It's almost a total repeat of last year's preseason. A lot of the same questions being asked. Can you just flip the switch when the regular season starts was the main theme just like last year. And Eli saying we will look at the video and figure it out. We have to play better yada yada yada.
As a fan it is a little disconcerting to see the offense struggle so mightily especially in preseason. Defenses don't scheme the way they do for regular season games. That's why a lot teams fans are given to false hope when they see their teams offense humming along and putting up a bunch of points only to crash and burn when the games count.
What is disappointing is that the starting offensive line showed no spine. They all talked a good game heading into training camp but we have yet to see the toughness they have espoused would be their mantra heading into the regular season. Very disappointing to say the least. But, they protected Eli very well last year even with absence of a credible running game so I don't see why they can't protect him again this year.
I think the thing that bothers me most is that other then the tightend position they have a host of very good skill postion players and one great one that should make this offense hell on wheels. So why Jerry Reese chose to ignore the o-line in the draft left a lot of people shaking their heads. I guess we'll just have to keep our fingers crossed and hope they get their shit together. It's basically the same offense so there should be no chemistry issues. But watching this preseason you would think they are playing together for the first time. Hard to figure.
... I think everyone feels your frustration about the O-line. Well, at least several BBIers.
To maintain my sanity. I've come to accept the premise that the Giants did not make a move along the offensive line because there were so many other holes to fill on a talent-challenged roster. But, if I'm a betting man, the O-line will get a significant infusion of talent during the 2017 off-season.
No action in offseason via draft or FA. What level of talent can you reasonably expect to shake loose as the cuts begin? I think we are stuck with what we have which is concerning.
Can't go forward if keep taking steps back. Even Eli was quoted with same comments in the post game...
He didn't get any new ones but he wasn't ignoring it?
not sure if true but if that was accurate?
why not say....it is a competition and best man wins.
bottomline...this OL need MORE....talent and bodies.
even if we decide to leave last years starters.....we have NO back-ups.....we have 20 million in cap....WTF!!!
... I think everyone feels your frustration about the O-line. Well, at least several BBIers.
To maintain my sanity. I've come to accept the premise that the Giants did not make a move along the offensive line because there were so many other holes to fill on a talent-challenged roster. But, if I'm a betting man, the O-line will get a significant infusion of talent during the 2017 off-season.
Exactly.
The opportunities to upgrade the O-Line in free agency were all less than ideal, and in the draft it would have meant sacrificing more upgrades on a historically bad defense or not adding another dynamic WR to a corps that was painfully thin. Defense was a priority this year. Next year, the free agent market will be should be much better for teams looking to upgrade at RT, and the 2017 looks to be fairly deep for OGs and OTs.
Off the top of my head, I'd say the Bills have good O-Line depth, but I also think that there are more teams suffering from a lack of it than there are teams who can boast of it, which is why a guy like Charles Brown still has a job.
we have eli and beckham which will be good for several huge plays a year. other than that, our offense stinks, has stunk, and gets its azz handed to them by almost every quality front 7 they go up against.
go back and look at the Vikings game, the Seahawks game, Eagles, you see a non-competitive offensive line. and there is no reason to think it will be any different this year. we chose continuity - continuing to be soft and unskilled up front.
while i agree that our depth is pretty poor (in a vacuum), this is actually a point i agree with as well. i think a lot are too close to the source of the NFCE and see what Dallas has assembled...but who exactly has a stellar OL otherwise?
i'd be shocked if a single person here could name more than 2-3 starters on ANY OL outside the NFCE. most are lucky to have a couple of above average guys along the line...
that said, ours seems not great at the moment for sure.
Our 2 yard square outs.
Such a BS offense. Not even close to being a high functioning WCO.
Our 2 yard square outs.
Such a BS offense. Not even close to being a high functioning WCO.
Do you really believe that what you saw last night was the actual offense? Come on man.
I'll say it again (for the 100th time):
If a LONG TERM SOLUTION AT LT was available, then they would push Flowers to RT.
Do you have a long term solution at LT? Okung has never played a full season.
LTs are not easy to come by. Except on BBI.
we have eli and beckham which will be good for several huge plays a year. other than that, our offense stinks, has stunk, and gets its azz handed to them by almost every quality front 7 they go up against.
go back and look at the Vikings game, the Seahawks game, Eagles, you see a non-competitive offensive line. and there is no reason to think it will be any different this year. we chose continuity - continuing to be soft and unskilled up front.
+1
If you take out the saints and Niners games this team has a mediocre offense. Playing against the Eagles and Vikings made me realize this offense inept against teams with any semblance of a front 7.
Quality starters and depth go hand in hand.
If you have near all-pros across several positions on your line, who are durable, you can have a project like Hart as your swing guy - much like Brewer was for us years ago.
But when you have a starting LT who's still raw from a technique standpoint, an above avg. LG who's hurt and two journeymen castoffs manning RG and RG, and raw undrafted guys behind them who really should be your second team options, that's a problem.
I wasn't a Flowers guy. I think he was too raw and too one-dimensional to draft so highly and throw right into the mix at LT. I would have preferred to draft the CB from Michigan St.
But now that he's here, I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that Flowers can't be a LT. It's just going to take more time.
Let's take a look at some of the highly drafted LTs of recent years:
- Brandon Scherff, whom many of us wanted in 2015 is a G.
- Andrus Peat, whom the Saints took right we took Flowers, has started all of 8 games and has been moved inside to G.
- Cameron Erving was moved to G and then moved to C when Alex Mack left via FA.
- Cedric Ogbuehi hasn't started a single game yet for CIN.
- Greg Robinson, the #2 overall in 2014, who many draft nils said was to the most physically gifted T (if raw) to come out in years was abysmal last season.
- Taylor Lewan went #11 in 2014, the pick just before Beckham, is starting at LT for Tennessee and gave up five sacks last season.
- Luke Joeckel went #2 overall in 2013 and is about to bust out of the league altogether.
My point is, some people just assume that a highly drafted OT will come in, start and dominate from day 1 - where of all the guys to go in the last few years, Jake Matthews is really the only guy who's lived up to his billing. Not everyone is Orlando Pace. These guys are playing one of the toughest positions on the field and need 2-3 years to devlop their bodies and technique.
I think Flowers will be fine.
Yea. It's preseason. So what? Is there anyone on BBI who truly believes the Giants are suddenly going to be in the top 10 in rushing once the season starts?
We all know the rushing game is a disaster. We just don't know exactly how much of a disaster it is going to be. All I can say is: "Nice way to be heading into the regular season. Really nice."
Quote:
and if I get a reasonable answer. WHO, aside from possibly Dallas, has the OL depth so lamented on here? Teams are scrambling, as we are, to put together, whole, healthy, frontliners..Do you think improvement is a mere phone call away?
Quality starters and depth go hand in hand.
If you have near all-pros across several positions on your line, who are durable, you can have a project like Hart as your swing guy - much like Brewer was for us years ago.
But when you have a starting LT who's still raw from a technique standpoint, an above avg. LG who's hurt and two journeymen castoffs manning RG and RG, and raw undrafted guys behind them who really should be your second team options, that's a problem.
I wasn't a Flowers guy. I think he was too raw and too one-dimensional to draft so highly and throw right into the mix at LT. I would have preferred to draft the CB from Michigan St.
But now that he's here, I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that Flowers can't be a LT. It's just going to take more time.
Let's take a look at some of the highly drafted LTs of recent years:
- Brandon Scherff, whom many of us wanted in 2015 is a G.
- Andrus Peat, whom the Saints took right we took Flowers, has started all of 8 games and has been moved inside to G.
- Cameron Erving was moved to G and then moved to C when Alex Mack left via FA.
- Cedric Ogbuehi hasn't started a single game yet for CIN.
- Greg Robinson, the #2 overall in 2014, who many draft nils said was to the most physically gifted T (if raw) to come out in years was abysmal last season.
- Taylor Lewan went #11 in 2014, the pick just before Beckham, is starting at LT for Tennessee and gave up five sacks last season.
- Luke Joeckel went #2 overall in 2013 and is about to bust out of the league altogether.
My point is, some people just assume that a highly drafted OT will come in, start and dominate from day 1 - where of all the guys to go in the last few years, Jake Matthews is really the only guy who's lived up to his billing. Not everyone is Orlando Pace. These guys are playing one of the toughest positions on the field and need 2-3 years to devlop their bodies and technique.
I think Flowers will be fine.
Speaking of quality, this is a quality post..Thanks for the details
area junc : 9:20 am : link : reply
into the stink category too. I hate his offense. Our 3 run plays - inside hand-off, Shotgun handoff and outside zone stretch.
Our 2 yard square outs.
Such a BS offense. Not even close to being a high functioning WCO.
The self-professed insider is now making claims on what the offense is based on preseason games.
Man, it sucks around here sometimes.
Quote:
and i throw McAdoo
area junc : 9:20 am : link : reply
into the stink category too. I hate his offense. Our 3 run plays - inside hand-off, Shotgun handoff and outside zone stretch.
Our 2 yard square outs.
Such a BS offense. Not even close to being a high functioning WCO.
The self-professed insider is now making claims on what the offense is based on preseason games.
Man, it sucks around here sometimes.
That clearly from inside the Mike Sullivan camp. Coaching change is imminent.
just a thought...How about "how many teams have poorer depth than the Giants do at this point?" Depth that's a drop off, but still can somewhat "hold forte for a while in there"...Do the the Giants 2nd and 3rd string OL measure up to those other teams depth as far as quality? No team can have all pros across the board...but that second line likely sees action over the course of the season (due to injuries etc etc). Do Giants depth measure up to an adequate depth as some teams may have or not?
Quote:
and if I get a reasonable answer. WHO, aside from possibly Dallas, has the OL depth so lamented on here? Teams are scrambling, as we are, to put together, whole, healthy, frontliners..Do you think improvement is a mere phone call away?
just a thought...How about "how many teams have poorer depth than the Giants do at this point?" Depth that's a drop off, but still can somewhat "hold forte for a while in there"...Do the the Giants 2nd and 3rd string OL measure up to those other teams depth as far as quality? No team can have all pros across the board...but that second line likely sees action over the course of the season (due to injuries etc etc). Do Giants depth measure up to an adequate depth as some teams may have or not?
Depth? I would consider it a luxury to be worried about the depth of the Giants non-starting 5. I'm worried the Giants have Richburg and Pugh; a work in progress with Flowers; and Newhouse and Jerry, probably neither one of whom would start for the majority of NFL teams. Who the fuck is "ok" with the starting 5 that they have progressed to the next level and is worried about depth? Geez Louise.
Quote:
and if I get a reasonable answer. WHO, aside from possibly Dallas, has the OL depth so lamented on here? Teams are scrambling, as we are, to put together, whole, healthy, frontliners..Do you think improvement is a mere phone call away?
just a thought...How about "how many teams have poorer depth than the Giants do at this point?" Depth that's a drop off, but still can somewhat "hold forte for a while in there"...Do the the Giants 2nd and 3rd string OL measure up to those other teams depth as far as quality? No team can have all pros across the board...but that second line likely sees action over the course of the season (due to injuries etc etc). Do Giants depth measure up to an adequate depth as some teams may have or not?
Depth shouldn't be measured by how backups fare when they come in 3-4 at a time. That's not reality and not how the REGULAR season works..Generally, one guy is plugged in to replace an ailing vet. The frontliners adapt to the newbie..Assessing an OL in preseason is silly, imo, especially with the regulars only playing a quarter or so..Worse case scenario? With our improved D (on paper), I'll take ladt year's Offense with their OL, warts and all..But hey, that's just me