin he taps Parcells on the shoulder and indicates he ready to go back in. Parcells said he never missed a down during the season.
RE: The Giants weren't dominant much of the '86 season. Â
(1)t wasn't a Bears-'85 romp through the season. There was a lot of concern about the offense, which sputtered a lot. Remember, they started with a loss to Dallas, and then they seemed to be scuffling. But they kept on winning and winning.
(2)At the time, I thought the '85 Giants team was better (They gave the Bears more of a fight in the playoffs than anyone else, remember, and who knows what might have happened if Landeta hadn't whiffed on that punt.) but in retrospect, I don't think I can justify that opinion.
I'm a bit surprised many don't recall the team's struggles offensively for the better part of 86.
1. Well, against Dallas the 85 showed up. A really good team which made mistakes, took the lead and then lost it late. They blew the lead so often in 85 and in 86 they blew the lead to Dallas opening night, allowed Washington to come back, messed up in Seattle, likely should have lost the 2nd Dallas game and came close to giving up a 90+ yards to Hershal Walker late and blew the lead in Minny. There were a lot of wins but a lot more frustration until the end of the Minny game when it changed.
(2) Yeah, Landeta's muff gets the attention (rightfully so) but Rob Carpenter's fumble was equally as devestating IMO. The Giants offense was moving.
It wasn't a Bears-'85 romp through the season. There was a lot of concern about the offense, which sputtered a lot. Remember, they started with a loss to Dallas, and then they seemed to be scuffling. But they kept on winning and winning.
Then things really went to another level with the famous Minnesota 4th-and-17 play.
By the time the playoffs came we expected them to win, but it was the Giants, so nobody took anything for granted. On the whole, that season was incredibly satisfying, but it wasn't obvious how good that team was until late, and the playoff run.
It was very different from the Tom Coughlin championship runs. The '07 and '11 teams weren't that great in the regular season, but the '86 team won the division with a great record. The '07 miracle playoff & Super Bowl run was like nothing else I've ever experienced as a Giants fan, but the '86 season was more satisfying end-to-end.
I wouldn't mind having that feeling again.
At the time, I thought the '85 Giants team was better (They gave the Bears more of a fight in the playoffs than anyone else, remember, and who knows what might have happened if Landeta hadn't whiffed on that punt.) but in retrospect, I don't think I can justify that opinion.
Dane, I remember the 85 - Bears/Giants playoff vividly. The Giants-D held its own that day, but the Giants-O was completely dominated by the Bears-D, as the Bears front 7 destroyed the Giants. The Landeta whiff didn't change the outcome of that game.
after the seattle loss, you could see they never wanted that feeling the rest of the way. Got stronger and stronger and more dominate.
culminating in one of the most fav things of experiencing in my lifetime being there, the "paper blizzard" championship game and SB XXI. The winning first SB Championship can never be relived again. granted the other 3 were close, but can top the feeling of first one.
RE: RE: The Giants weren't dominant much of the '86 season. Â
It wasn't a Bears-'85 romp through the season. There was a lot of concern about the offense, which sputtered a lot. Remember, they started with a loss to Dallas, and then they seemed to be scuffling. But they kept on winning and winning.
Then things really went to another level with the famous Minnesota 4th-and-17 play.
By the time the playoffs came we expected them to win, but it was the Giants, so nobody took anything for granted. On the whole, that season was incredibly satisfying, but it wasn't obvious how good that team was until late, and the playoff run.
It was very different from the Tom Coughlin championship runs. The '07 and '11 teams weren't that great in the regular season, but the '86 team won the division with a great record. The '07 miracle playoff & Super Bowl run was like nothing else I've ever experienced as a Giants fan, but the '86 season was more satisfying end-to-end.
I wouldn't mind having that feeling again.
At the time, I thought the '85 Giants team was better (They gave the Bears more of a fight in the playoffs than anyone else, remember, and who knows what might have happened if Landeta hadn't whiffed on that punt.) but in retrospect, I don't think I can justify that opinion.
Dane, I remember the 85 - Bears/Giants playoff vividly. The Giants-D held its own that day, but the Giants-O was completely dominated by the Bears-D, as the Bears front 7 destroyed the Giants. The Landeta whiff didn't change the outcome of that game.
How can you say we weren't dominate? We lost game 1 and game 7 and won the next 12. We won our last three games by 10 points (on the road to a 12-2 team), 20 points and 31 points. Including the playoffs, 7 of 19 opponents scored less than 10 points against us. Sure there were some games where the score was close but mostly because Parcells kept a lid on the offense because he knew the defense would hold in crunch time.
LOL, yes it was.
I echo many of the comments above (AP Halfmoon, JohnF): after so many years trundling at the bottom, and the slow climb back to respectability, first under Ray Perkins, then the Tuna, but the smackdown in the playoffs the year before, '86 was such joy, vindication, sighs of satisfaction, and watching that D just manhandle the opponents.
Glorious!
LT dominated that season like no other defensive player I've ever seen Â
head down and play through everything, he became a fan favorite. He had a few years of "growing up". The 1986 season started rough for him, and in previous seasons he might have crumbled and whimpered, but he kept pushing through and turned it around in a big way.
How can you say we weren't dominate? We lost game 1 and game 7 and won the next 12. We won our last three games by 10 points (on the road to a 12-2 team), 20 points and 31 points. Including the playoffs, 7 of 19 opponents scored less than 10 points against us. Sure there were some games where the score was close but mostly because Parcells kept a lid on the offense because he knew the defense would hold in crunch time.
I think the D was dominant all year, putting us in a position to win many close games. The last month, and the playoffs, the offense kicked in and thats when he started killing teams. Counting the last week of the season, I think we had an average score of something like 40-11 the rest of the way.
by mid to late November, thanks to some very gutty come from behind wins and a damn good record, the signs were there that this team was special or destined for greatness. By late December there was ample evidence that this team would destroy every team in its path. And they did just that.
interestingly enough the 90 team really dominated through the first 10 games of that season. Don't let anyone fool you with words like methodical or boring or run run pass. That team killed just about everyone on their way to a 10-0 record. Then sort of hung on for dear life the rest of the way but keep in mind the schedule got a lot tougher and the Giants lost their starting QB. Hoss was more than ready but the Giants offense changed when Hoss took over. They took less deep shots than earlier in the year. Contrary to myth, the Giants offense in 90 was pretty damn explosive early on. They went deep often.
86 team was more of a work in progress early on. The D and running game carried that team early. Once they got their sea legs they completely skull fucked everyone in their path.
86 started slower but finished in dominant fashion where as 90 started off in dominant fashion, slowed down a bit in December and saved the dramatics for NFC title game and Supe 21.
head down and play through everything, he became a fan favorite. He had a few years of "growing up". The 1986 season started rough for him, and in previous seasons he might have crumbled and whimpered, but he kept pushing through and turned it around in a big way.
Yeah, Simms should have sucked it up when his thumb broke in half and ended up sticking out of the skin.
to games since I was 10. I sat through some of the worst football games imaginable. Watching this team build up to the '86 season was amazing. My brother and I could not wait until Sunday each week. The term "long suffering fan" was an understatement. Even waiting for our flight to LA from Newark for the SB was a chore. There was a blizzard the night before and all the flights were cancelled. The terminal was full of Giants fans sleeping on the floor or where ever we could find a spot. They actually opened the private lounges for us. Eventually the PA system can and an airline executive came on saying "don't worry we will get you there". Soon thereafter a 747 was taxied to the gate. They took everyone as long as you had a ticket regardless of the flight or even the airline. Seating was open so you basically got on board and sat wherever there was an empty seat. Kind of sums up what the typical Giant fan endured for our team back then. It was finally worth the wait.
RE: When Simms decided to stop whining like a little bitch, and put his Â
head down and play through everything, he became a fan favorite. He had a few years of "growing up". The 1986 season started rough for him, and in previous seasons he might have crumbled and whimpered, but he kept pushing through and turned it around in a big way.
Lastly, Simms didnt miss a game in 84, 85 or 86. He git hurt early on in legit fashion. I don't remember Simms whining other than the time Parcells benched him for Scott Brunner. And I don't even think Simms went to the media. He told Parcells to trade him.
Fans were lost then and still lost now.
went to my first regular season game in 86 against Philly Â
then managed to sneak into a game or two later on. I remember getting into the Packers game last game of the year. Fans were chanting we want the Bears.
Oh wait, I must be wrong I was told the Giant fans were terrified of Doug Flutie and the NFC's crappiest offensive team.
haha....you and I have been fighting that fight for a long time djm Â
The Giants would have smoked the Bears had they gotten past the Redskins. The Skins were the better team that season anyway.
Joe Montana managed to hang three whole points on the Giants in the Meadowlands in January 1987 but sure, Doug Flutie would have led the Bears to victory. What a joke.
RE: When Simms decided to stop whining like a little bitch, and put his Â
head down and play through everything, he became a fan favorite. He had a few years of "growing up". The 1986 season started rough for him, and in previous seasons he might have crumbled and whimpered, but he kept pushing through and turned it around in a big way.
This might be the single stupidest piece of shit post ever entered here. You're an idiot.
Was he a "whiny bitch" when his shoulder was separated in 1980 and 1981, when he was high-lowed by Klecko and Gastineau in preseason of 1982 and destroyed his knee, or when he shattered his thumb on Clyde Simmons helmet in 1983 and the bone was sticking out? All because they had a shit offensive line that couldn't protect him?
He demanded a trade over the stupid Parcells decision to start Brunner in private, kept his mouth shut publicly.
that we ever had. Sorry to the younger guys here. That 86 team was the best defense hands down. We had a dominant running game and an adequate passing game. Special teams were awesome too. Our starters played on specials. Plus, our depth was incredible and partially due to the fact that the free agency rules were different then and we had backups on the team who could easily start on other teams.
How dominant were we? Just go to youtube and search 1986 giants. Watch any regular season game.
BTW, the other division rivals were awesome too. The Eagles and SKins were really good. In fact, during that Era the NFC in general was so dominant. Just look at the string of superbowls won by the NFC back then.
5-10-1, Giants beat them 35-3 at home and 17-14 at the Vet in a game that wasn't as close as the score makes it seem. The Giants were up 17-0 going into the 4th quarter and the Eagles scored on a fluky 75 yard TD pass when whoever was covering Mike Quick fell, then added a late garbage time TD.
just look at the record that year and then the postseason scoring differential.
There were more dramatic moments than 86 but as far as dominance is concerned, 86 in a landslide.
07 was just ridiculous. Not only the run but fans had to wait a long time in between 90 and 07 so there was that aspect to it as well. 07 was a like a Hollywood movie. Beating Dallas along the way was the cherry on top. My God the packers NFC title game in tundra conditions is almost forgotten that's how insanely dramatic that run was. But with that said, 90 is still my proudest NYG run ever. One phrase says it all --"THERE WILL BE NO THREEPEAT."
2011 is almost boring when stacked up to the other three. Think about that for a second. 2011 was as glorious and exciting as one could hope for and it pales in comparison to 90 and 07 in terms of dramatics.
We are fucking blessed. Even the last 3-4 years. I said it the night they won super bowl 46 we can't say a fucking word for a long long time. Fans still do...but not me. The Giants (Coughlin-Reese) owe us nothing.
Points For: 371 (23.2/g) 8th of 28
Points Against: 236 (14.8/g) 2nd of 28
1990:
Points For: 335 (20.9/g) 15th of 28
Points Against: 211 (13.2/g) 1st of 28
Taylor was more dominant in 86 yet the Giants Secondary in 1990 was light years ahead of the 86 team.
Yup. 90 D was different but in some ways better. hard to say anyone was better than that 86 D but I trust that D more than any NYG unit I ever saw. I love that 90 team like no other. Guts in spades.
So aggressive, with that killer pass rush and peak LT. The 1990 defense was like a python that slowly, calmly, strangled the life out of opponents. They didn't have the pass rush 1986 did, but as you mentioned, they didn't need to because their secondary was much better. Every single DB position was upgraded from 1986 - Patterson to Collins, Williams to Walls, Williams and Thompson as the nickel and dime CBs, Hill to Jackson, and Kinard/Welch to Guyton, plus Duerson as safety depth.
You could throw on the 1986 defense a bit, although your QB would pay the price - 3400 passing yards allowed. The 1990 defense only gave up 2700.
How can you say we weren't dominate? We lost game 1 and game 7 and won the next 12. We won our last three games by 10 points (on the road to a 12-2 team), 20 points and 31 points. Including the playoffs, 7 of 19 opponents scored less than 10 points against us. Sure there were some games where the score was close but mostly because Parcells kept a lid on the offense because he knew the defense would hold in crunch time.
At the time, they didn't seem to be dominating. They weren't blowing teams out. The D was incredible but the O was having problems. As you note, they lost games 1 and 7. That meant they were 5-2. There was a lot of hand-wringing. At that point, it wasn't obvious that they were the best team in the league, or the conference, or even in the division.
But after that, they just won and won and won. By about the last quarter of the season every Giants fan could tell something special was happening.
IIRC the big worry was playing the Bears in the playoffs, but the Bears lost in an upset, and that was that. Washington was good but the Giants had their number. And then the Broncos led at halftime, somehow, but I don't remember being very worried about that. The Giants were superb at halftime adjustments, you could just sort of tell that Denver had hit them with their best shot and barely had a lead, and that the second half would be New York's time.
actually I remember LT being really worried about playing Â
...because the 70's were so, so terrible and because of the sweet buildup - from drafting LT, to getting Rob Carpenter and building the 86' team piece by piece.
The culmination of the first half of the 80's built up through that season - each week, the Giants surprising themselves and their fans, rarely losing - NEVER giving up 100 yards rushing, by seasons end a monster was born and oh were Green Bay and the Cardinals unfortunate to hit us the last 2 weeks of the season.
COMPLETELY flattened those 2 teams - the greatest Giants team of all time was running on all cylinders - a juggernaut...
I got to go to that SuperBowl - 21 and BROKE, beg, borrowed to scrape together enough to be at that - the biggest of shows, and oh did they deliver.
That depends on whether you're a baby boomer, or a millennial.
For the baby boomers, a long suffering bunch, that first
SB win was extra special. If you're a millennial, you might
feel differently!
RE: RE: When Simms decided to stop whining like a little bitch, and put his Â
head down and play through everything, he became a fan favorite. He had a few years of "growing up". The 1986 season started rough for him, and in previous seasons he might have crumbled and whimpered, but he kept pushing through and turned it around in a big way.
Lastly, Simms didnt miss a game in 84, 85 or 86. He git hurt early on in legit fashion. I don't remember Simms whining other than the time Parcells benched him for Scott Brunner. And I don't even think Simms went to the media. He told Parcells to trade him.
Fans were lost then and still lost now.
Look, the 1986 team is my favorite team. This was the only team that I really felt they were dominant and should win, and that SB was more thrilling to me than all the others. The other SB's we were always the underdog, and never given much of a chance. However lets not sugar coat the Simms thing. He was a 1st rd pick who, after 5 yrs in the league, more than 1/2 of the fanbase thought was a bust. He was a china doll (hurt all the time), lost his starting role for a while, and asked to be traded. Now you can rationalize all you want, but he was not highly thought of up to 1985. I say this as a Simms fan, who I think is the 2nd best QB the Giants have ever had (I never saw YA).
By the start of the '86 season, there was no doubt Simms was a very, very good QB. They became a top team during the '84 season and were improved in '85. Much was expected of them in '86 and they delivered. They only lost 2 games, the opener vs Dallas (over confidence) and at Seattle, no shame there. They had almost NO injuries all year. As for the close games and the great plays that saved games, that's what great teams do, they find ways to win. As for stats, who cares? Their game was ball control to eat up the clock and keep the defense fresh. They dominated the playoffs and came back for a dominating super bowl win. The next year, they lost their first 2 games before the strike, lost 3 replacement games because George Young and the Mara's waited until the last minute to put together a scab team. Starting out 0-5, they never recovered.
The 2007 team started out with injuries and a very terrible Eli Manning at QB. Towards the end of the season, players came back from injuries and the team was very healthy. Rookies started to contribute and Manning got good. Don't forget, he threw 4 int's vs Minnesota in late November. We didn't know the team we were watching in the playoffs. They suddenly had a great QB and rookies making their way into the lineup. The Dec-Jan Giants were a much different team than the Sept-Nov Giants. The next year they showed their playoff run wasn't a fluke until Pierce and Buress were lost.
Eli manning was never terrible or very terrible or anything close to terrible. He was a winning, strong armed but still flawed young QB. Most young qbs struggle at times. Eli did too but he also won games and played well.
Most of the media had the Giants buried. How could they come back after that devastating loss. We didn't lose again till Seattle game in the Kingdump. Simms was horrible that game. After that game the Team took it too another level and cruised until the first half of the Super Bowl.
In the Second half McConkey with the towel running on the field you knew the Giants were going to win. They clobbered Denver and Elway in the second half.
Eli manning was never terrible or very terrible or anything close to terrible. He was a winning, strong armed but still flawed young QB. Most young qbs struggle at times. Eli did too but he also won games and played well.
He threw a lot of int's before that streach. Much was also written about how he was so much better after Shockey went down.
Senior year of high school and went to the Eagles and Packers game. It's hard to fathom how dominant LT was unless you saw him in person. Against the Eagles he was unstoppable.
it was the culmination of the steady growth provided by George Young's drafting starting with Simms in 1979.
And because that steady growth was itself a culmination of the horrid years that led to the explosion in 1978 and the hiring of George Young.
So - 1986 was more than just a season. It was years of waiting - followed by steady great drafting by George Young (with no free agency) and the building of a truly dominating force on defense and an overall great team. I KNEW the Giants were winning in 1986 ten seconds after they lost to the Bears in 1985. Anyone who followed the steady buildup from 1979 knew the team was becoming stronger and stronger year after year. 1979 through 1986 - the most fantastic stretch of years in my lifetime all because of George Young and the Giants.
Two totally different situations. One all-time dominant season where in the end opponents were crushed without mercy, and a season straight out of a Hollywood movie with bigger and bigger insane upsets up until the defeat of what would have been the undisputed greatest NFL team of all time off of a miracle play in the most clutch drive in NFL History.
I like having them both and their reduxes of '90 and '11.
The defense was just flat mean and we could
run the rock anytime we needed to not to mention we had
a number of deamons on special teams ...
I watched Paul Horning destroy us early 60's and to finally
get to the big game with Simms and LT it was like none other
etched in the mind forever .
Eli manning was never terrible or very terrible or anything close to terrible. He was a winning, strong armed but still flawed young QB. Most young qbs struggle at times. Eli did too but he also won games and played well.
He threw a lot of int's before that streach. Much was also written about how he was so much better after Shockey went down.
Right, but he was far from terrible. We've all seen terrible. 2005-2006 Eli ain't it. Not even close.
86' was magical. My girlfriends father was a Jets fan and it was my senior year of High School. I lived in Southern Jersey. I knew more Eagle, Jets and Cowboy fans than Giants fans. My older sisters' boyfriend was a Niners fan who was miserable to me. My bus rides were hell for years because the Giants were bad for so long. I am from a large extended Italian family, and when they find a soft spot they bust balls like it is their fucking job and they are the best at it. My balls were busted for years and then......1986. Once they got in a groove at the end of the season, I knew they were going to win it all. I won bets with everyone I knew. It was the best year of my life. I busted EVERONES balls unmercifully, the apprentice surpassed the masters.
86' was magical. My girlfriends father was a Jets fan and it was my senior year of High School. I lived in Southern Jersey. I knew more Eagle, Jets and Cowboy fans than Giants fans. My older sisters' boyfriend was a Niners fan who was miserable to me. My bus rides were hell for years because the Giants were bad for so long. I am from a large extended Italian family, and when they find a soft spot they bust balls like it is their fucking job and they are the best at it. My balls were busted for years and then......1986. Once they got in a groove at the end of the season, I knew they were going to win it all. I won bets with everyone I knew. It was the best year of my life. I busted EVERONES balls unmercifully, the apprentice surpassed the masters.
Hey I know you! There was a documentary made about your life where Joe Pesci played you and Marissa Tomei played your GF: "My Cousin Vinny", right?
"the offense struggling" early on or through much of the season, I have this to say about that '86 team.
And all you young 'uns who have bitched and continue to bitch about Kevin Gilbride's offense incorporated into TC's insistence on run/pass balance, please take note.
Bill Parcels' run on 1st and 2nd down no matter what Woody Hayes memorial philosophy and Ron Earhardt's offense was brutal. To hold back a QB like Phil Simms in his prime was almost tragic stupidity - except that it ended with Simms' 22/25 3 TD Superbowl.
G-d I cringed watching that offense of Earhardt's and Parcels'. Talk about predictable!!!
Gilbride's was an offensive genius like General Patton in comparison to those clowns dictating the '86 offense.
"the offense struggling" early on or through much of the season, I have this to say about that '86 team.
And all you young 'uns who have bitched and continue to bitch about Kevin Gilbride's offense incorporated into TC's insistence on run/pass balance, please take note.
Bill Parcels' run on 1st and 2nd down no matter what Woody Hayes memorial philosophy and Ron Earhardt's offense was brutal. To hold back a QB like Phil Simms in his prime was almost tragic stupidity - except that it ended with Simms' 22/25 3 TD Superbowl.
G-d I cringed watching that offense of Earhardt's and Parcels'. Talk about predictable!!!
Gilbride's was an offensive genius like General Patton in comparison to those clowns dictating the '86 offense.
Whaaaat?? Do you recall that their best WR was Lionel Manuel, and that he didn't play from Week 5 until the playoffs? Who would you suggest he throw to? Earhardt a clown? Really? They were a running team with little talent at WR and a stud at TE in Bavaro. He ran the offense exactly as he should have, and exactly as Parcells wanted. And by the way, that clown's offense set the league record in '78 with NE 3,165 yards on the ground, and in '77 as Off Co his offense set the NFL single season scoring record that still stands with 589.
86' was magical. My girlfriends father was a Jets fan and it was my senior year of High School. I lived in Southern Jersey. I knew more Eagle, Jets and Cowboy fans than Giants fans. My older sisters' boyfriend was a Niners fan who was miserable to me. My bus rides were hell for years because the Giants were bad for so long. I am from a large extended Italian family, and when they find a soft spot they bust balls like it is their fucking job and they are the best at it. My balls were busted for years and then......1986. Once they got in a groove at the end of the season, I knew they were going to win it all. I won bets with everyone I knew. It was the best year of my life. I busted EVERONES balls unmercifully, the apprentice surpassed the masters.
Hey I know you! There was a documentary made about your life where Joe Pesci played you and Marissa Tomei played your GF: "My Cousin Vinny", right?
Every italian cliche' in movies could describe my family. People came neighboring states when my grandmother cooked certain meals. I used get up early on Saturday mornings to help her start preparing for Sunday meals. I have made dough, made frsh pasta with her. If I told you my name and you googled it, there are some scary people that I never new were scary. Is what it is. You had to yell if you wanted to heard at those dinners....Fellow Italians from NJ back me up, we are all like that. The ball busting is an art form.
That depends on whether you're a baby boomer, or a millennial.
For the baby boomers, a long suffering bunch, that first
SB win was extra special. If you're a millennial, you might
feel differently!
I'm 51 - 86' was a better SEASON.
07' season sucked. It really did. So did 2011.
The highs of the 07 and 11 playoffs are unparalleled though - 2007, I'd say is arguably the most exciting playoff run in history.
Honestly, since then, football hasn't held the same level of excitement for me. Once you've had the best something has to offer, what's left?
named Chris Chase. He ranks the '86 Giants as the 17th best SB team ever, yet the '84 Niners 2nd and the '89 Niners 4th. Which is kinda funny because I recall that more than a few of those players on either the '84 or '89 Niners were, you know, members of the '86 Niners that the Giants demolished 49-3 in one of the most lopsided playoff games in history...
"the offense struggling" early on or through much of the season, I have this to say about that '86 team.
And all you young 'uns who have bitched and continue to bitch about Kevin Gilbride's offense incorporated into TC's insistence on run/pass balance, please take note.
Bill Parcels' run on 1st and 2nd down no matter what Woody Hayes memorial philosophy and Ron Earhardt's offense was brutal. To hold back a QB like Phil Simms in his prime was almost tragic stupidity - except that it ended with Simms' 22/25 3 TD Superbowl.
G-d I cringed watching that offense of Earhardt's and Parcels'. Talk about predictable!!!
Gilbride's was an offensive genius like General Patton in comparison to those clowns dictating the '86 offense.
Whaaaat?? Do you recall that their best WR was Lionel Manuel, and that he didn't play from Week 5 until the playoffs? Who would you suggest he throw to? Earhardt a clown? Really? They were a running team with little talent at WR and a stud at TE in Bavaro. He ran the offense exactly as he should have, and exactly as Parcells wanted. And by the way, that clown's offense set the league record in '78 with NE 3,165 yards on the ground, and in '77 as Off Co his offense set the NFL single season scoring record that still stands with 589.
Some clown.
So in 77 and 78 Earhardt coached great offenses, what does that have to do with 1986 and how he ran that team under the direction of Bill Parcells?
Short on talent at WR, surely, so fucking play 2 TEs more you had Zeke Mowatt, possibly a top 10 TE in the league as your 2nd TE.
Did you watch that team? I was living in SF at the time and compared to Walsh's rendition of the WCO the Giants O was poorly managed. Parcells didn't trust Simms.
Parcells was a risk-taker, even though he liked "smash mouth" offense. He liked to go for it on 4th down. He'd use trick plays and fake punts. He knew he had a defense that could bail him out, and he took advantage of that. So while the offense was pretty vanilla, the Giants overall weren't THAT predictable.
IIRC, Parcells hated fumbles but wasn't that upset by downfield interceptions. There's the story of him saying to Simms "If you don't throw two interceptions today you're not taking enough chances." He liked the downfield passing game, as TC did.
And they'd score on D fairly often, too. That helped.
AP, give substance or just shut the fuck up. Bashing a post with zero grounded specific reasoning is the most useless childish garbage crap on the internet.
YOU SUCK!
NO YOU SUCK!
I SAID IT FIRST!!!
Jeez Louise...
The 8th in points scored is misleading I bet, because it doesn't subtract defensive scores but attributes all scoring to the "offense."
They weren't awful, but they were awful to watch and could have been much, much better and more efficient at, you know, scoring points. Parcels was practically obsessed with eating clock as opposed to scoring, IMO.
RE: Play defense, let LT do his thing, run the ball Â
The game was better then. Everybody got excited when a team would score during a defensive battle. Our last NFC Championship was like that. This league of non-stop scoring is more like a video game and feeds more to the fantasy fan at the expense of better played football.
RE: RE: RE: To the several posters who commented about Â
"the offense struggling" early on or through much of the season, I have this to say about that '86 team.
And all you young 'uns who have bitched and continue to bitch about Kevin Gilbride's offense incorporated into TC's insistence on run/pass balance, please take note.
Bill Parcels' run on 1st and 2nd down no matter what Woody Hayes memorial philosophy and Ron Earhardt's offense was brutal. To hold back a QB like Phil Simms in his prime was almost tragic stupidity - except that it ended with Simms' 22/25 3 TD Superbowl.
G-d I cringed watching that offense of Earhardt's and Parcels'. Talk about predictable!!!
Gilbride's was an offensive genius like General Patton in comparison to those clowns dictating the '86 offense.
Whaaaat?? Do you recall that their best WR was Lionel Manuel, and that he didn't play from Week 5 until the playoffs? Who would you suggest he throw to? Earhardt a clown? Really? They were a running team with little talent at WR and a stud at TE in Bavaro. He ran the offense exactly as he should have, and exactly as Parcells wanted. And by the way, that clown's offense set the league record in '78 with NE 3,165 yards on the ground, and in '77 as Off Co his offense set the NFL single season scoring record that still stands with 589.
Some clown.
So in 77 and 78 Earhardt coached great offenses, what does that have to do with 1986 and how he ran that team under the direction of Bill Parcells?
Short on talent at WR, surely, so fucking play 2 TEs more you had Zeke Mowatt, possibly a top 10 TE in the league as your 2nd TE.
Did you watch that team? I was living in SF at the time and compared to Walsh's rendition of the WCO the Giants O was poorly managed. Parcells didn't trust Simms.
Lou I'm surprised at you. This post is ridiculous.
Do you think that Earhart forgot how to run an offense? Earhardt enacted the philosophy of his boss. And by the way, when he was OffCo at Pittsburgh, he turned Barry Foster into a star RB and had some people actually believing that Bubby Brister was an NFL QB.
Zeke Mowatt was coming off ACL surgery, missed all of '85 and wasn't right until the last quarter of the year when he began to take a bigger role.
If you're comparing the Giants to the 49ers you're a fool. Parcells and Walsh are polar opposites in football philosophy. Remember after the 1990 title game “What do you think of that West Coast Offense now?” When a reporter asked him if the Giants’ victory had “vindicated” their style of play, Parcells shot back, “It’s always been vindicated. It’s that new stuff that has something to prove.”
And in case you forgot, the Giants and their "poorly managed" offense beat the 49ers TWICE in 1986, once by 49-3 when they had everyone back.
"Parcells didn't trust Simms" is one of the dumbest statements ever made here. Parcells PROTECTED Simms by using their stellar running game and defense to win until Manuel came back and Mowatt was healthy. THAT is intelligent coaching.
AP, give substance or just shut the fuck up. Bashing a post with zero grounded specific reasoning is the most useless childish garbage crap on the internet.
YOU SUCK!
NO YOU SUCK!
I SAID IT FIRST!!!
Jeez Louise...
The 8th in points scored is misleading I bet, because it doesn't subtract defensive scores but attributes all scoring to the "offense."
They weren't awful, but they were awful to watch and could have been much, much better and more efficient at, you know, scoring points. Parcels was practically obsessed with eating clock as opposed to scoring, IMO.
Actually, there was only one defensive TD all season in 1986. George Martin. :)
The team wound up +11 in turnovers (4th in the league) - browsing through the scoring for the year, you see a VERY consistent offense that could be counted on to put 17-21 points on the board every week - with that defense, much more than enough.
and idiotic play calling that you are calling "smart". Damn near cost the Giants a game they should have won handily, as they were the superior team and demonstrated that superiority quite blatantly when the 2 teams met again.
When the Giants played the 9ers on Monday night, why did the go into halftime down 17-0, and what did they change to flip that game around and win 21-17?
Let's fast forward a second to David Carr interviewing Rashad Jennings and his comment to Rashad (again on the topic of Eli's field generalship and how MacAdoo gives Eli freedom to change plays) about how smart Eli is, and how he has the freedom to audible to a pass play if the original running play requested from the sidelines looks like it will run "into a brick wall" - that was Carr's exact words.
That game was 17-0 Niners because the Fugazi Giants insisted on running into a brick wall all the first half as the 9ers were, IIRC, putting 9 guys in the box just to stop the Giants running game... and it worked.
For the second half the Giants came out passing against the 9ers tightly packed D and marched through them like a hot knife through room temperature butter.
They were idiots for not doing that earlier in the game. For not giving Phil the kind of options Eli has for changing plays at the LOS.
IMO. That's where my comment about BP not trusting Simms comes from.
And you are right to pick up that I really blame Parcels, not Earnhardt.
They were happy to play a style that would earn them 17-21 points per game when with their OL, Phil, Morris, and Bavaro and Galbreath they had enough weapons to score a good bit more.
As for only one defensive touchdown I know I should have said "points scored by the D or set up by defensive turnovers..." Because Martin's was the only one I could remember (during the regular season obviously) but I recall the D being "responsible" for more than just that by giving the O opportunities via TOs.
But I couldn't actually find the stay of points scored by the defense vis a fast Google search. Nice job.
Who the fuck says it's wrong to compare Parcels'offense to Walsh's? You are my boss, my dad, my G-d? Go piss off yourself.
To this day I believe Phill Simms had the ability to be a better QB than Joe Montana, but had the bad luck of falling into an ass backwards offensive philosophy that 1) limited his opportunities to win titles and 2) kept him out of the hall of fame.
Phil was a great pure passer, saddled with shit for wideouts and an archaic offensive philosophy.
I don't see why having a great defense should be a justification for having a staid offense. Phil's lousy passing stats re TDs to INTs was largely because of that style of offense; not the predicate of why that offense was "smart" to run.
It's great to be able to run time of the clock at times, but what you should be aiming for on offense is to score points.
You realize that Walsh's teams won more titles than Parcels' right? You realize that some years under D coordinator Seifert the 9ers had one of the best Ds in the league, right? Was that treated by Walsh as reason to gear down and slow down his offense? Rubbish concepts. And I would argue that at times Walsh won with inferior talent.
Who the fuck says it's wrong to compare Parcels'offense to Walsh's? You are my boss, my dad, my G-d? Go piss off yourself.
To this day I believe Phill Simms had the ability to be a better QB than Joe Montana, but had the bad luck of falling into an ass backwards offensive philosophy that 1) limited his opportunities to win titles and 2) kept him out of the hall of fame.
Phil was a great pure passer, saddled with shit for wideouts and an archaic offensive philosophy.
I don't see why having a great defense should be a justification for having a staid offense. Phil's lousy passing stats re TDs to INTs was largely because of that style of offense; not the predicate of why that offense was "smart" to run.
It's great to be able to run time of the clock at times, but what you should be aiming for on offense is to score points.
You realize that Walsh's teams won more titles than Parcels' right? You realize that some years under D coordinator Seifert the 9ers had one of the best Ds in the league, right? Was that treated by Walsh as reason to gear down and slow down his offense? Rubbish concepts. And I would argue that at times Walsh won with inferior talent.
The Blind Slide included interviews with Walsh and Parcells, in which Walsh describes success on offense being about having a system, and Parcells describes success on defense being dependent on talent.
As for Simms, it's probably already been stated here but Walsh wanted him instead of Montana.
Who the fuck says it's wrong to compare Parcels'offense to Walsh's? You are my boss, my dad, my G-d? Go piss off yourself.
To this day I believe Phill Simms had the ability to be a better QB than Joe Montana, but had the bad luck of falling into an ass backwards offensive philosophy that 1) limited his opportunities to win titles and 2) kept him out of the hall of fame.
Phil was a great pure passer, saddled with shit for wideouts and an archaic offensive philosophy.
I don't see why having a great defense should be a justification for having a staid offense. Phil's lousy passing stats re TDs to INTs was largely because of that style of offense; not the predicate of why that offense was "smart" to run.
It's great to be able to run time of the clock at times, but what you should be aiming for on offense is to score points.
You realize that Walsh's teams won more titles than Parcels' right? You realize that some years under D coordinator Seifert the 9ers had one of the best Ds in the league, right? Was that treated by Walsh as reason to gear down and slow down his offense? Rubbish concepts. And I would argue that at times Walsh won with inferior talent.
You said the Giants offense was "poorly managed". No, it was not, it was run in a different style befitting a different football philosophy. You were obviously enamored of the WCO at the time, I was not, that's fine. I think the Giants ran the right offense for their philosophy and their geographical location and their personnel. And you still didn't tell me who Simms was supposed to throw it to with Manuel (best on NYG, avg otherwise) out and Mowatt recovering. Bobby Johnson was their #1, and McConkey wasn't even on the roster until week 5.
And I didn't tell you to piss off, so go fuck yourself (just kidding. We can agree to disagree).
They were happy to play a style that would earn them 17-21 points per game when with their OL, Phil, Morris, and Bavaro and Galbreath they had enough weapons to score a good bit more.
As for only one defensive touchdown I know I should have said "points scored by the D or set up by defensive turnovers..." Because Martin's was the only one I could remember (during the regular season obviously) but I recall the D being "responsible" for more than just that by giving the O opportunities via TOs.
But I couldn't actually find the stay of points scored by the defense vis a fast Google search. Nice job.
Right - I said the defense was +11 in turnovers, FWIW, that was 5th in the league.
I believe the Giant offense was engineered around it's talents. That offensive line was excellent at run blocking, horrid at pass protection. 84' and 85' were career years for Simms in yardage, but he was sacked 55 and 52 times in each, respectively. By 86', Parcells/Earhardt shifted the offense accordingly, and Simms was sacked ONLY 45 times. For reference, Eli's WORST season - he was sacked 39 times in 2013. Let that sink in. The 1986 Giants offensive line was weaker in pass protection than the God-awful 2013 unit - and not by a little!
It wasn't a matter of Parcells not being bright enough to allow Phil to throw more, it was a matter of keeping Simms on the Sports page and off the Obituaries!
I give credit to Parcells to knowing his teams weaknesses and getting the absolute best out of what was a flawed offense.
They were happy to play a style that would earn them 17-21 points per game when with their OL, Phil, Morris, and Bavaro and Galbreath they had enough weapons to score a good bit more.
As for only one defensive touchdown I know I should have said "points scored by the D or set up by defensive turnovers..." Because Martin's was the only one I could remember (during the regular season obviously) but I recall the D being "responsible" for more than just that by giving the O opportunities via TOs.
But I couldn't actually find the stay of points scored by the defense vis a fast Google search. Nice job.
Right - I said the defense was +11 in turnovers, FWIW, that was 5th in the league.
I believe the Giant offense was engineered around it's talents. That offensive line was excellent at run blocking, horrid at pass protection. 84' and 85' were career years for Simms in yardage, but he was sacked 55 and 52 times in each, respectively. By 86', Parcells/Earhardt shifted the offense accordingly, and Simms was sacked ONLY 45 times. For reference, Eli's WORST season - he was sacked 39 times in 2013. Let that sink in. The 1986 Giants offensive line was weaker in pass protection than the God-awful 2013 unit - and not by a little!
It wasn't a matter of Parcells not being bright enough to allow Phil to throw more, it was a matter of keeping Simms on the Sports page and off the Obituaries!
I give credit to Parcells to knowing his teams weaknesses and getting the absolute best out of what was a flawed offense.
Right. Play to your strengths. They were very weak at WR, no depth at TE while Mowatt was active but still recovering, and once they settled on Morris at RB and Carthon as lead blocker they were unstoppable on the ground. I loved watching them run at will.
the offense struggled a bit early on in the year Â
that's unlikely to be breached. I agree the had poor WRs and I'd even add the Joe Morris had awful hands too so it's not like they had a ton of options of talented folks to pass to, but I did mention Galbreath who IIRC was the team's 2nd leading receiver after Bavaro.
But you are ignoring my example of the 9ers game on Monday night and completely ignoring my point about trusting Phil to change plays at the LOS to adjust to the defensive schemes and fronts the team was facing in real-time. Instead of adjusting as a half time remedy...
That OL didn't suck at pass blocking. They gave up a lot of sacks because that archaic offense didn't have 3 step drops and ways of getting the ball out of the QB's hands fast enough. And because damn near every time the DID pass it was 3rd and long. As for their "great" running game, weren't they middle of the pack in yards per rush? When your offense is obvious it's easier to defend...
Run, run, pass.
Run, run, pass.
How to make your QB
look like an ass!
Just hated that O philosophy. Let's aim to win by a late field goal!
RE: Well I think we've reached an impasse of opinion Â
that's unlikely to be breached. I agree the had poor WRs and I'd even add the Joe Morris had awful hands too so it's not like they had a ton of options of talented folks to pass to, but I did mention Galbreath who IIRC was the team's 2nd leading receiver after Bavaro.
But you are ignoring my example of the 9ers game on Monday night and completely ignoring my point about trusting Phil to change plays at the LOS to adjust to the defensive schemes and fronts the team was facing in real-time. Instead of adjusting as a half time remedy...
That OL didn't suck at pass blocking. They gave up a lot of sacks because that archaic offense didn't have 3 step drops and ways of getting the ball out of the QB's hands fast enough. And because damn near every time the DID pass it was 3rd and long. As for their "great" running game, weren't they middle of the pack in yards per rush? When your offense is obvious it's easier to defend...
Run, run, pass.
Run, run, pass.
How to make your QB
look like an ass!
Just hated that O philosophy. Let's aim to win by a late field goal!
Not ignoring your point Lou, just don't think in that era it was a prevalent as it is today. That really didn't become popular until Jim Kelly with Buffalo.
Nice rhyme though :-)
I think you are wrong about audibles and QBs calling their own plays. Â
Actually I believe that was the norm in old times. Not sure about audibles, but didn't guys like Starr and Unitas call their own plays?
I agree Levy and Kelly popularized it to some extent. But the modern passing offense wasn't exactly "new" by 1986. Goes back to Sid Gilliam and the Rams.
RE: I think you are wrong about audibles and QBs calling their own plays. Â
Actually I believe that was the norm in old times. Not sure about audibles, but didn't guys like Starr and Unitas call their own plays?
I agree Levy and Kelly popularized it to some extent. But the modern passing offense wasn't exactly "new" by 1986. Goes back to Sid Gilliam and the Rams.
In 1984 and 85', Simms threw for 4044 and 3849 yards, respectively.
What was the difference? Simms had several more targets in 84', including Earnest Gray, a healthy Lionel Manuel, a healthy Zeke Mowatt, Byron Williams even pulled down a few hundred yards - that was the year they platooned Carpenter and Morris - those 2 combined for 1300 yards - it was an excellent, balanced offense and Simms thrived, again - his highest yeardage in a season.
85' still was diverse, with backs combining for over 1,000 receiving, Manuel with a solid 850 yards, Simms chucked for 3800+.
By 86, several key targets were gone, and Parcells knew they couldn't live with a quarterback spending half the game lying on his back. Really, the injuries to Mowatt and Manuel were the real game changers.
I've enjoyed going back through those stats. Nice to see the old names - Earnest Gray, Rob Carpenter - spotted Tom Mullady and John Mistler on that 84' roster.
Going through them though - really highlights one thing.
Phil Simms is one of the most underrated QB's in league history. He was CONSTANTLY under attack, never enjoyed a top-tier WR, had balls of steel - notoriously holding the ball far too long in his early years, waiting FOREVER for one of his shitty, shitty Wide Receivers to break free of coverage. He was fucking Braveheart. I truly believe, the best of the lot in that era.
RE: I think you are wrong about audibles and QBs calling their own plays. Â
Actually I believe that was the norm in old times. Not sure about audibles, but didn't guys like Starr and Unitas call their own plays?
I agree Levy and Kelly popularized it to some extent. But the modern passing offense wasn't exactly "new" by 1986. Goes back to Sid Gilliam and the Rams.
Yes, Unitas, Starr and that era plays called by QB, not at the LOS but in the huddle. Then Tom Landry and Paul Brown popularized plays being called by the coaches. The Giants used hand signals. Kelly and the Bills began the shift towards what we have now with the QB constantly looking to change the play at the OL
RE: RE: I think you are wrong about audibles and QBs calling their own plays. Â
Actually I believe that was the norm in old times. Not sure about audibles, but didn't guys like Starr and Unitas call their own plays?
I agree Levy and Kelly popularized it to some extent. But the modern passing offense wasn't exactly "new" by 1986. Goes back to Sid Gilliam and the Rams.
In 1984 and 85', Simms threw for 4044 and 3849 yards, respectively.
What was the difference? Simms had several more targets in 84', including Earnest Gray, a healthy Lionel Manuel, a healthy Zeke Mowatt, Byron Williams even pulled down a few hundred yards - that was the year they platooned Carpenter and Morris - those 2 combined for 1300 yards - it was an excellent, balanced offense and Simms thrived, again - his highest yeardage in a season.
85' still was diverse, with backs combining for over 1,000 receiving, Manuel with a solid 850 yards, Simms chucked for 3800+.
By 86, several key targets were gone, and Parcells knew they couldn't live with a quarterback spending half the game lying on his back. Really, the injuries to Mowatt and Manuel were the real game changers.
I've enjoyed going back through those stats. Nice to see the old names - Earnest Gray, Rob Carpenter - spotted Tom Mullady and John Mistler on that 84' roster.
Going through them though - really highlights one thing.
Phil Simms is one of the most underrated QB's in league history. He was CONSTANTLY under attack, never enjoyed a top-tier WR, had balls of steel - notoriously holding the ball far too long in his early years, waiting FOREVER for one of his shitty, shitty Wide Receivers to break free of coverage. He was fucking Braveheart. I truly believe, the best of the lot in that era.
good post
WR Stacey Robinson was a 2nd round draft pick in 1985. Â
The guy had blazing speed, was a 4.40 guy IIRC. Why wasn't he more a factor in the 1986 offense? In fact when the Giants finally turned to him he was a key contributor.
Quote:
Robinson's most notable game was in week 13 of the 1986 season, when the Giants were playing the 49ers on Monday Night Football. The Giants trailed 17-0 at halftime, but scored three touchdowns in the third quarter to win the game. Robinson caught the second touchdown, a 34-yard pass from Phil Simms, but he made an incredible grab[2] on a 49-yard pass from Phil Simms, down to the 1-yard line, to set up the Giants' final score. He finished with 5 catches for a career high 116 yards receiving as the Giants won 21-17.[3] The Giants went on to win Super Bowl XXI that season over the Denver Broncos, and Robinson caught three passes for a team high 62 receiving yards in the big game.[4]
...besides Manuel, NONE of the wideouts in the 80's were really any good. Earnest Gray was going to be Simms' go-to receiver - actually drafted in the second round in 79, right after Simms, he was a decent receiver, had 1100+ yards in 83, injuries slowed him and he was gone by 85' - the only other high round draft picks early in Simms career were John Mistler (3rd rd. - 737 yards receiving CAREER) and Stacy Robinson (2nd rd. pick - 749 yards receiving CAREER).
Parcells/Young virtually ignored receiver in the draft. Lionel Manuel was a 7th rd pick. They got lucky with him. With the rest? They got what they paid for.
It wasn't until 87' - Mark Ingram, Stephen Baker - that the Giants finally addressed the position. Both were in line with the rest of the decade. Weak receivers, though Ingram did have one of the most memorable catch and runs in team history.
Really, when Simms finally got a top shelf receiver in Mike Sherrard, they immediately turned into the Giants most dangerous QB-receiver combination in a generation. The Gods quickly intervened and broke Sherrards hip while he was running away from defenders on like a 70+ yard pass play from Simms. That really, really sucked. Always been a 'what-if' for me. If he didn't get hurt, I doubt they lose the season finale against Dallas - that game was razor close - that would have re-shuffled the playoff order. That Giants team had the leagues #1 ranked defense. LT and Simms could have exited properly, with another SB trophy instead of humiliation in SF.
That defense was so good, it was a shock when other teams made a first down. Where QB's were getting ko'ed on almost a weekly basis. It was brutal, smashmouth football, especially in the NFC East.
The offense was Joe Morris off tackle, and a seam pass to Bavaro.
I loved the playoff run in 2007, but there's no comparison for the whole season. We were the best team in 1986. The only thing that might have topped it was if the 2008 team finished the deal.
2007 was a good team that got hot at the right time and defeated far superior teams.
Of the 100,000+ people...80,000 were Giants fans!
There was no Internet then. Totally different times.
And after all those years of misery (30 years of a lot of bad teams since the last GIANTS Championship), it was just incomparable.
He wasn't loved until late, that's for sure. The emergence of the suburbanites featuring Brad Benson's cut nose matched the intensity of Rambo/Bavaro and the momentum grew after the Minny game.
BUT, nothing will beat that '07 run for me. The surprise of it all. In fact, it was the opposite of '86; each win was a "I'll be damned" kind of thing.
Met my first wife at a Giants game that year and the result of that union was two fantastic sons.
I owe a lot to that group of guys.
Oddly enough, I divorced my first wife in 2006 and married my second wife in early '07, just after SB 42.
When we went to get my second wife's Green Card in late February 2009, the adjudicator had a signed photo of Brandon Jacobs on his desk. My wife gets all excited and starts talking about the Super Bowl and I am convinced her enthusiasm for the Giants proved our marriage was legit and prompted the adjudicator to stamp my wife's passport on the spot.
The New York Football Giants: my team.
Then things really went to another level with the famous Minnesota 4th-and-17 play.
By the time the playoffs came we expected them to win, but it was the Giants, so nobody took anything for granted. On the whole, that season was incredibly satisfying, but it wasn't obvious how good that team was until late, and the playoff run.
It was very different from the Tom Coughlin championship runs. The '07 and '11 teams weren't that great in the regular season, but the '86 team won the division with a great record. The '07 miracle playoff & Super Bowl run was like nothing else I've ever experienced as a Giants fan, but the '86 season was more satisfying end-to-end.
I wouldn't mind having that feeling again.
At the time, I thought the '85 Giants team was better (They gave the Bears more of a fight in the playoffs than anyone else, remember, and who knows what might have happened if Landeta hadn't whiffed on that punt.) but in retrospect, I don't think I can justify that opinion.
Oddly enough, I divorced my first wife in 2006 and married my second wife in early '07, just after SB 42.
When we went to get my second wife's Green Card in late February 2009, the adjudicator had a signed photo of Brandon Jacobs on his desk. My wife gets all excited and starts talking about the Super Bowl and I am convinced her enthusiasm for the Giants proved our marriage was legit and prompted the adjudicator to stamp my wife's passport on the spot.
The New York Football Giants: my team.
Man, those are some good stories!
'90's drama was easily the best (and in my opinion the better team) and '07's was fucking spectacular. I might have a different perspective if I had been around for the terrible teams prior to '85, but 86 was just the best team winning
1986 didnt surprise me the NYG won but in 07 i was STUNNED, i will admit i thought eli manning sucked back then but he shut my old ass up a but lol
Right? The funny thing is, I had planned on being a life-long bachelor. I had always had too much fun bouncing around from woman to woman. When someone would ask me, "When are you going to get married?" My stock reply was, "When the Giants win the Super Bowl." As a fan since '63 (seven years old) I figured it would never happen.
Next thing I know...
1986 was amazing to witness. We'd been okay '84 and pretty good in '85, but I certainly didn't expect to dominate teams defensively the way we did in '86. The funny thing is that the offense was actually pretty mediocre for much of the season: we won consistently, but we didn't exactly blow people out. Then came the playoffs.
For me, though, 2007 was much more satisfying. Beating Dallas in the playoffs would've been enough to make me happy, but then beating GB in an historic Championship game and then handing NE their only loss of the year (and in convincing fashion, IMO) made it truly a dream season.
Same age, same feeling.
Then came 81 and LT a playoff team a play off win. Then came Parcells and 86. Unlike some here the scars of 18 years of lousy football did not allow me to be confident the Gants would win the Super Bowl.
They trailed at half, I wasn t surprised I was use to losing. They dominated the second half, they won, my best moment as a Giants fan, 07 close behind.
In retrospect I see how great that team was But the Super Bowl unto they won, seemed too good to really happen for a Giants fan.
We still talk about that season and playoffs to this day. Such a great team all around. Loved the smashmouth style of the offence and that punishing D that killed QB's all season.
Such great memories!!
I remember they rushed out a video similar to the Bears 85 Super Bowl Shuffle that I still watch to this day for its campiness....."We are the New York Giants, Don't you know we're Great!....." Mark Collins, Andy Headen, Herb Welsh, etc in coats because it was freezing.
This team became a steamroller at the end of the season and carried it right through the playoffs. It was an amazing time and the sky was the limit for 87 and beyond.....but the strike took the wind out of their sails a bit.
Ah....good times!
Quote:
During the 86 season?
There was no Internet then. Totally different times.
As you can tell from my handle, I preferred '90, because the NFC Championship and the SB25 were the two best "games" in that they played their hearts out, got a few devine breaks to win a championship that could have just as easily gone to either of the other two very good teams.
42 was even more improbable, but it still seems like a fairy tale, and truth be told, we weren't really that good. And 46 was similar, less the David vs Goliath drama.
One of the things I found totally amazing was that during the fourth game of the season against New Orleans, Mark Bavaro had is jaw broken in the first half. He had it wired shut during in halftime, and as the second half is about to begin he taps Parcells on the shoulder and indicates he ready to go back in. Parcells said he never missed a down during the season.
(1)t wasn't a Bears-'85 romp through the season. There was a lot of concern about the offense, which sputtered a lot. Remember, they started with a loss to Dallas, and then they seemed to be scuffling. But they kept on winning and winning.
(2)At the time, I thought the '85 Giants team was better (They gave the Bears more of a fight in the playoffs than anyone else, remember, and who knows what might have happened if Landeta hadn't whiffed on that punt.) but in retrospect, I don't think I can justify that opinion.
I'm a bit surprised many don't recall the team's struggles offensively for the better part of 86.
1. Well, against Dallas the 85 showed up. A really good team which made mistakes, took the lead and then lost it late. They blew the lead so often in 85 and in 86 they blew the lead to Dallas opening night, allowed Washington to come back, messed up in Seattle, likely should have lost the 2nd Dallas game and came close to giving up a 90+ yards to Hershal Walker late and blew the lead in Minny. There were a lot of wins but a lot more frustration until the end of the Minny game when it changed.
(2) Yeah, Landeta's muff gets the attention (rightfully so) but Rob Carpenter's fumble was equally as devestating IMO. The Giants offense was moving.
What day?
Quote:
.
What day?
On the 10th day of April - I blessed this earth
Then things really went to another level with the famous Minnesota 4th-and-17 play.
By the time the playoffs came we expected them to win, but it was the Giants, so nobody took anything for granted. On the whole, that season was incredibly satisfying, but it wasn't obvious how good that team was until late, and the playoff run.
It was very different from the Tom Coughlin championship runs. The '07 and '11 teams weren't that great in the regular season, but the '86 team won the division with a great record. The '07 miracle playoff & Super Bowl run was like nothing else I've ever experienced as a Giants fan, but the '86 season was more satisfying end-to-end.
I wouldn't mind having that feeling again.
At the time, I thought the '85 Giants team was better (They gave the Bears more of a fight in the playoffs than anyone else, remember, and who knows what might have happened if Landeta hadn't whiffed on that punt.) but in retrospect, I don't think I can justify that opinion.
culminating in one of the most fav things of experiencing in my lifetime being there, the "paper blizzard" championship game and SB XXI. The winning first SB Championship can never be relived again. granted the other 3 were close, but can top the feeling of first one.
Quote:
It wasn't a Bears-'85 romp through the season. There was a lot of concern about the offense, which sputtered a lot. Remember, they started with a loss to Dallas, and then they seemed to be scuffling. But they kept on winning and winning.
Then things really went to another level with the famous Minnesota 4th-and-17 play.
By the time the playoffs came we expected them to win, but it was the Giants, so nobody took anything for granted. On the whole, that season was incredibly satisfying, but it wasn't obvious how good that team was until late, and the playoff run.
It was very different from the Tom Coughlin championship runs. The '07 and '11 teams weren't that great in the regular season, but the '86 team won the division with a great record. The '07 miracle playoff & Super Bowl run was like nothing else I've ever experienced as a Giants fan, but the '86 season was more satisfying end-to-end.
I wouldn't mind having that feeling again.
At the time, I thought the '85 Giants team was better (They gave the Bears more of a fight in the playoffs than anyone else, remember, and who knows what might have happened if Landeta hadn't whiffed on that punt.) but in retrospect, I don't think I can justify that opinion.
Dane, I remember the 85 - Bears/Giants playoff vividly. The Giants-D held its own that day, but the Giants-O was completely dominated by the Bears-D, as the Bears front 7 destroyed the Giants. The Landeta whiff didn't change the outcome of that game.
but the Booby Johnson drop in the end zone did.
LOL, yes it was.
I echo many of the comments above (AP Halfmoon, JohnF): after so many years trundling at the bottom, and the slow climb back to respectability, first under Ray Perkins, then the Tuna, but the smackdown in the playoffs the year before, '86 was such joy, vindication, sighs of satisfaction, and watching that D just manhandle the opponents.
Glorious!
Scary good, but scarier is that I thought he was better in 1984.
I think the D was dominant all year, putting us in a position to win many close games. The last month, and the playoffs, the offense kicked in and thats when he started killing teams. Counting the last week of the season, I think we had an average score of something like 40-11 the rest of the way.
86 team was more of a work in progress early on. The D and running game carried that team early. Once they got their sea legs they completely skull fucked everyone in their path.
86 started slower but finished in dominant fashion where as 90 started off in dominant fashion, slowed down a bit in December and saved the dramatics for NFC title game and Supe 21.
Points For: 371 (23.2/g) 8th of 28
Points Against: 236 (14.8/g) 2nd of 28
1990:
Points For: 335 (20.9/g) 15th of 28
Points Against: 211 (13.2/g) 1st of 28
Yeah, Simms should have sucked it up when his thumb broke in half and ended up sticking out of the skin.
Cmon dude.
Lastly, Simms didnt miss a game in 84, 85 or 86. He git hurt early on in legit fashion. I don't remember Simms whining other than the time Parcells benched him for Scott Brunner. And I don't even think Simms went to the media. He told Parcells to trade him.
Fans were lost then and still lost now.
Oh wait, I must be wrong I was told the Giant fans were terrified of Doug Flutie and the NFC's crappiest offensive team.
Joe Montana managed to hang three whole points on the Giants in the Meadowlands in January 1987 but sure, Doug Flutie would have led the Bears to victory. What a joke.
This might be the single stupidest piece of shit post ever entered here. You're an idiot.
Was he a "whiny bitch" when his shoulder was separated in 1980 and 1981, when he was high-lowed by Klecko and Gastineau in preseason of 1982 and destroyed his knee, or when he shattered his thumb on Clyde Simmons helmet in 1983 and the bone was sticking out? All because they had a shit offensive line that couldn't protect him?
He demanded a trade over the stupid Parcells decision to start Brunner in private, kept his mouth shut publicly.
I cried real tears when we won that Super Bowl, as great as the others were, that one is still special.
How dominant were we? Just go to youtube and search 1986 giants. Watch any regular season game.
BTW, the other division rivals were awesome too. The Eagles and SKins were really good. In fact, during that Era the NFC in general was so dominant. Just look at the string of superbowls won by the NFC back then.
Points For: 371 (23.2/g) 8th of 28
Points Against: 236 (14.8/g) 2nd of 28
1990:
Points For: 335 (20.9/g) 15th of 28
Points Against: 211 (13.2/g) 1st of 28
Taylor was more dominant in 86 yet the Giants Secondary in 1990 was light years ahead of the 86 team.
Oh wait, I must be wrong I was told the Giant fans were terrified of Doug Flutie and the NFC's crappiest offensive team.
I was told the Giants offense would run right over the Bears and not have any turnovers.
There were more dramatic moments than 86 but as far as dominance is concerned, 86 in a landslide.
07 was just ridiculous. Not only the run but fans had to wait a long time in between 90 and 07 so there was that aspect to it as well. 07 was a like a Hollywood movie. Beating Dallas along the way was the cherry on top. My God the packers NFC title game in tundra conditions is almost forgotten that's how insanely dramatic that run was. But with that said, 90 is still my proudest NYG run ever. One phrase says it all --"THERE WILL BE NO THREEPEAT."
2011 is almost boring when stacked up to the other three. Think about that for a second. 2011 was as glorious and exciting as one could hope for and it pales in comparison to 90 and 07 in terms of dramatics.
We are fucking blessed. Even the last 3-4 years. I said it the night they won super bowl 46 we can't say a fucking word for a long long time. Fans still do...but not me. The Giants (Coughlin-Reese) owe us nothing.
Quote:
1986:
Points For: 371 (23.2/g) 8th of 28
Points Against: 236 (14.8/g) 2nd of 28
1990:
Points For: 335 (20.9/g) 15th of 28
Points Against: 211 (13.2/g) 1st of 28
Taylor was more dominant in 86 yet the Giants Secondary in 1990 was light years ahead of the 86 team.
Yup. 90 D was different but in some ways better. hard to say anyone was better than that 86 D but I trust that D more than any NYG unit I ever saw. I love that 90 team like no other. Guts in spades.
You could throw on the 1986 defense a bit, although your QB would pay the price - 3400 passing yards allowed. The 1990 defense only gave up 2700.
But after that, they just won and won and won. By about the last quarter of the season every Giants fan could tell something special was happening.
IIRC the big worry was playing the Bears in the playoffs, but the Bears lost in an upset, and that was that. Washington was good but the Giants had their number. And then the Broncos led at halftime, somehow, but I don't remember being very worried about that. The Giants were superb at halftime adjustments, you could just sort of tell that Denver had hit them with their best shot and barely had a lead, and that the second half would be New York's time.
The culmination of the first half of the 80's built up through that season - each week, the Giants surprising themselves and their fans, rarely losing - NEVER giving up 100 yards rushing, by seasons end a monster was born and oh were Green Bay and the Cardinals unfortunate to hit us the last 2 weeks of the season.
COMPLETELY flattened those 2 teams - the greatest Giants team of all time was running on all cylinders - a juggernaut...
I got to go to that SuperBowl - 21 and BROKE, beg, borrowed to scrape together enough to be at that - the biggest of shows, and oh did they deliver.
86 was great.
For the baby boomers, a long suffering bunch, that first
SB win was extra special. If you're a millennial, you might
feel differently!
Quote:
head down and play through everything, he became a fan favorite. He had a few years of "growing up". The 1986 season started rough for him, and in previous seasons he might have crumbled and whimpered, but he kept pushing through and turned it around in a big way.
Lastly, Simms didnt miss a game in 84, 85 or 86. He git hurt early on in legit fashion. I don't remember Simms whining other than the time Parcells benched him for Scott Brunner. And I don't even think Simms went to the media. He told Parcells to trade him.
Fans were lost then and still lost now.
Look, the 1986 team is my favorite team. This was the only team that I really felt they were dominant and should win, and that SB was more thrilling to me than all the others. The other SB's we were always the underdog, and never given much of a chance. However lets not sugar coat the Simms thing. He was a 1st rd pick who, after 5 yrs in the league, more than 1/2 of the fanbase thought was a bust. He was a china doll (hurt all the time), lost his starting role for a while, and asked to be traded. Now you can rationalize all you want, but he was not highly thought of up to 1985. I say this as a Simms fan, who I think is the 2nd best QB the Giants have ever had (I never saw YA).
The 2007 team started out with injuries and a very terrible Eli Manning at QB. Towards the end of the season, players came back from injuries and the team was very healthy. Rookies started to contribute and Manning got good. Don't forget, he threw 4 int's vs Minnesota in late November. We didn't know the team we were watching in the playoffs. They suddenly had a great QB and rookies making their way into the lineup. The Dec-Jan Giants were a much different team than the Sept-Nov Giants. The next year they showed their playoff run wasn't a fluke until Pierce and Buress were lost.
In the Second half McConkey with the towel running on the field you knew the Giants were going to win. They clobbered Denver and Elway in the second half.
He threw a lot of int's before that streach. Much was also written about how he was so much better after Shockey went down.
We were 10-6, and in the 6 losses, the largest margin of defeat was only 7 points....we were in every game.....
We beat the 49'ers in the playoffs, and then went to Chicago...it was the Bear's year, with that defense.....
After that loss, the Giants could have folded next season, or saw that they needed to play at an even higher level...they chose to do the latter.....
14-2...very close to an undefeated season.....the defense gave up 23 points in the playoffs in three games.....
But most important of all, their first SB win, and first championship in 30 years...the waiting was finally over.....
And because that steady growth was itself a culmination of the horrid years that led to the explosion in 1978 and the hiring of George Young.
So - 1986 was more than just a season. It was years of waiting - followed by steady great drafting by George Young (with no free agency) and the building of a truly dominating force on defense and an overall great team. I KNEW the Giants were winning in 1986 ten seconds after they lost to the Bears in 1985. Anyone who followed the steady buildup from 1979 knew the team was becoming stronger and stronger year after year. 1979 through 1986 - the most fantastic stretch of years in my lifetime all because of George Young and the Giants.
I like having them both and their reduxes of '90 and '11.
and u said u cant compare and u basically did brilliance of intense men
run the rock anytime we needed to not to mention we had
a number of deamons on special teams ...
I watched Paul Horning destroy us early 60's and to finally
get to the big game with Simms and LT it was like none other
etched in the mind forever .
Quote:
Eli manning was never terrible or very terrible or anything close to terrible. He was a winning, strong armed but still flawed young QB. Most young qbs struggle at times. Eli did too but he also won games and played well.
He threw a lot of int's before that streach. Much was also written about how he was so much better after Shockey went down.
Right, but he was far from terrible. We've all seen terrible. 2005-2006 Eli ain't it. Not even close.
Hey I know you! There was a documentary made about your life where Joe Pesci played you and Marissa Tomei played your GF: "My Cousin Vinny", right?
And all you young 'uns who have bitched and continue to bitch about Kevin Gilbride's offense incorporated into TC's insistence on run/pass balance, please take note.
Bill Parcels' run on 1st and 2nd down no matter what Woody Hayes memorial philosophy and Ron Earhardt's offense was brutal. To hold back a QB like Phil Simms in his prime was almost tragic stupidity - except that it ended with Simms' 22/25 3 TD Superbowl.
G-d I cringed watching that offense of Earhardt's and Parcels'. Talk about predictable!!!
Gilbride's was an offensive genius like General Patton in comparison to those clowns dictating the '86 offense.
And all you young 'uns who have bitched and continue to bitch about Kevin Gilbride's offense incorporated into TC's insistence on run/pass balance, please take note.
Bill Parcels' run on 1st and 2nd down no matter what Woody Hayes memorial philosophy and Ron Earhardt's offense was brutal. To hold back a QB like Phil Simms in his prime was almost tragic stupidity - except that it ended with Simms' 22/25 3 TD Superbowl.
G-d I cringed watching that offense of Earhardt's and Parcels'. Talk about predictable!!!
Gilbride's was an offensive genius like General Patton in comparison to those clowns dictating the '86 offense.
Whaaaat?? Do you recall that their best WR was Lionel Manuel, and that he didn't play from Week 5 until the playoffs? Who would you suggest he throw to? Earhardt a clown? Really? They were a running team with little talent at WR and a stud at TE in Bavaro. He ran the offense exactly as he should have, and exactly as Parcells wanted. And by the way, that clown's offense set the league record in '78 with NE 3,165 yards on the ground, and in '77 as Off Co his offense set the NFL single season scoring record that still stands with 589.
Some clown.
Quote:
86' was magical. My girlfriends father was a Jets fan and it was my senior year of High School. I lived in Southern Jersey. I knew more Eagle, Jets and Cowboy fans than Giants fans. My older sisters' boyfriend was a Niners fan who was miserable to me. My bus rides were hell for years because the Giants were bad for so long. I am from a large extended Italian family, and when they find a soft spot they bust balls like it is their fucking job and they are the best at it. My balls were busted for years and then......1986. Once they got in a groove at the end of the season, I knew they were going to win it all. I won bets with everyone I knew. It was the best year of my life. I busted EVERONES balls unmercifully, the apprentice surpassed the masters.
Hey I know you! There was a documentary made about your life where Joe Pesci played you and Marissa Tomei played your GF: "My Cousin Vinny", right?
Every italian cliche' in movies could describe my family. People came neighboring states when my grandmother cooked certain meals. I used get up early on Saturday mornings to help her start preparing for Sunday meals. I have made dough, made frsh pasta with her. If I told you my name and you googled it, there are some scary people that I never new were scary. Is what it is. You had to yell if you wanted to heard at those dinners....Fellow Italians from NJ back me up, we are all like that. The ball busting is an art form.
For the baby boomers, a long suffering bunch, that first
SB win was extra special. If you're a millennial, you might
feel differently!
07' season sucked. It really did. So did 2011.
The highs of the 07 and 11 playoffs are unparalleled though - 2007, I'd say is arguably the most exciting playoff run in history.
Honestly, since then, football hasn't held the same level of excitement for me. Once you've had the best something has to offer, what's left?
and you guys piss and moan because we have only won 2 in the last 9 years.
1986 was beyond great. It was like being in a dream.
I don't think this Rufus was even born in 1986, holy facacta!
Any jackazz can publish anything on the webz - ( New Window )
Quote:
"the offense struggling" early on or through much of the season, I have this to say about that '86 team.
And all you young 'uns who have bitched and continue to bitch about Kevin Gilbride's offense incorporated into TC's insistence on run/pass balance, please take note.
Bill Parcels' run on 1st and 2nd down no matter what Woody Hayes memorial philosophy and Ron Earhardt's offense was brutal. To hold back a QB like Phil Simms in his prime was almost tragic stupidity - except that it ended with Simms' 22/25 3 TD Superbowl.
G-d I cringed watching that offense of Earhardt's and Parcels'. Talk about predictable!!!
Gilbride's was an offensive genius like General Patton in comparison to those clowns dictating the '86 offense.
Whaaaat?? Do you recall that their best WR was Lionel Manuel, and that he didn't play from Week 5 until the playoffs? Who would you suggest he throw to? Earhardt a clown? Really? They were a running team with little talent at WR and a stud at TE in Bavaro. He ran the offense exactly as he should have, and exactly as Parcells wanted. And by the way, that clown's offense set the league record in '78 with NE 3,165 yards on the ground, and in '77 as Off Co his offense set the NFL single season scoring record that still stands with 589.
Some clown.
So in 77 and 78 Earhardt coached great offenses, what does that have to do with 1986 and how he ran that team under the direction of Bill Parcells?
Short on talent at WR, surely, so fucking play 2 TEs more you had Zeke Mowatt, possibly a top 10 TE in the league as your 2nd TE.
Did you watch that team? I was living in SF at the time and compared to Walsh's rendition of the WCO the Giants O was poorly managed. Parcells didn't trust Simms.
Wound up ranked 8th in points, 10th in yards, 6th ranked rushing offense in the league.
That offense did what it was supposed to. EAT CLOCK AND LOTS OF IT.
I kind of liked that philosophy myself...
IIRC, Parcells hated fumbles but wasn't that upset by downfield interceptions. There's the story of him saying to Simms "If you don't throw two interceptions today you're not taking enough chances." He liked the downfield passing game, as TC did.
And they'd score on D fairly often, too. That helped.
AP, give substance or just shut the fuck up. Bashing a post with zero grounded specific reasoning is the most useless childish garbage crap on the internet.
YOU SUCK!
NO YOU SUCK!
I SAID IT FIRST!!!
Jeez Louise...
The 8th in points scored is misleading I bet, because it doesn't subtract defensive scores but attributes all scoring to the "offense."
They weren't awful, but they were awful to watch and could have been much, much better and more efficient at, you know, scoring points. Parcels was practically obsessed with eating clock as opposed to scoring, IMO.
I kind of liked that philosophy myself...
The game was better then. Everybody got excited when a team would score during a defensive battle. Our last NFC Championship was like that. This league of non-stop scoring is more like a video game and feeds more to the fantasy fan at the expense of better played football.
Quote:
In comment 13029762 BlueLou said:
Quote:
"the offense struggling" early on or through much of the season, I have this to say about that '86 team.
And all you young 'uns who have bitched and continue to bitch about Kevin Gilbride's offense incorporated into TC's insistence on run/pass balance, please take note.
Bill Parcels' run on 1st and 2nd down no matter what Woody Hayes memorial philosophy and Ron Earhardt's offense was brutal. To hold back a QB like Phil Simms in his prime was almost tragic stupidity - except that it ended with Simms' 22/25 3 TD Superbowl.
G-d I cringed watching that offense of Earhardt's and Parcels'. Talk about predictable!!!
Gilbride's was an offensive genius like General Patton in comparison to those clowns dictating the '86 offense.
Whaaaat?? Do you recall that their best WR was Lionel Manuel, and that he didn't play from Week 5 until the playoffs? Who would you suggest he throw to? Earhardt a clown? Really? They were a running team with little talent at WR and a stud at TE in Bavaro. He ran the offense exactly as he should have, and exactly as Parcells wanted. And by the way, that clown's offense set the league record in '78 with NE 3,165 yards on the ground, and in '77 as Off Co his offense set the NFL single season scoring record that still stands with 589.
Some clown.
So in 77 and 78 Earhardt coached great offenses, what does that have to do with 1986 and how he ran that team under the direction of Bill Parcells?
Short on talent at WR, surely, so fucking play 2 TEs more you had Zeke Mowatt, possibly a top 10 TE in the league as your 2nd TE.
Did you watch that team? I was living in SF at the time and compared to Walsh's rendition of the WCO the Giants O was poorly managed. Parcells didn't trust Simms.
Lou I'm surprised at you. This post is ridiculous.
Do you think that Earhart forgot how to run an offense? Earhardt enacted the philosophy of his boss. And by the way, when he was OffCo at Pittsburgh, he turned Barry Foster into a star RB and had some people actually believing that Bubby Brister was an NFL QB.
Zeke Mowatt was coming off ACL surgery, missed all of '85 and wasn't right until the last quarter of the year when he began to take a bigger role.
If you're comparing the Giants to the 49ers you're a fool. Parcells and Walsh are polar opposites in football philosophy. Remember after the 1990 title game “What do you think of that West Coast Offense now?” When a reporter asked him if the Giants’ victory had “vindicated” their style of play, Parcells shot back, “It’s always been vindicated. It’s that new stuff that has something to prove.”
And in case you forgot, the Giants and their "poorly managed" offense beat the 49ers TWICE in 1986, once by 49-3 when they had everyone back.
"Parcells didn't trust Simms" is one of the dumbest statements ever made here. Parcells PROTECTED Simms by using their stellar running game and defense to win until Manuel came back and Mowatt was healthy. THAT is intelligent coaching.
Quote:
awful post, just awful
AP, give substance or just shut the fuck up. Bashing a post with zero grounded specific reasoning is the most useless childish garbage crap on the internet.
YOU SUCK!
NO YOU SUCK!
I SAID IT FIRST!!!
Jeez Louise...
The 8th in points scored is misleading I bet, because it doesn't subtract defensive scores but attributes all scoring to the "offense."
They weren't awful, but they were awful to watch and could have been much, much better and more efficient at, you know, scoring points. Parcels was practically obsessed with eating clock as opposed to scoring, IMO.
The team wound up +11 in turnovers (4th in the league) - browsing through the scoring for the year, you see a VERY consistent offense that could be counted on to put 17-21 points on the board every week - with that defense, much more than enough.
When the Giants played the 9ers on Monday night, why did the go into halftime down 17-0, and what did they change to flip that game around and win 21-17?
Let's fast forward a second to David Carr interviewing Rashad Jennings and his comment to Rashad (again on the topic of Eli's field generalship and how MacAdoo gives Eli freedom to change plays) about how smart Eli is, and how he has the freedom to audible to a pass play if the original running play requested from the sidelines looks like it will run "into a brick wall" - that was Carr's exact words.
That game was 17-0 Niners because the Fugazi Giants insisted on running into a brick wall all the first half as the 9ers were, IIRC, putting 9 guys in the box just to stop the Giants running game... and it worked.
For the second half the Giants came out passing against the 9ers tightly packed D and marched through them like a hot knife through room temperature butter.
They were idiots for not doing that earlier in the game. For not giving Phil the kind of options Eli has for changing plays at the LOS.
IMO. That's where my comment about BP not trusting Simms comes from.
And you are right to pick up that I really blame Parcels, not Earnhardt.
As for only one defensive touchdown I know I should have said "points scored by the D or set up by defensive turnovers..." Because Martin's was the only one I could remember (during the regular season obviously) but I recall the D being "responsible" for more than just that by giving the O opportunities via TOs.
But I couldn't actually find the stay of points scored by the defense vis a fast Google search. Nice job.
To this day I believe Phill Simms had the ability to be a better QB than Joe Montana, but had the bad luck of falling into an ass backwards offensive philosophy that 1) limited his opportunities to win titles and 2) kept him out of the hall of fame.
Phil was a great pure passer, saddled with shit for wideouts and an archaic offensive philosophy.
I don't see why having a great defense should be a justification for having a staid offense. Phil's lousy passing stats re TDs to INTs was largely because of that style of offense; not the predicate of why that offense was "smart" to run.
It's great to be able to run time of the clock at times, but what you should be aiming for on offense is to score points.
You realize that Walsh's teams won more titles than Parcels' right? You realize that some years under D coordinator Seifert the 9ers had one of the best Ds in the league, right? Was that treated by Walsh as reason to gear down and slow down his offense? Rubbish concepts. And I would argue that at times Walsh won with inferior talent.
To this day I believe Phill Simms had the ability to be a better QB than Joe Montana, but had the bad luck of falling into an ass backwards offensive philosophy that 1) limited his opportunities to win titles and 2) kept him out of the hall of fame.
Phil was a great pure passer, saddled with shit for wideouts and an archaic offensive philosophy.
I don't see why having a great defense should be a justification for having a staid offense. Phil's lousy passing stats re TDs to INTs was largely because of that style of offense; not the predicate of why that offense was "smart" to run.
It's great to be able to run time of the clock at times, but what you should be aiming for on offense is to score points.
You realize that Walsh's teams won more titles than Parcels' right? You realize that some years under D coordinator Seifert the 9ers had one of the best Ds in the league, right? Was that treated by Walsh as reason to gear down and slow down his offense? Rubbish concepts. And I would argue that at times Walsh won with inferior talent.
The Blind Slide included interviews with Walsh and Parcells, in which Walsh describes success on offense being about having a system, and Parcells describes success on defense being dependent on talent.
As for Simms, it's probably already been stated here but Walsh wanted him instead of Montana.
To this day I believe Phill Simms had the ability to be a better QB than Joe Montana, but had the bad luck of falling into an ass backwards offensive philosophy that 1) limited his opportunities to win titles and 2) kept him out of the hall of fame.
Phil was a great pure passer, saddled with shit for wideouts and an archaic offensive philosophy.
I don't see why having a great defense should be a justification for having a staid offense. Phil's lousy passing stats re TDs to INTs was largely because of that style of offense; not the predicate of why that offense was "smart" to run.
It's great to be able to run time of the clock at times, but what you should be aiming for on offense is to score points.
You realize that Walsh's teams won more titles than Parcels' right? You realize that some years under D coordinator Seifert the 9ers had one of the best Ds in the league, right? Was that treated by Walsh as reason to gear down and slow down his offense? Rubbish concepts. And I would argue that at times Walsh won with inferior talent.
You said the Giants offense was "poorly managed". No, it was not, it was run in a different style befitting a different football philosophy. You were obviously enamored of the WCO at the time, I was not, that's fine. I think the Giants ran the right offense for their philosophy and their geographical location and their personnel. And you still didn't tell me who Simms was supposed to throw it to with Manuel (best on NYG, avg otherwise) out and Mowatt recovering. Bobby Johnson was their #1, and McConkey wasn't even on the roster until week 5.
And I didn't tell you to piss off, so go fuck yourself (just kidding. We can agree to disagree).
As for only one defensive touchdown I know I should have said "points scored by the D or set up by defensive turnovers..." Because Martin's was the only one I could remember (during the regular season obviously) but I recall the D being "responsible" for more than just that by giving the O opportunities via TOs.
But I couldn't actually find the stay of points scored by the defense vis a fast Google search. Nice job.
Right - I said the defense was +11 in turnovers, FWIW, that was 5th in the league.
I believe the Giant offense was engineered around it's talents. That offensive line was excellent at run blocking, horrid at pass protection. 84' and 85' were career years for Simms in yardage, but he was sacked 55 and 52 times in each, respectively. By 86', Parcells/Earhardt shifted the offense accordingly, and Simms was sacked ONLY 45 times. For reference, Eli's WORST season - he was sacked 39 times in 2013. Let that sink in. The 1986 Giants offensive line was weaker in pass protection than the God-awful 2013 unit - and not by a little!
It wasn't a matter of Parcells not being bright enough to allow Phil to throw more, it was a matter of keeping Simms on the Sports page and off the Obituaries!
I give credit to Parcells to knowing his teams weaknesses and getting the absolute best out of what was a flawed offense.
Quote:
They were happy to play a style that would earn them 17-21 points per game when with their OL, Phil, Morris, and Bavaro and Galbreath they had enough weapons to score a good bit more.
As for only one defensive touchdown I know I should have said "points scored by the D or set up by defensive turnovers..." Because Martin's was the only one I could remember (during the regular season obviously) but I recall the D being "responsible" for more than just that by giving the O opportunities via TOs.
But I couldn't actually find the stay of points scored by the defense vis a fast Google search. Nice job.
Right - I said the defense was +11 in turnovers, FWIW, that was 5th in the league.
I believe the Giant offense was engineered around it's talents. That offensive line was excellent at run blocking, horrid at pass protection. 84' and 85' were career years for Simms in yardage, but he was sacked 55 and 52 times in each, respectively. By 86', Parcells/Earhardt shifted the offense accordingly, and Simms was sacked ONLY 45 times. For reference, Eli's WORST season - he was sacked 39 times in 2013. Let that sink in. The 1986 Giants offensive line was weaker in pass protection than the God-awful 2013 unit - and not by a little!
It wasn't a matter of Parcells not being bright enough to allow Phil to throw more, it was a matter of keeping Simms on the Sports page and off the Obituaries!
I give credit to Parcells to knowing his teams weaknesses and getting the absolute best out of what was a flawed offense.
Right. Play to your strengths. They were very weak at WR, no depth at TE while Mowatt was active but still recovering, and once they settled on Morris at RB and Carthon as lead blocker they were unstoppable on the ground. I loved watching them run at will.
But you are ignoring my example of the 9ers game on Monday night and completely ignoring my point about trusting Phil to change plays at the LOS to adjust to the defensive schemes and fronts the team was facing in real-time. Instead of adjusting as a half time remedy...
That OL didn't suck at pass blocking. They gave up a lot of sacks because that archaic offense didn't have 3 step drops and ways of getting the ball out of the QB's hands fast enough. And because damn near every time the DID pass it was 3rd and long. As for their "great" running game, weren't they middle of the pack in yards per rush? When your offense is obvious it's easier to defend...
Run, run, pass.
Run, run, pass.
How to make your QB
look like an ass!
Just hated that O philosophy. Let's aim to win by a late field goal!
But you are ignoring my example of the 9ers game on Monday night and completely ignoring my point about trusting Phil to change plays at the LOS to adjust to the defensive schemes and fronts the team was facing in real-time. Instead of adjusting as a half time remedy...
That OL didn't suck at pass blocking. They gave up a lot of sacks because that archaic offense didn't have 3 step drops and ways of getting the ball out of the QB's hands fast enough. And because damn near every time the DID pass it was 3rd and long. As for their "great" running game, weren't they middle of the pack in yards per rush? When your offense is obvious it's easier to defend...
Run, run, pass.
Run, run, pass.
How to make your QB
look like an ass!
Just hated that O philosophy. Let's aim to win by a late field goal!
Not ignoring your point Lou, just don't think in that era it was a prevalent as it is today. That really didn't become popular until Jim Kelly with Buffalo.
Nice rhyme though :-)
I agree Levy and Kelly popularized it to some extent. But the modern passing offense wasn't exactly "new" by 1986. Goes back to Sid Gilliam and the Rams.
I agree Levy and Kelly popularized it to some extent. But the modern passing offense wasn't exactly "new" by 1986. Goes back to Sid Gilliam and the Rams.
In 1984 and 85', Simms threw for 4044 and 3849 yards, respectively.
What was the difference? Simms had several more targets in 84', including Earnest Gray, a healthy Lionel Manuel, a healthy Zeke Mowatt, Byron Williams even pulled down a few hundred yards - that was the year they platooned Carpenter and Morris - those 2 combined for 1300 yards - it was an excellent, balanced offense and Simms thrived, again - his highest yeardage in a season.
85' still was diverse, with backs combining for over 1,000 receiving, Manuel with a solid 850 yards, Simms chucked for 3800+.
By 86, several key targets were gone, and Parcells knew they couldn't live with a quarterback spending half the game lying on his back. Really, the injuries to Mowatt and Manuel were the real game changers.
I've enjoyed going back through those stats. Nice to see the old names - Earnest Gray, Rob Carpenter - spotted Tom Mullady and John Mistler on that 84' roster.
Going through them though - really highlights one thing.
Phil Simms is one of the most underrated QB's in league history. He was CONSTANTLY under attack, never enjoyed a top-tier WR, had balls of steel - notoriously holding the ball far too long in his early years, waiting FOREVER for one of his shitty, shitty Wide Receivers to break free of coverage. He was fucking Braveheart. I truly believe, the best of the lot in that era.
I agree Levy and Kelly popularized it to some extent. But the modern passing offense wasn't exactly "new" by 1986. Goes back to Sid Gilliam and the Rams.
Yes, Unitas, Starr and that era plays called by QB, not at the LOS but in the huddle. Then Tom Landry and Paul Brown popularized plays being called by the coaches. The Giants used hand signals. Kelly and the Bills began the shift towards what we have now with the QB constantly looking to change the play at the OL
Quote:
Actually I believe that was the norm in old times. Not sure about audibles, but didn't guys like Starr and Unitas call their own plays?
I agree Levy and Kelly popularized it to some extent. But the modern passing offense wasn't exactly "new" by 1986. Goes back to Sid Gilliam and the Rams.
In 1984 and 85', Simms threw for 4044 and 3849 yards, respectively.
What was the difference? Simms had several more targets in 84', including Earnest Gray, a healthy Lionel Manuel, a healthy Zeke Mowatt, Byron Williams even pulled down a few hundred yards - that was the year they platooned Carpenter and Morris - those 2 combined for 1300 yards - it was an excellent, balanced offense and Simms thrived, again - his highest yeardage in a season.
85' still was diverse, with backs combining for over 1,000 receiving, Manuel with a solid 850 yards, Simms chucked for 3800+.
By 86, several key targets were gone, and Parcells knew they couldn't live with a quarterback spending half the game lying on his back. Really, the injuries to Mowatt and Manuel were the real game changers.
I've enjoyed going back through those stats. Nice to see the old names - Earnest Gray, Rob Carpenter - spotted Tom Mullady and John Mistler on that 84' roster.
Going through them though - really highlights one thing.
Phil Simms is one of the most underrated QB's in league history. He was CONSTANTLY under attack, never enjoyed a top-tier WR, had balls of steel - notoriously holding the ball far too long in his early years, waiting FOREVER for one of his shitty, shitty Wide Receivers to break free of coverage. He was fucking Braveheart. I truly believe, the best of the lot in that era.
good post
Robinson's most notable game was in week 13 of the 1986 season, when the Giants were playing the 49ers on Monday Night Football. The Giants trailed 17-0 at halftime, but scored three touchdowns in the third quarter to win the game. Robinson caught the second touchdown, a 34-yard pass from Phil Simms, but he made an incredible grab[2] on a 49-yard pass from Phil Simms, down to the 1-yard line, to set up the Giants' final score. He finished with 5 catches for a career high 116 yards receiving as the Giants won 21-17.[3] The Giants went on to win Super Bowl XXI that season over the Denver Broncos, and Robinson caught three passes for a team high 62 receiving yards in the big game.[4]
Parcells/Young virtually ignored receiver in the draft. Lionel Manuel was a 7th rd pick. They got lucky with him. With the rest? They got what they paid for.
It wasn't until 87' - Mark Ingram, Stephen Baker - that the Giants finally addressed the position. Both were in line with the rest of the decade. Weak receivers, though Ingram did have one of the most memorable catch and runs in team history.
Really, when Simms finally got a top shelf receiver in Mike Sherrard, they immediately turned into the Giants most dangerous QB-receiver combination in a generation. The Gods quickly intervened and broke Sherrards hip while he was running away from defenders on like a 70+ yard pass play from Simms. That really, really sucked. Always been a 'what-if' for me. If he didn't get hurt, I doubt they lose the season finale against Dallas - that game was razor close - that would have re-shuffled the playoff order. That Giants team had the leagues #1 ranked defense. LT and Simms could have exited properly, with another SB trophy instead of humiliation in SF.