as the reason for our offensive regression? I mean, it's been stated a million times that he didn't design the offense, and that he doesn't call the plays (!), yet I still see people wanting to heap all of the blame on him. I also read that he was a horrible offensive coordinator in his only chance at it. I thought I'd try to look at this particular coach a little more closely to see why everybody wants to blame him.
Offensive regression from 2015 to 2016:
Last year we were 6th in scoring, this year we were 26th.
Last year we scored over 30 points 7 times, this year we didn't hit that mark at all.
Last year we only scored under 20 points twice, this year we scored under 20 points 10 times.
We regressed in scoring, passing, and rushing. We did not show improvement in any category (although Eli's completion percentage went up, but that's it).
Now let's look at Mike Sullivan's role, and as an overall coach:
Let's start with the "Sullivan is proven horrible OC" meme that's been circulating around here lately.
First of all, Sullivan only served as an Offensive Coordinator for 2 seasons with Tampa Bay, both under Greg Schiano (also his only two years as head coach).
2012:
The team set a franchise record with 5,820 yards of total offense and 389 total points scored. Good for 13th in the NFL. The previous season, 2011, they were ranked 32nd in the NFL in offense.
Josh Freeman threw for over 4000 yards, 27 TD's, with 17 INT's. Josh Freeman! The guy has never had another season like it.
Doug Martin ran for nearly 1500 yards and 11 TD's.
2013:
Here is where he gets the bad rap, but I went back and wanted to look at what happened. Let's try to remember a couple of things that were happening here, instead of just looking at the final result, which I myself did not remember until I went back and looked.
First off, in only his second year, Schiano was already wearing out his welcome and the lockerroom was deteriorating.
The MRSA outbreak that ended Lawrence Tynes career happened during training camp.
A rift opened between Schiano and Freeman during training camp, where Schiano was accused of rigging the voting for team captains, which prevented Freeman becoming a captain. The next day, Freeman skipped the team photo session and blamed it on "oversleeping". Freeman was benched three games into the regular season and accused of quitting on the team because of the situation with Schiano.
Doug Martin went on injured reserve after 6 games.
However, 3rd round pick Mike Glennon then came in for the final 13 games and set franchise rookie quarterback records for the Bucs, throwing for 2600 yards, 19 TD's, and only 9 INT's.
Despite that, The team regressed back to 32nd in the league in offense, which is what they were two years prior, the year before Sullivan took over as OC. Schiano and his entire staff were fired at the end of the season. So it wasn't like they had a good thing in place and said "Sullivan is responsible for this, let's fire him and get a new guy in here". The entire staff was fired. After a year off, Sullivan came back to the Giants in the role of Quarterback Coach and many were happy to have him, citing his successful experience as a coordinator (on BBI he was considered to have gotten a raw deal because of Schiano), and his work with Eli Manning in the same capacity in 2010-2011.
Previous Coaching Experience:
New York Giants Quarterback Coach 2015, 2011, 2010 Performance was good.
New York Giants Wide Receivers Coach 2004-2009 Any complaints here?
There is a little more with other teams prior to this, but this is as far as I feel like I need to go back to make the point. The rest I can't remember and I doubt anybody else here can, or will try to go back farther.
So...
These are all the facts, not what I think happened, but the facts. Last year, 2015, Tom Coughlin was the head coach, McAdoo was the Offensive Coordinator, and Sullivan was the Quarterbacks Coach. This year, everybody moved one spot up. McAdoo moved to the Head Coaching position, but maintained playcalling abilities. Sullivan shifted up to the Offensive Coordinator postion, but again, was not granted playcalling abilities.
Do you really think the change of title for Sullivan granted him that much more responsibility than what he had last year, enough responsibility to tank the offense to the numbers cited above?
Are his two years as an offensive coordinator, one great, one poor, enough of a sample size (for the stats lovers) to claim the guy is a failure at OC? As far as being a position coach, anybody got a problem with him as QB Coach in 2010, 2011, and 2015? How about as WR's coach from 2004-2009? Any complaints there?
I don't know the answer why we regressed, personally, but a lot of people on this site claim to... and that answer apparently is that Sullivan is a bum. I counter that with: "based on what"? There is the evidence above, tell me why Sullivan is responsible.
I would agree with this, except there really wasn't that much roster turnover on offense from last year to this year.
On defense, we added 200 million worth of talent.
Not to dismiss Sully entirely, as I suspect a big part of his role is to break down opponent film, build a game plan and sets of play tiers on the diner menu.
Quote:
One guy is the HC who did a great job managing games en route to an 11-5 record. The other is a JAG everywhere he's been.
Like I said initially, it's not about making him a scapegoat. His value and contribution to the team needs to be evaluated along with plenty of players on the offensive side of the ball. In my opinion, it makes more sense to go in a different direction. He doesn't share the same offensive philosophy as McAdoo. He doesn't call the plays. I think the team would be better off exploring other coordinators who align with McAdoo and can bring fresh ideas to the table.
Did Sullivan and McAdoo work together last year on offense, when we were 6th in the league? It's not like Sullivan just showed up this year.
Sullivan wasn't the OC last year. Working together on the offense is a bit of a stretch. Coughlin-McAdoo worked together on the offense.
Tom, the giants didn't purposely score less points because they had a good defense. They scored less points because the offense lacked talent and creativity.
I mean who takes responsibility? Who is accountable here?
McAdoo got his job because Mara recognized that the "offense was broken" after the 2013 season.
Do you think Mara has an opinion about the offense is broken now?
Do you think someone in the organization has a plan to fix it? Whose responsibility is it to formulate that plan and achieve concensus by making sure his superiors approve?
I'd guess that if the OC doesn't have ownership of a coherent plan, then there isn't one. Dysfunction has been designed into the system.
This, IMO, is why Sullivan us on the hot seat.
I wouldn't say that, but I think the offense would be better off going in a different direction at OC. The OL sucked. The TEs sucked. RBs were mediocre and WR production was spotty at best outside of Beckham and Shephard.
It's both -- I think they need a true WC OC, an infusion of talent along the OL, and a skill player mismatch at TE and/or WR.
It's not the head coach's job to keep the offensive ranking up; it's to win games. In his first season McAdoo won 11 games...a mark that Coughlin reached only twice in 12 seasons.
This season can only be categorized as an enormous success for McAdoo.
And I'll state for the record, I've never had a dog in this fight until you brought up the topic today. For all I know he could be perfect for calling plays under Mac, but he has to let him do that first.
Not the trolls and the Coughlin dead-enders. They've done nothing but bitch and whine since the end of the playoff game.
I mean who takes responsibility? Who is accountable here?
McAdoo got his job because Mara recognized that the "offense was broken" after the 2013 season.
Do you think Mara has an opinion about the offense is broken now?
Do you think someone in the organization has a plan to fix it? Whose responsibility is it to formulate that plan and achieve concensus by making sure his superiors approve?
I'd guess that if the OC doesn't have ownership of a coherent plan, then there isn't one. Dysfunction has been designed into the system.
This, IMO, is why Sullivan us on the hot seat.
Shouldn't it be the head coach's job to fix the offense? Why is that in Sullivan's lap?
Quote:
This season can only be categorized as an enormous success for McAdoo.
Not the trolls and the Coughlin dead-enders. They've done nothing but bitch and whine since the end of the playoff game.
Word. Need something to bitch about.
McAdoo made the best out of a bad hand. This team easily could have gone 6-10 again had the ends of games been managed as poorly as they had been by Coughlin in 2015.
Quote:
In comment 13329503 Go Terps said:
Quote:
This season can only be categorized as an enormous success for McAdoo.
Not the trolls and the Coughlin dead-enders. They've done nothing but bitch and whine since the end of the playoff game.
Word. Need something to bitch about.
Yeah, dropping from 6th in the NFL to 26th in the NFL, and getting blown out in the playoffs after failing to score over 20 points for the 6th game in a row, but a team that scored over 30 points, something we've failed to do all year...
Nothing to bitch about. Not even worth mentioning, right?
McAdoo made the best out of a bad hand. This team easily could have gone 6-10 again had the ends of games been managed as poorly as they had been by Coughlin in 2015.
And you and I have been on the same page about this forever.
However, with practically the same personnel problems last year, we were much better. Why?
It's over. Done. Focus now is on moving forward and improving in 2017.
We get it. The offense stunk.
2016 was a successful season (as Terps noted).
Why do you blame Sullivan?
Quote:
The job of fixing the offense was on the GM, and he neglected to do that in favor of huge spending on defense.
McAdoo made the best out of a bad hand. This team easily could have gone 6-10 again had the ends of games been managed as poorly as they had been by Coughlin in 2015.
And you and I have been on the same page about this forever.
However, with practically the same personnel problems last year, we were much better. Why?
Because the offensive personnel was significantly worse this year than last year. A forked Cruz was an inferior option to Randle, Donnell eliminated himself as a threat, Vereen missed the season, Beckham struggled in high profile situations, and the offensive line was the same and a year more degraded.
Had McAdoo opened up the offense he could have gotten Eli and/or Beckham killed. And if that didn't happen he certainly would have put our defense in less advantageous positions to influence games. McAdoo said it himself to Francesa before the season started: the Brad Wing/Dwayne Harris combination is a potent weapon and he wouldn't be afraid to use it. The importance of Wing and McAdoo's rightful willingness to count on him completely bore itself out both during the regular season and in the disastrous playoff game when Wing finally faltered.
McAdoo did something this year that Coughlin, for all his great qualities, often failed to do: he implemented game plans that catered to the strengths of his team. McAdoo is the head coach and the entire team, not just the offense, is his charge. Had he opened up the offense more the stats may have been better, but the win-loss record would have been worse. He deserves to be lauded for setting aside any pride he may have had in being an offensive coach and recognizing the best path to winning games. It bodes well for the future of this team as long as he is the head coach.
Quote:
In comment 13329529 Go Terps said:
Quote:
The job of fixing the offense was on the GM, and he neglected to do that in favor of huge spending on defense.
McAdoo made the best out of a bad hand. This team easily could have gone 6-10 again had the ends of games been managed as poorly as they had been by Coughlin in 2015.
And you and I have been on the same page about this forever.
However, with practically the same personnel problems last year, we were much better. Why?
Because the offensive personnel was significantly worse this year than last year. A forked Cruz was an inferior option to Randle, Donnell eliminated himself as a threat, Vereen missed the season, Beckham struggled in high profile situations, and the offensive line was the same and a year more degraded.
Had McAdoo opened up the offense he could have gotten Eli and/or Beckham killed. And if that didn't happen he certainly would have put our defense in less advantageous positions to influence games. McAdoo said it himself to Francesa before the season started: the Brad Wing/Dwayne Harris combination is a potent weapon and he wouldn't be afraid to use it. The importance of Wing and McAdoo's rightful willingness to count on him completely bore itself out both during the regular season and in the disastrous playoff game when Wing finally faltered.
McAdoo did something this year that Coughlin, for all his great qualities, often failed to do: he implemented game plans that catered to the strengths of his team. McAdoo is the head coach and the entire team, not just the offense, is his charge. Had he opened up the offense more the stats may have been better, but the win-loss record would have been worse. He deserves to be lauded for setting aside any pride he may have had in being an offensive coach and recognizing the best path to winning games. It bodes well for the future of this team as long as he is the head coach.
I sure hope you're right.
Sullivan's overall resume on the offensive side of the ball isn't all that impressive either. He had a pretty good run as WR coach (Smith/Manningham/Nicks), though Plax imploded on his watch and Cruz arrived after Sullivan switched jobs. His first stint as QB Coach was distinctly mixed: Eli struggled in 2010, then sparkled in 2011. I think it's fair to say most of Eli's formative pro coaching came from Coughlin, Hufnagel, Gilbride and Palmer, not Sullivan. By 2010, Eli was basically a finished product.
You've already discussed his time in Tampa. I agree that he probably wasn't as terrible as the Bucs' 2013 record suggests, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that he was so special that you would seek him out to run a completely different offense.
In 2016, Sullivan was the easy, in-house option for OC. Do you really think the team shouldn't seek an upgrade, or that it will be inordinately difficult to find one?
Quote:
This season can only be categorized as an enormous success for McAdoo.
Not the trolls and the Coughlin dead-enders. They've done nothing but bitch and whine since the end of the playoff game.
But, please, don't think about it; your head will only ache with the effort.
Why do you blame Sullivan?
I'm not heaping blame on sullivan. Basically what BBB said: he just seems like an odd fit. If someone is available that BM is more comfortable with, wouldn't you explore?
And really, the Coughlin sh-t is getting tiresome. The only people that keep bringing Coughlin up are the ones that are calling everybody Coughlin lovers. Am I not going to be able to ever participate in a discussion on this board again without it being mentioned that I was a fan of Coughlin, which somehow negates any validity of any opinion of the team that I have moving forward?
If you don't want to discuss the offense, why it went bad, and how to fix it, what do you want to discuss?
Quote:
and you were all over a thread two days ago where the the narrative was largely heaping the blame onto Sullivan for the offensive woes, and you called him an awful OC.
Why do you blame Sullivan?
I'm not heaping blame on sullivan. Basically what BBB said: he just seems like an odd fit. If someone is available that BM is more comfortable with, wouldn't you explore?
I'm all for it. I was hoping for Philbin last year, I thought that would have been perfect.
And really, the Coughlin sh-t is getting tiresome. The only people that keep bringing Coughlin up are the ones that are calling everybody Coughlin lovers. Am I not going to be able to ever participate in a discussion on this board again without it being mentioned that I was a fan of Coughlin, which somehow negates any validity of any opinion of the team that I have moving forward?
If you don't want to discuss the offense, why it went bad, and how to fix it, what do you want to discuss?
I'm all for discussing the offense and why it went bad. But it would be nice to do so without BBI acting like whiny 15 year olds.
I'm just as tired as the Coughlin V Reese bullshit.
Quote:
but this notion that we can't discuss the offense which was putrid, and the reasons for it, is bizarre to me. What is this, Fight Club?
And really, the Coughlin sh-t is getting tiresome. The only people that keep bringing Coughlin up are the ones that are calling everybody Coughlin lovers. Am I not going to be able to ever participate in a discussion on this board again without it being mentioned that I was a fan of Coughlin, which somehow negates any validity of any opinion of the team that I have moving forward?
If you don't want to discuss the offense, why it went bad, and how to fix it, what do you want to discuss?
I'm all for discussing the offense and why it went bad. But it would be nice to do so without BBI acting like whiny 15 year olds.
I'm just as tired as the Coughlin V Reese bullshit.
Who is being whiny? Me?
I tried to start a legitimate discussion with nothing but the known facts, and got called a troll and Coughlin apologist. The thread had nothing to do with Coughlin and I didn't insinuate that it did. Which party was whiny again?
Quote:
In comment 13329595 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
but this notion that we can't discuss the offense which was putrid, and the reasons for it, is bizarre to me. What is this, Fight Club?
And really, the Coughlin sh-t is getting tiresome. The only people that keep bringing Coughlin up are the ones that are calling everybody Coughlin lovers. Am I not going to be able to ever participate in a discussion on this board again without it being mentioned that I was a fan of Coughlin, which somehow negates any validity of any opinion of the team that I have moving forward?
If you don't want to discuss the offense, why it went bad, and how to fix it, what do you want to discuss?
I'm all for discussing the offense and why it went bad. But it would be nice to do so without BBI acting like whiny 15 year olds.
I'm just as tired as the Coughlin V Reese bullshit.
Who is being whiny? Me?
I tried to start a legitimate discussion with nothing but the known facts, and got called a troll and Coughlin apologist. The thread had nothing to do with Coughlin and I didn't insinuate that it did. Which party was whiny again?
Wasn't calling you whiny.
I think people have legitimate questions as to what Sullivan actually brings to the table, as his resume/background doesn't inspire a lot of confidence.
That is all.
And really, the Coughlin sh-t is getting tiresome. The only people that keep bringing Coughlin up are the ones that are calling everybody Coughlin lovers. Am I not going to be able to ever participate in a discussion on this board again without it being mentioned that I was a fan of Coughlin, which somehow negates any validity of any opinion of the team that I have moving forward?
If you don't want to discuss the offense, why it went bad, and how to fix it, what do you want to discuss?
Britt, with all due respect, how many times this season did you post "Anyone else miss Coughlin?" or similar unprovoked when things were going bad, either in game threads or after losses? I remember it fairly regularly to the point where people were saying Britt, we get it.
No doubt it is frustrating. But big picture- they won 11 games and the defense improved drastically. There is a lot to build on.
Not everything has to be a case of assigning blame (which is BBIs specialty)
Every year in the NFL is different, not everything is linear. 2017 is a new year.
Quote:
but this notion that we can't discuss the offense which was putrid, and the reasons for it, is bizarre to me. What is this, Fight Club?
And really, the Coughlin sh-t is getting tiresome. The only people that keep bringing Coughlin up are the ones that are calling everybody Coughlin lovers. Am I not going to be able to ever participate in a discussion on this board again without it being mentioned that I was a fan of Coughlin, which somehow negates any validity of any opinion of the team that I have moving forward?
If you don't want to discuss the offense, why it went bad, and how to fix it, what do you want to discuss?
Britt, with all due respect, how many times this season did you post "Anyone else miss Coughlin?" or similar unprovoked when things were going bad, either in game threads or after losses? I remember it fairly regularly to the point where people were saying Britt, we get it.
I did do that earlier this year, it was wrong, I owned it, and apologized for it. It was out of emotion during the games (certainly not the worst thing posted on the game threads or post game threads by any stretch, but still, I owned it). I have moved on from it.
The offensive personnel was putrid going into 2016. Most people were too enamored with the signings on defense to see it.
What's worrying is we're risking the same situation, only reversed, in 2017. There's a lot of assuming that the defense will remain good, and we should focus on signing offensive players. We're a year too late on that. There is no Osemele (1st team All-Pro), no Mitchell Schwartz (2nd team), no Ladarius Green to be had.
The offensive personnel was putrid going into 2016. Most people were too enamored with the signings on defense to see it.
What's worrying is we're risking the same situation, only reversed, in 2017. There's a lot of assuming that the defense will remain good, and we should focus on signing offensive players. We're a year too late on that. There is no Osemele (1st team All-Pro), no Mitchell Schwartz (2nd team), no Ladarius Green to be had.
Why does it always have to be your way? I love how you leave out the fact that Reese added multiple All Pros in: Snacks, OV, & Jenkins and paired them with Collins (1st team) and DRC (2nd team)
But that doesn't seem to count because that doesn't align with the Terps' vision.
You are an odd duck. The ultimate BBI contrarian.
We zig
But since you wanted to spend on offense, somehow everyone else is the idiot.
Now we are fucked because the Giants didn't follow Terps' vision.
It's silly. Giants zig. You zag. It's always something else with you.
But since you wanted to spend on offense, somehow everyone else is the idiot.
Now we are fucked because the Giants didn't follow Terps' vision.
It's silly. Giants zig. You zag. It's always something else with you.
You completely miss the point. I'm saying we shouldn't ignore the defense the way we ignored the offense last year. 2017 is a new year and I wouldn't just assume the defense will be good again, ignore it, and focus on spending on the offensive side of the ball.
Quote:
and building a dominate unit, which Reese did on defense.
But since you wanted to spend on offense, somehow everyone else is the idiot.
Now we are fucked because the Giants didn't follow Terps' vision.
It's silly. Giants zig. You zag. It's always something else with you.
You completely miss the point. I'm saying we shouldn't ignore the defense the way we ignored the offense last year. 2017 is a new year and I wouldn't just assume the defense will be good again, ignore it, and focus on spending on the offensive side of the ball.
Agreed. I'd add another pass rusher if the opportunity presented itself, I wouldn't assume anything.
I agree with you that teams with strong defenses will often score less than teams with bad defenses, based on their ability to hold a lead they will be more likely to play conservatively than to be aggressive.
Alternatively one must consider that when you have a bad defense you likely get fewer touches and less time to produce. Your field position is also likely to be worse (over time).
Not sure how much of that should balance out.
My biggest problem is that the offense really regressed as the year went on. We saw very minimal improvements in the running game, and the passing game turned to dog sh*t. All while the defense improved significantly.
Furthermore, you can't use the "good defense" argument to explain the poor offensive performance against Philly and GB. Of course Philly had a pretty good defense, but GB didn't have a particularly great one. We just weren't really a threat to come from behind.
Let's face it - when we got to 14-13 it looked like we had a chance, but when they got to 21 that hope was significantly diminished, and by the time it was 28-13 we all knew the game was completely out of reach. Why? There was zero confidence that we could score 29 points.