be the smartest man in the room, but if your players don't execute, then it means nothing. There were plenty of opportunities to score mid-20's and more, but for drops, errant passes, failed blocks, and inopportune penalties. Sometimes it's the players.
Poor offensive performance this year, in no small part due to being with the same personnel grouping 95% of the time.
The guy has never presided as OC over a decent offense. McAdoo says we're going to look long and hard at everything, well, if we're OK with improving underperforming players, no reason why coaches or coordinators shouldn't be subject to the same scrutiny.
Hell yes. Seriously. Do you want to keep thia Vanilla offense that has not done anything since Mcadoo arrived? Think about every preseason how this offense performed and how everyone wondered if Mcadoo was just calling vanilla plays in preseason? 90% enough said.
I can't fathom the team not adjusting over 17 games
would have to fire himself. Sullivan is basically there to give McAdoo his juice box and talk to the players. You all know McAdoo is calling the plays in his offense why do you constantly pretend like it is someone else?
Seriously in all the games this season how many times did the television crew even cut to Sullivan? There's your answer.
McAdoo is a much better game manager than I expected, and I think he's part of the future of the organization. His offensive play calling (however much he leads Eli) leaves something to be desired. Given that, I don't know whether a new OC would be able to give the offense more variety. A lot of people talk about how the personnel was too limiting that we were forced to be more conservative than we might be with other personnel. If that is the case, is there little value in bringing in a new OC? Is it just a matter of bringing in playmakers? At what point does the OC have a responsibility to rejuvenate the offense or should we expect the OC to do so? Is our OC a relatively superfluous job given McAdoo's function?
But there is an aspect involved with the Offense that needs to be changed. You can't leave things as they are after the putrid output this O achieved this season.
I personally believe MacAdoo is taking on too much
Either before or after Sean Payton was his OC, Fassel gave his RBs coach the title of OC. However, Fassel called all the plays and everyone knew that Fassel was the one responsible for the offense.
I think we've got the same situation here. It's McAdoo's offense that the Giants are running. Sullivan is the OC in name only. He doesn't deserve to be fired but he could well take the hit for McAdoo's play calling.
With a poor OL, no TE, or a true #2 WR hard to blame coaches
And at RB, you had a good blocker who's very slow in Jennings, and Perkins who's a decent runner but I guess took some time to develop his blocking skills. And of course Vereen missed a chunk of the season.
When the offense turned ugly in Gilbride's last season, he was very forthcoming during an interview (during the season, not after he was forced into retirement)... he said something like when you have glaring weaknesses in talent, no matter what adjustments you make, teams quickly catch on and counter those adjustments. You can make an argument he was deflecting blame and looking after his own butt, but it makes sense.
Giants faced cover 2 defense mostly. The way to beat that (not an expert, but according to everything I read/heard) is a good running game & with a decent TE to threaten the middle of the field. Giants had neither. And to top it off, they had a slot WR, coming back from serious injuries playing outside.
We have an offensive coordinator? That's shocking.
Get McAdoo someone who actually shares his philosophy. Right now it's like bubble gum and popsicle sticks holding Eli and Ben McAdoo together. I think Sully is here for Eli, and only Eli. Right now it's square peg, round hole - Eli is just too smart a QB to not be able to work in this offense, but it is not best suited for him. He's a gunslinger who reads the defense pre-snap as well as anyone playing the game (which is how he is "getting by" in the WCO imo). He certainly doesn't have the consistent footwork that the WCO bases progressions off of, and when the offensive line is shit and you don't trust them, no running game, well, all the timing gets messed up and you have a broken offense.
Nassib is better suited to this offense, which many suspected was a significant motivator for the organization in moving in this direction (players like Victor Cruz publicly said something to this effect when McAdoo was hired).
McAdoo is here for the future, and if he continues having success he'll get his own OC and QB (Nassib or someone else) pretty soon through attrition. He's not even 40 yet!
hard to blame the OC when the HC is calling the plays. I agree with
The Giants couldn't get OBJ free most of the year. They couldn't score at all this year and couldn't sustain drives. Now is it more a matter of execution, game-planning or a combo of both? There were teams in this league with lesser talent and actually played much better on offense. The West Coast Offense seemed like it was not in synch at all. I think the OC is a guy that would also be making in game adjustments. I'm not so sure we saw enough of that either. Quite frankly, I'd keep Sullivan around in some capacity, but would get a real WCO coordinator in here. A guy with experience and some success in this league. McAdoo doesn't have the time to devote to the Offense, as a Head Coach. Get somebody in here that can turn this offense around!
...there's little reason to consider him an important part of the solution.
Does Mike Sullivan "deserve" to be fired? Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I couldn't care less about the justice of his fate. I just want the Giants to have the best possible coordinator for the offense they are running and the talent they are likely to have in 2017. While I don't have a list of smart, up-and-coming, WCO-savvy coaches, it's hard to believe that there isn't a better fit out there than Sullivan.
RE: hard to blame the OC when the HC is calling the plays. I agree with
When the offense turned ugly in Gilbride's last season, he was very forthcoming during an interview (during the season, not after he was forced into retirement)... he said something like when you have glaring weaknesses in talent, no matter what adjustments you make, teams quickly catch on and counter those adjustments. You can make an argument he was deflecting blame and looking after his own butt, but it makes sense.
I don't think he was covering his ass. It reads more as an accurate assessment than anything else. Instead of a read and react option route where Eli and the receiver are taking advantage of the DB by making the same reads inside the play, the receivers were getting taken out at the stem of the route and forced out of the driver's seat on that decision - that's when Eli and the receivers looked so out of whack. The option on the route is the exploit and where the "complexity" came from, so for a defense it makes sense to not let the receiver get to the point where the receiver can execute their downfield read. Cut off the decision. That's the counter and that's the adjustments teams made to defeat it.
As with any 'Repeal and Replace'-type discussion...
...the big question is what comes next. One obvious candidate is Alex Van Pelt, who worked alongside McAdoo in Green Bay and succeeded him as QB coach. I don't know what kind of relationship they have, or how well regarded Van Pelt is in the McCarthy tree.
Mike McCarthy runs his offensive staff as a braintrust (with himself at the top), and rotates the coaches through different roles. Van Pelt has previously coached the Green Bay RBs, and divided his time between WRs and QBs in 2015. He's not all that high on the official org chart, with AHC-Offense Tom Clements and OC Edgar Bennett outranking him. So Sullivan's job would be a clear promotion.
Van Pelt's one season as Offensive Coordinator in Buffalo was a mess, but so was the whole team. Van Pelt replaced Turk Schonert just before the start of the season, and Dick Jauron was fired in November. (Our old friend Perry Fewell took over, earning respect around the League for his work as Interim HC on a sinking ship.) The next year, he seems to have done a pretty good job with Josh Freeman in Tampa, though I think he was still around when Freeman regressed in 2011.
I'm sure there are other, stronger possibilities. If McAdoo were reaching back to his roots, though, Van Pelt would rate an interview.
is look to copy the Cowboys model. I think that's a lot more responsible for their recent success (well, that and all the picks on the OL) than anything else.
They went out and hired several ex-coaches and made them responsible for different elements of the game, giving them AHC level titles.
You don't have to can Sullivan, or even demote him. Go out and hire someone good and make him the 'passing coordinator' or some other dopey title. Having another brain in the room, so long as they're all on the same page, can't hurt, and there's no cap for coaches. Get guys that can work together, and get them to work.
Another name to consider: Eagles' QB Coach John DiFilippo.
The Giants have known him for a long time: he broke down tape for Coughlin for two years, and his dad was AD at Boston College until 2012. Like Van Pelt, he's had a chance to get his feet wet with one year as OC - running a lousy WCO for Mike Pettine in Cleveland, with Josh McCown, Johnny Manziel and Austin Davis taking turns at QB. FWIW, the Browns' offense was even worse this year.
I was impressed with Carson Wentz as a rookie. I don't know how much credit DiFilippo deserves, as opposed to Doug Pederson, or Wentz's native ability. Anything that disrupt's Wentz's progress is good; maybe swiping his position coach would qualify.
in game planning. We know that he doesn't call the plays. Until I see anything else, the state of the offense is in McAdoo's hands. I'd love to being someone like Norv Turner in, but will Mac be willing to cede control?
My main issue with Sullivan is that he reeks of a front office (i.e. - ownership) hire. Let Mac hire who he wants. It's his ass on the line.
is look to copy the Cowboys model. I think that's a lot more responsible for their recent success (well, that and all the picks on the OL) than anything else.
They went out and hired several ex-coaches and made them responsible for different elements of the game, giving them AHC level titles.
Is that really what they did though? The two former head coaches are the offensive and defensive coordinators, Linehan and Marinelli.
By the way, both were disastrous head coaches, with a combined record of 21-63. Dallas hired them for their proven skill as coordinators. The great thing about their failure in St. Louis and Detroit is that Dallas doesn't need to worry about anyone offering them the top job again. (OK, Linehan might be an EXTREME long shot.)
As I wrote in previous threads, the Sullivan/McAdoo structure makes no sense in that they espouse completely different systems. Sullivan runs the Gilbride vertical offense while Ben runs the Mike Holgrem/Andy Reid style WCO. McAdoo needs to put down the Denny's menu and hire an OC in his image. I like Sullivan and more importantly so does Eli. Get rid of this Cigretti lapdog and put Sullivan back as QB coach. Give him some kind of inflated title like Assistant HC-QB's. And yes I'd love to see them take a hard steer at McCoy.
generalist who can see the forest through the trees and get the team ready to execute classic plays when trends make them useful again.
A former head coach possibly.
Its one thing to say, 'this is what we do - lets wait until we have the horses or until the league trends make it work again' and yet, if the opposing DL in set wide and you cannot take advantage of that by quickly ripping one up the middle, than maybe you forgot to practice and plan for the basics.
is look to copy the Cowboys model. I think that's a lot more responsible for their recent success (well, that and all the picks on the OL) than anything else.
They went out and hired several ex-coaches and made them responsible for different elements of the game, giving them AHC level titles.
Is that really what they did though? The two former head coaches are the offensive and defensive coordinators, Linehan and Marinelli.
By the way, both were disastrous head coaches, with a combined record of 21-63. Dallas hired them for their proven skill as coordinators. The great thing about their failure in St. Louis and Detroit is that Dallas doesn't need to worry about anyone offering them the top job again. (OK, Linehan might be an EXTREME long shot.)
They broke it up - coming up with 'passing game coordinator' and 'running game coordinator', and hiring ex-HCs (guys who were good enough at OC/DC to merit elevation to a top spot somewhere) in Bill Callahan (since departed), Scott Linehan, Rod Marinelli.
No, none of them were ever great HC's, but that's not what you're hiring them for. They were good enough coordinators and showed enough to be considered HC material. We have something similar in Spags on D. Breaking down one spot into two (OC into Passing and Run coordinators) can be counterproductive, but can also be useful given the limited amount of practice time.
In short - I liked the Giants increasing the size of their coaching staff prior to the '16 season. I think they should consider going a bit further.
But, along with that is the stipulation that McAdoo relieve himself of playcalling and all other OC duties. As HC, he could and should obviously be involved in personnel decisions, gameplanning, etc. But, he should not be the person in charge and neither should Sullivan.
RE: RE: hard to blame the OC when the HC is calling the plays. I agree with
those who say that McAdoo should be allowed to hire an OC who shares his philosophy.
I'm concerned that the HC is calling those plays because he doesn't trust the OC to do it for him.
Ditto. Plus, I think the offense was a big enough problem in enough games and for the season as a whole to warrant a new OC.
Some mention Spags last year as a comparison and defense of not removing the OC. I have two responses to that. One, Spags has a very positive history with the Giants as equity. Two, I thought he should have been fired last year. This year, he did a better job than I expected, but I think a little too much credit is going to him. He had a lot of talent thanks to the draft and FA being heavily focused on the D. While I think his job should be very secure after this season, I also still wouldn't annoint him the second coming, expect him to be the next HC, extend his contract, or block him from leaving for another job. With this talent, the defense should be in the top half of the league every season.
I'd say no. I think the poor performance is rooted in a number of different factors.
First of all - proper conservative playcalling. In other words, when you have a dominant defense and you have a lead, you don't take unnecessary risks that you would otherwise take when your defense sucks and you can't hold a lead. All things being equal the improved defense should point to reduced offensive output, imo.
Secondly - McAdoo calling plays leading to completely new objectives on offense. An OC would be motivated to hit all their offensive goals (like averaging 27PPG, as McAdoo indicated was the offense's goal to start the season). A HC has different, more important goals (like making the playoffs and double-digit wins). All things being equal switching the playcalling duties from OC to HC should point to reduced offensive output, imo.
Third, shifts in practice philosophy focusing on developing young talent vs. execution that McAdoo pointed out in the beginning of the year would point to more young players contributing early at the cost of efficiency and execution.
If we had the world's greatest offensive coordinator we might have expected to take a small step backward from where we ended last year on offense. So it's very difficult to pin all the blame on Sullivan.
Having said that - we should see some track record of success as OC. I haven't really seen that in Sullivan's resume. He seemed to do very poorly in TB, and now our offense did extremely poorly with him. While he's not calling the plays, he would be in charge of designing the offensive gameplans and in making adjustments throughout the game. I'm not sure we saw any indication that he's really good enough in the spot to merit the position of OC of the NYG.
So, I would replace him, but I would not have hired him to begin with.
But there is an aspect involved with the Offense that needs to be changed. You can't leave things as they are after the putrid output this O achieved this season.
Exactly. It would be pure scapegoating to blame all the offenses woes onSullivan. But the unit underperformed and the OC usually takes the hit for that, especially when he has a thin resume like Sullivan
Poor offensive performance this year, in no small part due to being with the same personnel grouping 95% of the time.
The guy has never presided as OC over a decent offense. McAdoo says we're going to look long and hard at everything, well, if we're OK with improving underperforming players, no reason why coaches or coordinators shouldn't be subject to the same scrutiny.
McAdoo is a much better game manager than I expected, and I think he's part of the future of the organization. His offensive play calling (however much he leads Eli) leaves something to be desired. Given that, I don't know whether a new OC would be able to give the offense more variety. A lot of people talk about how the personnel was too limiting that we were forced to be more conservative than we might be with other personnel. If that is the case, is there little value in bringing in a new OC? Is it just a matter of bringing in playmakers? At what point does the OC have a responsibility to rejuvenate the offense or should we expect the OC to do so? Is our OC a relatively superfluous job given McAdoo's function?
A little easier to "manage" the game when your 200 million dollar defense is pitching shutouts.
Forgot about that. Tough guy to let go...
The guy has never presided as OC over a decent offense. McAdoo says we're going to look long and hard at everything, well, if we're OK with improving underperforming players, no reason why coaches or coordinators shouldn't be subject to the same scrutiny.
It seems as if McAdoo is doing the playcalling..
so if thats the case then why would you replace Sullivan as the OC?
So why fire the guy?
Seriously in all the games this season how many times did the television crew even cut to Sullivan? There's your answer.
To the question I have no idea if they should change the OC, I ll let that up to McAdoo.
To the question I have no idea if they should change the OC, I ll let that up to McAdoo.
Spags had a successful run here that included a SB victory and a strong follow up campaign in 2008.
What has Sullivan ever done that makes someone think he's capable of being an OC?
I think we've got the same situation here. It's McAdoo's offense that the Giants are running. Sullivan is the OC in name only. He doesn't deserve to be fired but he could well take the hit for McAdoo's play calling.
When the offense turned ugly in Gilbride's last season, he was very forthcoming during an interview (during the season, not after he was forced into retirement)... he said something like when you have glaring weaknesses in talent, no matter what adjustments you make, teams quickly catch on and counter those adjustments. You can make an argument he was deflecting blame and looking after his own butt, but it makes sense.
Giants faced cover 2 defense mostly. The way to beat that (not an expert, but according to everything I read/heard) is a good running game & with a decent TE to threaten the middle of the field. Giants had neither. And to top it off, they had a slot WR, coming back from serious injuries playing outside.
Nassib is better suited to this offense, which many suspected was a significant motivator for the organization in moving in this direction (players like Victor Cruz publicly said something to this effect when McAdoo was hired).
McAdoo is here for the future, and if he continues having success he'll get his own OC and QB (Nassib or someone else) pretty soon through attrition. He's not even 40 yet!
Terrible Mickey Mouse offense ended the season.
Current staff must be deaf, dumb and blind.
Does Mike Sullivan "deserve" to be fired? Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I couldn't care less about the justice of his fate. I just want the Giants to have the best possible coordinator for the offense they are running and the talent they are likely to have in 2017. While I don't have a list of smart, up-and-coming, WCO-savvy coaches, it's hard to believe that there isn't a better fit out there than Sullivan.
I'm concerned that the HC is calling those plays because he doesn't trust the OC to do it for him.
I don't think he was covering his ass. It reads more as an accurate assessment than anything else. Instead of a read and react option route where Eli and the receiver are taking advantage of the DB by making the same reads inside the play, the receivers were getting taken out at the stem of the route and forced out of the driver's seat on that decision - that's when Eli and the receivers looked so out of whack. The option on the route is the exploit and where the "complexity" came from, so for a defense it makes sense to not let the receiver get to the point where the receiver can execute their downfield read. Cut off the decision. That's the counter and that's the adjustments teams made to defeat it.
Mike McCarthy runs his offensive staff as a braintrust (with himself at the top), and rotates the coaches through different roles. Van Pelt has previously coached the Green Bay RBs, and divided his time between WRs and QBs in 2015. He's not all that high on the official org chart, with AHC-Offense Tom Clements and OC Edgar Bennett outranking him. So Sullivan's job would be a clear promotion.
Van Pelt's one season as Offensive Coordinator in Buffalo was a mess, but so was the whole team. Van Pelt replaced Turk Schonert just before the start of the season, and Dick Jauron was fired in November. (Our old friend Perry Fewell took over, earning respect around the League for his work as Interim HC on a sinking ship.) The next year, he seems to have done a pretty good job with Josh Freeman in Tampa, though I think he was still around when Freeman regressed in 2011.
I'm sure there are other, stronger possibilities. If McAdoo were reaching back to his roots, though, Van Pelt would rate an interview.
They went out and hired several ex-coaches and made them responsible for different elements of the game, giving them AHC level titles.
You don't have to can Sullivan, or even demote him. Go out and hire someone good and make him the 'passing coordinator' or some other dopey title. Having another brain in the room, so long as they're all on the same page, can't hurt, and there's no cap for coaches. Get guys that can work together, and get them to work.
I was impressed with Carson Wentz as a rookie. I don't know how much credit DiFilippo deserves, as opposed to Doug Pederson, or Wentz's native ability. Anything that disrupt's Wentz's progress is good; maybe swiping his position coach would qualify.
My main issue with Sullivan is that he reeks of a front office (i.e. - ownership) hire. Let Mac hire who he wants. It's his ass on the line.
They went out and hired several ex-coaches and made them responsible for different elements of the game, giving them AHC level titles.
Is that really what they did though? The two former head coaches are the offensive and defensive coordinators, Linehan and Marinelli.
By the way, both were disastrous head coaches, with a combined record of 21-63. Dallas hired them for their proven skill as coordinators. The great thing about their failure in St. Louis and Detroit is that Dallas doesn't need to worry about anyone offering them the top job again. (OK, Linehan might be an EXTREME long shot.)
A former head coach possibly.
Its one thing to say, 'this is what we do - lets wait until we have the horses or until the league trends make it work again' and yet, if the opposing DL in set wide and you cannot take advantage of that by quickly ripping one up the middle, than maybe you forgot to practice and plan for the basics.
Quote:
is look to copy the Cowboys model. I think that's a lot more responsible for their recent success (well, that and all the picks on the OL) than anything else.
They went out and hired several ex-coaches and made them responsible for different elements of the game, giving them AHC level titles.
Is that really what they did though? The two former head coaches are the offensive and defensive coordinators, Linehan and Marinelli.
By the way, both were disastrous head coaches, with a combined record of 21-63. Dallas hired them for their proven skill as coordinators. The great thing about their failure in St. Louis and Detroit is that Dallas doesn't need to worry about anyone offering them the top job again. (OK, Linehan might be an EXTREME long shot.)
They broke it up - coming up with 'passing game coordinator' and 'running game coordinator', and hiring ex-HCs (guys who were good enough at OC/DC to merit elevation to a top spot somewhere) in Bill Callahan (since departed), Scott Linehan, Rod Marinelli.
No, none of them were ever great HC's, but that's not what you're hiring them for. They were good enough coordinators and showed enough to be considered HC material. We have something similar in Spags on D. Breaking down one spot into two (OC into Passing and Run coordinators) can be counterproductive, but can also be useful given the limited amount of practice time.
In short - I liked the Giants increasing the size of their coaching staff prior to the '16 season. I think they should consider going a bit further.
Quote:
those who say that McAdoo should be allowed to hire an OC who shares his philosophy.
I'm concerned that the HC is calling those plays because he doesn't trust the OC to do it for him.
Some mention Spags last year as a comparison and defense of not removing the OC. I have two responses to that. One, Spags has a very positive history with the Giants as equity. Two, I thought he should have been fired last year. This year, he did a better job than I expected, but I think a little too much credit is going to him. He had a lot of talent thanks to the draft and FA being heavily focused on the D. While I think his job should be very secure after this season, I also still wouldn't annoint him the second coming, expect him to be the next HC, extend his contract, or block him from leaving for another job. With this talent, the defense should be in the top half of the league every season.
First of all - proper conservative playcalling. In other words, when you have a dominant defense and you have a lead, you don't take unnecessary risks that you would otherwise take when your defense sucks and you can't hold a lead. All things being equal the improved defense should point to reduced offensive output, imo.
Secondly - McAdoo calling plays leading to completely new objectives on offense. An OC would be motivated to hit all their offensive goals (like averaging 27PPG, as McAdoo indicated was the offense's goal to start the season). A HC has different, more important goals (like making the playoffs and double-digit wins). All things being equal switching the playcalling duties from OC to HC should point to reduced offensive output, imo.
Third, shifts in practice philosophy focusing on developing young talent vs. execution that McAdoo pointed out in the beginning of the year would point to more young players contributing early at the cost of efficiency and execution.
If we had the world's greatest offensive coordinator we might have expected to take a small step backward from where we ended last year on offense. So it's very difficult to pin all the blame on Sullivan.
Having said that - we should see some track record of success as OC. I haven't really seen that in Sullivan's resume. He seemed to do very poorly in TB, and now our offense did extremely poorly with him. While he's not calling the plays, he would be in charge of designing the offensive gameplans and in making adjustments throughout the game. I'm not sure we saw any indication that he's really good enough in the spot to merit the position of OC of the NYG.
So, I would replace him, but I would not have hired him to begin with.
Exactly. It would be pure scapegoating to blame all the offenses woes onSullivan. But the unit underperformed and the OC usually takes the hit for that, especially when he has a thin resume like Sullivan
The guy has never presided as OC over a decent offense. McAdoo says we're going to look long and hard at everything, well, if we're OK with improving underperforming players, no reason why coaches or coordinators shouldn't be subject to the same scrutiny.
So why fire the guy?
Terrible Mickey Mouse offense ended the season.
Current staff must be deaf, dumb and blind.