The predictive power of the first Philly game

..

at that.

I would be interested to see how this compares with games against the Skins and Cowboys.

well we move and handle the ball..While the chart makes cool reading, it is not germain to whether we win or lose against the Eagles. New staffs and players on both sides of the ball for both teams..

In comment 13199086 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

well we move and handle the ball..While the chart makes cool reading, it is not germain to whether we win or lose against the Eagles. New staffs and players on both sides of the ball for both teams..

That's not the point of the thread.

Brown Recluse said:

Quote:

at that. I would be interested to see how this compares with games against the Skins and Cowboys.

As you wish...
Cowboys: Strong correlation last five years; not so much before that.
Year W/L Playoffs?
1999 WIN No
2000 WIN Yes
2001 WIN No
2002 WIN Yes
2003 LOSS No
2004 WIN No
2005 LOSS Yes
2006 WIN Yes
2007 LOSS Yes
2008 WIN Yes
2009 WIN No
2010 WIN No
2011 WIN Yes
2012 LOSS No
2013 LOSS No
2014 LOSS No
2015 LOSS No
2016 WIN TBD

Year W/L Playoffs?
2000 LOSS Yes
2001 WIN No
2002 WIN Yes
2003 WIN No
2004 WIN No
2005 WIN Yes
2006 WIN Yes
2007 WIN Yes
2008 WIN Yes
2009 WIN No
2010 WIN No
2011 LOSS Yes
2012 WIN No
2013 WIN No
2014 WIN No
2015 WIN No
2016 LOSS TBD
The good news: negative correlation the past 7 years. ;o)

In comment 13199086 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

well we move and handle the ball..While the chart makes cool reading, it is not germain to whether we win or lose against the Eagles. New staffs and players on both sides of the ball for both teams..

I disagree. I think what the chart says is that the Eagles are a good way for the Giants to find out if they are a good team or not. Say what you want about the Andy Reid Eagles, but they were a consistently good team. They had five years in a row over 10 wins. That's consistent success. More recently, by the time the Giants figured out Chip Kelly's offense, so did everyone else. But not soon enough.

And now here they come again, with a well coached defense and a offense built around minimizing a rookie QB's mistakes. I thought they outplayed Dallas, and only needed one more field goal at the end to win the game. Are they the best team in the division? Probably not. Are they, again, a decent measuring stick to see where the Giants stand? Absolutely. Kill the Eagles, and the Giants have momentum for the rest of the season. Get destroyed, and start questioning whether the Giants are going in the right direction.

In comment 13199132 mikeinbloomfield said:

Quote:

In comment 13199086 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: well we move and handle the ball..While the chart makes cool reading, it is not germain to whether we win or lose against the Eagles. New staffs and players on both sides of the ball for both teams.. I disagree. I think what the chart says is that the Eagles are a good way for the Giants to find out if they are a good team or not. Say what you want about the Andy Reid Eagles, but they were a consistently good team. They had five years in a row over 10 wins. That's consistent success. More recently, by the time the Giants figured out Chip Kelly's offense, so did everyone else. But not soon enough. And now here they come again, with a well coached defense and a offense built around minimizing a rookie QB's mistakes. I thought they outplayed Dallas, and only needed one more field goal at the end to win the game. Are they the best team in the division? Probably not. Are they, again, a decent measuring stick to see where the Giants stand? Absolutely. Kill the Eagles, and the Giants have momentum for the rest of the season. Get destroyed, and start questioning whether the Giants are going in the right direction.

Not buying..Kill the Eagles and we may or may not do well the remainder of the season..Lose to them and we may or may not do well the remainder of the season..It's certainly informative and B3 always puts much thought into his posts, but I don't believe it's anything other than cyclical which affects all teams, save for perhaps the Pats..

TC was a far better coach than Fassel, yet TC couldn't beat the Eagles and Fassel owned them..Collins did better than Eli has against them and no one would say he's in the same class as Eli..Again, cyclical..It either ends this Sunday or the cycle continues until the next game..

Thanks for posting those =)

We need to beat these effers

RE: We'll win or lose Sunday depending on how
mikeinbloomfield : 10:56 am : link : reply
And now here they come again, with a well coached defense and a offense built around minimizing a rookie QB's mistakes. I thought they outplayed Dallas, and only needed one more field goal at the end to win the game.

I felt they outplayed Dallas also.....their only problem was when they had Dallas on the ropes, they went conservative...


Are they the best team in the division? Probably not. Are they, again, a decent measuring stick to see where the Giants stand? Absolutely. Kill the Eagles, and the Giants have momentum for the rest of the season. Get destroyed, and start questioning whether the Giants are going in the right direction.

Some teams just have your number....but these things go in cycles....does a new coach change that? Maybe, maybe not....

One thing is for sure, our weakness is our OL, and Philly has the weapons to exploit it....It will be no surprise to Mac, that the Philly defense will be bringing the pressure....I think he over reacted to what he perceived the pressure would be from the Vikings and his game plan was too conservative.....you have to put points on the board against this defense....if you are playing catch up, you fall right into the Philly trap....

In comment 13199157 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

In comment 13199132 mikeinbloomfield said: Quote: In comment 13199086 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: well we move and handle the ball..While the chart makes cool reading, it is not germain to whether we win or lose against the Eagles. New staffs and players on both sides of the ball for both teams.. I disagree. I think what the chart says is that the Eagles are a good way for the Giants to find out if they are a good team or not. Say what you want about the Andy Reid Eagles, but they were a consistently good team. They had five years in a row over 10 wins. That's consistent success. More recently, by the time the Giants figured out Chip Kelly's offense, so did everyone else. But not soon enough. And now here they come again, with a well coached defense and a offense built around minimizing a rookie QB's mistakes. I thought they outplayed Dallas, and only needed one more field goal at the end to win the game. Are they the best team in the division? Probably not. Are they, again, a decent measuring stick to see where the Giants stand? Absolutely. Kill the Eagles, and the Giants have momentum for the rest of the season. Get destroyed, and start questioning whether the Giants are going in the right direction. Not buying..Kill the Eagles and we may or may not do well the remainder of the season..Lose to them and we may or may not do well the remainder of the season..It's certainly informative and B3 always puts much thought into his posts, but I don't believe it's anything other than cyclical which affects all teams, save for perhaps the Pats.. TC was a far better coach than Fassel, yet TC couldn't beat the Eagles and Fassel owned them..Collins did better than Eli has against them and no one would say he's in the same class as Eli..Again, cyclical..It either ends this Sunday or the cycle continues until the next game..

Well, my point about the Eagles was that they were not cyclical, not recently. Their lack of playoff success belies the fact that they were a very, very good team under Reid. Throw out his first and last years there, and they had 1 losing season out of 12, in 2005. That's ridiculous. They were, in an average year, a good measuring stick as to whether the Giants were a good team or not. That's all I'm saying. If they win this week, I will be more optimistic about the Giants going forward. If they lose, do we give up hope? Of course not. But we do go back to counting games the Giants should win against the weak sisters, and hoping for a couple upsets to squeeze into the playoffs, like the last couple of years.

In comment 13199202 mikeinbloomfield said:

Quote:

In comment 13199157 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: In comment 13199132 mikeinbloomfield said: Quote: In comment 13199086 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: well we move and handle the ball..While the chart makes cool reading, it is not germain to whether we win or lose against the Eagles. New staffs and players on both sides of the ball for both teams.. I disagree. I think what the chart says is that the Eagles are a good way for the Giants to find out if they are a good team or not. Say what you want about the Andy Reid Eagles, but they were a consistently good team. They had five years in a row over 10 wins. That's consistent success. More recently, by the time the Giants figured out Chip Kelly's offense, so did everyone else. But not soon enough. And now here they come again, with a well coached defense and a offense built around minimizing a rookie QB's mistakes. I thought they outplayed Dallas, and only needed one more field goal at the end to win the game. Are they the best team in the division? Probably not. Are they, again, a decent measuring stick to see where the Giants stand? Absolutely. Kill the Eagles, and the Giants have momentum for the rest of the season. Get destroyed, and start questioning whether the Giants are going in the right direction. Not buying..Kill the Eagles and we may or may not do well the remainder of the season..Lose to them and we may or may not do well the remainder of the season..It's certainly informative and B3 always puts much thought into his posts, but I don't believe it's anything other than cyclical which affects all teams, save for perhaps the Pats.. TC was a far better coach than Fassel, yet TC couldn't beat the Eagles and Fassel owned them..Collins did better than Eli has against them and no one would say he's in the same class as Eli..Again, cyclical..It either ends this Sunday or the cycle continues until the next game.. Well, my point about the Eagles was that they were not cyclical, not recently. Their lack of playoff success belies the fact that they were a very, very good team under Reid. Throw out his first and last years there, and they had 1 losing season out of 12, in 2005. That's ridiculous. They were, in an average year, a good measuring stick as to whether the Giants were a good team or not. That's all I'm saying. If they win this week, I will be more optimistic about the Giants going forward. If they lose, do we give up hope? Of course not. But we do go back to counting games the Giants should win against the weak sisters, and hoping for a couple upsets to squeeze into the playoffs, like the last couple of years.

That's fair

Kicking our asses through all the turmoil they've had and rotating QB issues, Chip Kelly ridding himself of the "bad" guys in the locker room and now Doug "Visor" Pederson trotting out a rookie QB. I'm fucking tired of losing to these assholes every year. Someone somewhere in that organization has something right.

In comment 13199132 mikeinbloomfield said:

Quote:

In comment 13199086 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: well we move and handle the ball..While the chart makes cool reading, it is not germain to whether we win or lose against the Eagles. New staffs and players on both sides of the ball for both teams.. I disagree. I think what the chart says is that the Eagles are a good way for the Giants to find out if they are a good team or not. Say what you want about the Andy Reid Eagles, but they were a consistently good team. They had five years in a row over 10 wins. That's consistent success. More recently, by the time the Giants figured out Chip Kelly's offense, so did everyone else. But not soon enough. And now here they come again, with a well coached defense and a offense built around minimizing a rookie QB's mistakes. I thought they outplayed Dallas, and only needed one more field goal at the end to win the game. Are they the best team in the division? Probably not. Are they, again, a decent measuring stick to see where the Giants stand? Absolutely. Kill the Eagles, and the Giants have momentum for the rest of the season. Get destroyed, and start questioning whether the Giants are going in the right direction.

Great post.

We have become a finesse type of team. Not saying one always beats the other but they sure do a great job of taking us off our game and bullying us. Feel like a kid who has his lunch money stolen when we play them.

Would be great if someone would stand up and say enough is enough.

Joey in VA said:

Quote:

Kicking our asses through all the turmoil they've had and rotating QB issues, Chip Kelly ridding himself of the "bad" guys in the locker room and now Doug "Visor" Pederson trotting out a rookie QB. I'm fucking tired of losing to these assholes every year. Someone somewhere in that organization has something right.

Yet they have lost to Dallas ten times in sixteen meetings since 2009. They've also dropped four straight to Washington.

In comment 13199219 Joey in VA said:

Quote:

Kicking our asses through all the turmoil they've had and rotating QB issues, Chip Kelly ridding himself of the "bad" guys in the locker room and now Doug "Visor" Pederson trotting out a rookie QB. I'm fucking tired of losing to these assholes every year. Someone somewhere in that organization has something right.

Yeah, it's embarrassing at this point.

This is already the week I dread.

These guys have bullied us for so long I don't know what to do.

Our best hope to reverse this trend is for Patton Oswalt to paintgun Philadelphia Phil one more time.

BlueHurricane said:

Quote:

We have become a finesse type of team. Not saying one always beats the other but they sure do a great job of taking us off our game and bullying us. Feel like a kid who has his lunch money stolen when we play them.

Finesse vs. physical is one way to look at it. More specifically, I think we match up poorly because our offensive line can't match their power up front, and our QB lacks the mobility to buy time to exploit their secondary when his protection breaks down. Romo, Prescott, Griffin, even Cousins can make the first man miss. Eli can't. Plus, he's never had a top-tier left tackle like the others have.

and while the caveat about causation is noted, the fact is that for any number of reasons games vs the Eagles are a very good indication of what the Giants are as a team.

Recent history is not encouraging. Far more than anything else, Coughlin's dreadful, not bad, dreadful record vs the Eagles - complete with humiliating losses - is why I was not sad to see him go. Reid & Kelly played him like a sap.

Not all on the coaches, however. Where are the players that step up their game vs their most bitter rival? Soft, mistake filled football.

Real test for McAdoo and possible to really make a statement mid season.

I've brought this up a few times recently. It was a complete flip of Coughlin.

He had a streak of NINE wins in a row vs Philadelphia. Lots of them quality wins as well. Not Matt Barkley.

Nine times.

Nine times?

Nine times.

In comment 13199280 Overseer said:

Quote:

I've brought this up a few times recently. It was a complete flip of Coughlin. He had a streak of NINE wins in a row vs Philadelphia. Lots of them quality wins as well. Not Matt Barkley.

And it was when he stopped beating Reid - losing five of their last six meetings - that his Giant tenure went south. The first game in 2003, marked by Seubert's injury and Westbrook going DJax on Jeff Feagles, was the beginning of the end.

While he has had a few good games against them, he has come up short far more often. Not always on him as the O-line has not exactly been his best friend in these match-ups over the years, but Eli has also been sloppy with the ball. Seems like pick-6 and Eagle games go hand in hand.

I have always felt that the Eagles do a good job of "shrinking" the field on Eli and that causes him to get flustered and challenges his accuracy on timing and come-back routes. Then he starts heaving the ball downfield but with little success as it becomes more desperation versus a gameplan.

The one thing I always thought neutralized the Eagle Defenses was a big, tall receiver (Shockey, Plax and even Nicks). But that isn't our playbook anymore...

IMO almost every year regardless of previous performance they come out playing as if they are more motivated, bigger, stronger, faster, meaner, more physical, better in every way - than the Giants offense.

I fully expect them to literally not figuratively beat the ever-loving shit out of each and every Giants offensive player on the field in this upcoming game. It comes down to if we can stop their offense which isn't all that great.

Winning this game is huge, it's always huge.

In comment 13199302 Big Blue Blogger said:

Quote:

In comment 13199280 Overseer said: Quote: I've brought this up a few times recently. It was a complete flip of Coughlin. He had a streak of NINE wins in a row vs Philadelphia. Lots of them quality wins as well. Not Matt Barkley. And it was when he stopped beating Reid - losing five of their last six meetings - that his Giant tenure went south. The first game in 2003, marked by Seubert's injury and Westbrook going DJax on Jeff Feagles, was the beginning of the end.

Tom's last big win against the Eagles came in '08 at Philly when the offensive line dominated their defense to the tune of 219 yards rushing on 45 runs in 39:10 of possession.

The Giants leading receiver that night was Kevin Boss. Plaxico was held to 1 catch for 17 yards and a TD, but his run blocking on the edges was devastating and Jim Johnson still had to treat him as a threat at any moment.

Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

While he has had a few good games against them, he has come up short far more often. Not always on him as the O-line has not exactly been his best friend in these match-ups over the years, but Eli has also been sloppy with the ball. Seems like pick-6 and Eagle games go hand in hand.

Not to mention the bizarre, unforced fumbles at key moments of consecutive meetings (2009 and 2010).

In comment 13199280 Overseer said:

Quote:

I've brought this up a few times recently. It was a complete flip of Coughlin. He had a streak of NINE wins in a row vs Philadelphia. Lots of them quality wins as well. Not Matt Barkley. Nine times. Nine times? Nine times.

I remember reading a story after that streak ended. The Giants were about to make it 10 in a row as they were up 9-0 until the end of the 3rd quarter when the Eagles scored 10 unanswered points and went on to win 10-9. While they were behind, one of the Eagle players said he thought to himself, "here we go again."

But they came back to win and then won the next 6 of 7 games against the Giants. It was like they had to get over that mental hump though and just beat them.

Makes you wonder if that's where the Giants are now mentally. Or at least, if thats where they have been through most of Coughlins tenure here. A new coach and two game win streak after a refreshing bye week might get help.

.

strong concern for years, and it seems that winning the first Eagles game is a sign whether or not the Giants are for real. That said, in the 4th quarter, the Eagles backed out of FG range with that goofy lateral/forward pass combo, followed by a sack. Since their kicker had been money from a greater distance, watching the game my WTF light lit up. The question of course is why not play conservatively, utilize low risk options and make it a two score game at that point. They did not, it is suggested that coaching blew the game at that point. So, this is not Andy Reid here, and the coaching is not up to snuff. Still, winning this matchup, should create thrust for the Giants, and set up a later showdown with the Cows. But it is different from other years and the statistical coincidence of winning the coming game might be of less significance. It does seem by any measure though to be a critical game against a divisional opponent, and of primordial importance.

and his in game decision making can be suspect (although so was TC's in the past few seasons), but I would have liked to bring in Andy Reid when he was available a few years back. The stars obviously didn't quite align since Coughlin was still riding the 2011 SB.

Reid's team just strike me as very well prepared and he's pretty much always had merely good, but far from great talent to work with (including now in KC). No coincidence that once he got TO, Philly took the next step ...although thankfully fell short vs New England.

And as soon as we win on Sunday, I am placing my wager on playoffs in Vegas...

RE: We'll win or lose Sunday depending on how
mikeinbloomfield : 10:56 am : link : reply
In comment 13199086 Big Blue '56 said:
Quote:
well we move and handle the ball..While the chart makes cool reading, it is not germain to whether we win or lose against the Eagles. New staffs and players on both sides of the ball for both teams..


I disagree. I think what the chart says is that the Eagles are a good way for the Giants to find out if they are a good team or not. Say what you want about the Andy Reid Eagles, but they were a consistently good team. They had five years in a row over 10 wins. That's consistent success. More recently, by the time the Giants figured out Chip Kelly's offense, so did everyone else. But not soon enough.

And now here they come again, with a well coached defense and a offense built around minimizing a rookie QB's mistakes. I thought they outplayed Dallas, and only needed one more field goal at the end to win the game. Are they the best team in the division? Probably not. Are they, again, a decent measuring stick to see where the Giants stand? Absolutely. Kill the Eagles, and the Giants have momentum for the rest of the season. Get destroyed, and start questioning whether the Giants are going in the right direction.

I think your 100% Right Beat Philly and show a semblance
of a run game and I think it will be a huge confidence
boost for this team ...!!

BBB - that correlation is kind of amazing actually.
Jimmy Googs : 2:06 pm : link : reply
And as soon as we win on Sunday, I am placing my wager on playoffs in Vegas..

Hopefully your just not on something ....
But I am not a gambler but I just might do the same ....

that's been the trend for few years where Eagles have owned the LOS for most part.

A win..really changes the pysche of this team (even with many new adds) or org going forward. A monkey off the back type deal.

Just a W whether by 50 or 1 point.

In comment 13199807 Bluesbreaker said:

Quote:

BBB - that correlation is kind of amazing actually. Jimmy Googs : 2:06 pm : link : reply And as soon as we win on Sunday, I am placing my wager on playoffs in Vegas.. Hopefully your just not on something .... But I am not a gambler but I just might do the same ....

Correlations like the above is not gambling. :-)

They always make big plays and their aggressive defense sets the tone. I expect them to pressure us into 3 and outs. Eli never seems comfortable playing against them. If the offense does not improve we will be lucky to score 13 pts.

In comment 13199364 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

I have always felt that the Eagles do a good job of "shrinking" the field on Eli and that causes him to get flustered and challenges his accuracy on timing and come-back routes. Then he starts heaving the ball downfield but with little success as it becomes more desperation versus a gameplan.

Excellent observation. I hadn't thought about it but once I read this, I thought it was exactly right.

I just hope the Giants take care of business on Sunday. The 'Skins being on a bye means we'll likely get the game in the DC area and I can hardly wait.

It must be given consideration as revelant. Being a divisional game of course it has relevance for he division title. But as there is not such a strong corellation with the other two division rivals there is obviously some other relationship and play offs with the Eagles.

Have no idea what that might be, but it seems too regular to be coincident.

I would say there is a decent chance it holds this year as well. Cowboys are in front in the division. Whoever loses will fall further behind Boys with both teams competing with each other for a WC spot.

the eagles have been consistently good during that time frame (won loss record of 118-91, playoffs 7 out of the 13 seasons, only 3 losing seasons out of 13) so they have been a barometer of whether we are playoff worthy or not.

In comment 13199380 Patrick77 said:

Quote:

IMO almost every year regardless of previous performance they come out playing as if they are more motivated, bigger, stronger, faster, meaner, more physical, better in every way - than the Giants offense. I fully expect them to literally not figuratively beat the ever-loving shit out of each and every Giants offensive player on the field in this upcoming game. It comes down to if we can stop their offense which isn't all that great. Winning this game is huge, it's always huge.

you forgot greener...oh wait that's the jets.

on whether Eli can hang a little longer in the pocket or create a bit more time for himself with some subtle movements. It is obvious this year that the passing game has suffered because he has been too quick in releasing the ball or often taking less versus waiting for the better opportunity.

Eli is playing into the Defense's hands as they only need to ensure they 1) cover Beckham for his first read or 2) swarm tackle Beckham if he cuts his route short.

Clearly have to throw on first down in this game, even if its for the 5-yard variety because Eli's internal clock isn't going to allow for longer third down throws to materialize.

Having Jennings/Perkins be a factor in gaining positive yards on outlet passes will keep Eli in control and also force Eagles to defend whole field. This is usually not the case when we play them. Can't keep looking to Donnell in the middle of field as he has moving backwards in his development.

And I expect that it will bear out this year once again: if the Giants win this week, I think we make the playoffs. If not, we won't.

In comment 13200353 gmenatlarge said:

Quote:

you forgot greener...oh wait that's the jets.

The eagles would definitely be greener than the Giants...

Les in TO said:

Quote:

The eagles have been consistently good during that time frame (won loss record of 118-91, playoffs 7 out of the 13 seasons, only 3 losing seasons out of 13) so they have been a barometer of whether we are playoff worthy or not.

That pretty much captures what's at work here. The last time the first Eagles game didn't determine (or at least reflect) the prospects for a Giant season was 1999, when Philly stunk and the Giants weren't much better. Even that year, an early sweep of the Eagles went a long way toward keeping the Giants afloat well into December, when they faded with an 0-3 finish against three playoff-bound teams.

Not trying to make too much of the correlation here. Some of what we see here is just timing and coincidence, added to the obvious inherent importance of a division game against a perennial contender. But the history underscores what we already knew: this is one week when "Hey, it's just one game" doesn't really apply.