This is not meant to be critical of Reese, but that comment surprised me.
We here at bbi have simplified the problem: Improve the offensive line, tightends, get a big receiver and add a full back.
What are we missing? Is this a case of we don't know what we don't know? I understand other than no fullback, Ruben R. and Vareen, it was basically the same offense.
But my recollection of that offense was even though they were rated in the top 10, at the end of games in the 4 minute drill they were pretty limited.
With no upgrade, and teams having a chance to study and adjust, (constant 2 high safety look) it wasn't such a reach that this offense would decline.
Anyone else have a reaction to his assessment?
Not fatman. He told us you cant take anything away from the preseason at all. He said Dak Prescott playing well meant nothing. The giants defense playing well and that the offense sucking meant nothing.
Then they all turned out to be accurate.
Offensively, the roster we brought into Green Bay last week isnt going to win you many games on the road.
At the skill positions we have Beckham, Shepard, potentially Perkins and who else?
Moving forward, you might have Vereen, Tye and King or Lewis at WR who can be useful.
Other than that, we need to bring in big time talent. In my opinion the #23 pick has to be a kid who can come in and make plays right away.
O.J. Howard
McCaffrey
Perhaps another WR
Quote:
Everyone on BBI from day 1 of the pre-season knew O Line was the problem. Fix it.
Not fatman. He told us you cant take anything away from the preseason at all. He said Dak Prescott playing well meant nothing. The giants defense playing well and that the offense sucking meant nothing.
Then they all turned out to be accurate.
That's BS..You can take VERY LITTLE away from pre-season given the constant shuffling of players in and out, no game-planning and so on..It has always been that way..The fact that it happened to mirror some stuff in pre-season is simply coincidence, nothing more..Preseason, aside from obvious benefits as regards some evaluation of personel who are trying to make some kind of impression, mean total squat as a harbinger of what is to come. Period.
Yeah i dont even think you need all those things. Fixing LT, one interior lineman, and a stud TE (Cook?) probably gets us back to where we need to be considering we should still be a strong defense again next season.
3) no viable TE
4) no FB
5) no TE and FB made it impossible to help the OTs in pass pro and to have a consistent running game.
Look around now at the threads discussing what offseason moves should be made. It's all the same: RT, RG, WR, TE.
A year too late on that front.
3) no viable TE
4) no FB
5) no TE and FB made it impossible to help the OTs in pass pro and to have a consistent running game.
This. There is no conspiracy here.
Whatever he meant by mystery or anything else he might say, I would take with a grain of salt..He sees it. The Giants see it..Of course they do. Hopefully they'll bring in the players to bring the O up to where it should be
The line regressed, the running, obviously, regressed.
Eli needs a tall target (Nicks, Plax) especially in the red zone.
Right.
Obj, Sheppard, and Cruz are very capable of finding holes and sitting in them.
Manning is also very good at working through his progressions.
I can count on one hand how many throws Manning was able to step into.
Fix this line, you fix the running game and give Manning more than 1 read and than a check down throw
It doesn't work that way. This ain't Madden where you maintain a rating based on a scale of 1-100 from one year to the next.
We would all be well advised to remember that in a few months if the same laissez-fare attitude is taken by the GM towards the defense in the offseason.
You're either getting better or worse. There is no maintaining.
If he really is serious about his statement. Something like "we are evaluating everything; we are identifying and prioritizing our needs; we are formulating a strategic plan ... etc. etc" .... Is what I was expecting.
McAdoo was a lot more candid, maybe Jerry doesn't want to acknowledge anything for fear of showing his cards, if that's it - I hope that's the case
But then again, this is BBI.
Just because most of the offense is the same as last year, "maintaining" is never good enough, the opponents do get paid too.
They are also in the business of identifying historical weaknesses and trends - and attacking those.
If he really is serious about his statement. Something like "we are evaluating everything; we are identifying and prioritizing our needs; we are formulating a strategic plan ... etc. etc" .... Is what I was expecting.
McAdoo was a lot more candid, maybe Jerry doesn't want to acknowledge anything for fear of showing his cards, if that's it - I hope that's the case
Sorry Manny, McAdoo isn't candid at all save for generalities
Too many times it seemed like, go up by 3 points, defense get's the ball back, time to kill the clock. 3 & out, but hey we took 2 minutes of the clock!
That's BS..You can take VERY LITTLE away from pre-season given the constant shuffling of players in and out, no game-planning and so on..It has always been that way..The fact that it happened to mirror some stuff in pre-season is simply coincidence, nothing more..Preseason, aside from obvious benefits as regards some evaluation of personel who are trying to make some kind of impression, mean total squat as a harbinger of what is to come. Period. [/quote]
That is just flat out wrong. 90% this board could see in preseason how badly this offensive line played, and knew it was a problem going into the season. Then after the first Dallas game, we heard "See!!! The line is really strong!" It turns out the preseason was a much better predictor. To say it was a coincidence that a line that played badly in four preseason games ended up being bad is beyond ludicrous. It's ok to acknowledge that guys that can't block in preseason rarely become stud blockers once they start keeping score.
IMHO, the offense or defense can deal with one major shortcoming (how many even average WRs did Simms have in his career?). Multiple shortcomings are very difficult to overcome.
Given Eli's age and "window", the OL must be a FA and draft priority. That probably means an overpay or two in salary and / or a potential trade for multiple positions on the OL.
I really, really hate drafting for need only and bypassing BPA in rounds 1 and 2 (and maybe 3). If it appears no offensive lineman worthy of the #23 will be available, I'd be OK with a trade up (I usually hate that) as the Giants really need an OL upgrade.
I do agree though if a projected regular season starter is regularly losing one on one match ups against the starters of the other teams, that is a concern that often translates to the regular season. Flower, Cruz are examples.
That's BS..You can take VERY LITTLE away from pre-season given the constant shuffling of players in and out, no game-planning and so on..It has always been that way..The fact that it happened to mirror some stuff in pre-season is simply coincidence, nothing more..Preseason, aside from obvious benefits as regards some evaluation of personel who are trying to make some kind of impression, mean total squat as a harbinger of what is to come. Period.
That is just flat out wrong. 90% this board could see in preseason how badly this offensive line played, and knew it was a problem going into the season. Then after the first Dallas game, we heard "See!!! The line is really strong!" It turns out the preseason was a much better predictor. To say it was a coincidence that a line that played badly in four preseason games ended up being bad is beyond ludicrous. It's ok to acknowledge that guys that can't block in preseason rarely become stud blockers once they start keeping score. [/quote]
Total coincidence in terms of predictability..EVERY PRESEASON people make dire predictions based off of what they see..What exactly did you see? Regulars got 5-10 snaps per game and not rarely as a group..Nassib playing major minutes..Many players who didn't even sniff the practice squad..
You can make ZERO projections based on limited PT and roster evaluations of 500 people shuttling in and out..Nobody "saw" anything. It was a typical reaction to OTAs, minicamps and preseason..It so happens a prediction, based on the usual preseason nothings, proved correct..
That's BS..You can take VERY LITTLE away from pre-season given the constant shuffling of players in and out, no game-planning and so on..It has always been that way..The fact that it happened to mirror some stuff in pre-season is simply coincidence, nothing more..Preseason, aside from obvious benefits as regards some evaluation of personel who are trying to make some kind of impression, mean total squat as a harbinger of what is to come. Period.
That is just flat out wrong. 90% this board could see in preseason how badly this offensive line played, and knew it was a problem going into the season. Then after the first Dallas game, we heard "See!!! The line is really strong!" It turns out the preseason was a much better predictor. To say it was a coincidence that a line that played badly in four preseason games ended up being bad is beyond ludicrous. It's ok to acknowledge that guys that can't block in preseason rarely become stud blockers once they start keeping score. [/quote]
That is just flat out wrong. 90% this board could see in preseason how badly this offensive line played, and knew it was a problem going into the season. Then after the first Dallas game, we heard "See!!! The line is really strong!" It turns out the preseason was a much better predictor. To say it was a coincidence that a line that played badly in four preseason games ended up being bad is beyond ludicrous. It's ok to acknowledge that guys that can't block in preseason rarely become stud blockers once they start keeping score. [/quote]
Total coincidence in terms of predictability..EVERY PRESEASON people make dire predictions based off of what they see..What exactly did you see? Regulars got 5-10 snaps per game and not rarely as a group..Nassib playing major minutes..Many players who didn't even sniff the practice squad..
You can make ZERO projections based on limited PT and roster evaluations of 500 people shuttling in and out..Nobody "saw" anything. It was a typical reaction to OTAs, minicamps and preseason..It so happens a prediction, based on the usual preseason nothings, proved correct..
Total coincidence in terms of predictability..EVERY PRESEASON people make dire predictions based off of what they see..What exactly did you see? Regulars got 5-10 snaps per game and not rarely as a group..Nassib playing major minutes..Many players who didn't even sniff the practice squad..
You can make ZERO projections based on limited PT and roster evaluations of 500 people shuttling in and out..Nobody "saw" anything. It was a typical reaction to OTAs, minicamps and preseason..It so happens a prediction, based on the usual preseason nothings, proved correct..
IMHO, the offense or defense can deal with one major shortcoming (how many even average WRs did Simms have in his career?). Multiple shortcomings are very difficult to overcome.
Given Eli's age and "window", the OL must be a FA and draft priority. That probably means an overpay or two in salary and / or a potential trade for multiple positions on the OL.
I really, really hate drafting for need only and bypassing BPA in rounds 1 and 2 (and maybe 3). If it appears no offensive lineman worthy of the #23 will be available, I'd be OK with a trade up (I usually hate that) as the Giants really need an OL upgrade.
This year was a new one for me: I've never seen such a conservative, unimaginative, poorly designed offense at this level
-What did Eli throw, 25-30 passes en toto during the preseason? What did you see in that, considering Eli has pretty much sucked every pre-season since 2004..
-How much did OBJ and even Shepard play?
-Since you say many saw in preseason what would eventually come to pass, did you also SEE that our D would be so good based on similar snap?
-Did you also see with limited snaps that the O wouldn't at least be the same O as last year with the same OL?
-etc., etc., etc..
1. The schedule got easier. Flowers was healthy. The receiving unit was upgraded.
What remained the same? McAdoo once again called the plays for the offense he installed. TE group: Same main two players. RBs: same performance level, if you liberally insert Perkins for Vereen.
The only time Eli's deficiencies are considered is to mention the alleged contributing factors. In other words, the ass-wipe commentary, absolving him. The offensive line gets pissed on. Is there ever mention that they have to protect a near statue back there? Would they like blocking for Prescott or Wenz?
Of course there are problems that are more design than performance. For instance , the psychotic belief that you can run without a fullback, blocking tight ends and a big wide receiver. But they better look at the Q. It's really important.
1. The schedule got easier. Flowers was healthy. The receiving unit was upgraded.
What remained the same? McAdoo once again called the plays for the offense he installed. TE group: Same main two players. RBs: same performance level, if you liberally insert Perkins for Vereen.
The only time Eli's deficiencies are considered is to mention the alleged contributing factors. In other words, the ass-wipe commentary, absolving him. The offensive line gets pissed on. Is there ever mention that they have to protect a near statue back there? Would they like blocking for Prescott or Wenz?
Of course there are problems that are more design than performance. For instance , the psychotic belief that you can run without a fullback, blocking tight ends and a big wide receiver. But they better look at the Q. It's really important.
Silly post pertaining to Eli..There is nothing wrong with Eli..He is the sme "statue" he's always been
Freaking depressing.
The heyday line - Diehl(6), Seubert(U), O'Hara(FA), Snee(1), Mackenzie(FA) got a LOT more value. Simply put, Accorsi was a hell of a lot better at snagging OL talent than Reese has been.
Still, a freaking 5th rounder was our starting LT. We're getting nowhere near that value with our drafts.
Quote:
said last week that Eli was playing the back 9. Has he considered that Manning might be at the 19th Hole, instead? It is ridiculous how the deteriorating play of the QB is immune to discussion about the offense's regression. What changed from '15 to '16?
1. The schedule got easier. Flowers was healthy. The receiving unit was upgraded.
What remained the same? McAdoo once again called the plays for the offense he installed. TE group: Same main two players. RBs: same performance level, if you liberally insert Perkins for Vereen.
The only time Eli's deficiencies are considered is to mention the alleged contributing factors. In other words, the ass-wipe commentary, absolving him. The offensive line gets pissed on. Is there ever mention that they have to protect a near statue back there? Would they like blocking for Prescott or Wenz?
Of course there are problems that are more design than performance. For instance , the psychotic belief that you can run without a fullback, blocking tight ends and a big wide receiver. But they better look at the Q. It's really important.
Silly post pertaining to Eli..There is nothing wrong with Eli..He is the sme "statue" he's always been
Still, a freaking 5th rounder was our starting LT. We're getting nowhere near that value with our drafts.
And Snee was a 2nd rounder. But your point is valid
Quote:
In comment 13329814 RetroJint said:
Quote:
said last week that Eli was playing the back 9. Has he considered that Manning might be at the 19th Hole, instead? It is ridiculous how the deteriorating play of the QB is immune to discussion about the offense's regression. What changed from '15 to '16?
1. The schedule got easier. Flowers was healthy. The receiving unit was upgraded.
What remained the same? McAdoo once again called the plays for the offense he installed. TE group: Same main two players. RBs: same performance level, if you liberally insert Perkins for Vereen.
The only time Eli's deficiencies are considered is to mention the alleged contributing factors. In other words, the ass-wipe commentary, absolving him. The offensive line gets pissed on. Is there ever mention that they have to protect a near statue back there? Would they like blocking for Prescott or Wenz?
Of course there are problems that are more design than performance. For instance , the psychotic belief that you can run without a fullback, blocking tight ends and a big wide receiver. But they better look at the Q. It's really important.
Silly post pertaining to Eli..There is nothing wrong with Eli..He is the sme "statue" he's always been
Disagree. The stone cold 4th quarter killer that Eli Manning was through 2011 is gone. PTSD from years of lousy OL play the cause. He still clearly has the tools, but the Mojo is gone.
Oh, so it was Eli who dropped those passes in Green Bay!! Eli played VERY well in that game. His team let him down. Especially Beckham.
I think I was thinking ( more like hoping ) for the same thing.....improvement. Instead we saw Will Johnson to IR, Vereen to IR, Cruz show he has lost a step, Tye is what he is, average, and we have some promising young skill players in Shepard, Perkins and Adams.
Our oline needs to be solidified, we still need a real TE and a outside compliment to OBJ.
Thats the mystery.. why did they take such a huge step BACKWARDS when they essentially had the same offense from the year before..
So if thats a mystery, so is his comment.
1. The schedule got easier. Flowers was healthy. The receiving unit was upgraded.
What remained the same? McAdoo once again called the plays for the offense he installed. TE group: Same main two players. RBs: same performance level, if you liberally insert Perkins for Vereen.
The only time Eli's deficiencies are considered is to mention the alleged contributing factors. In other words, the ass-wipe commentary, absolving him. The offensive line gets pissed on. Is there ever mention that they have to protect a near statue back there? Would they like blocking for Prescott or Wenz?
Of course there are problems that are more design than performance. For instance , the psychotic belief that you can run without a fullback, blocking tight ends and a big wide receiver. But they better look at the Q. It's really important.
Eli did not play as well as '15, but you watch the Giant o line as compared to other playoff teams and think the o line is not a problem?
This offense is pillow soft. No power run game to make the defense work. No fear of playaction. No physicality in short yardage. I read from a poster on this site the Giants have 11 rushing TD'S in two seasons. That is fucking pathetic.
This means the Giants offense is big play or bust. Take away the big play via Beckham and you have the Giants beat. The line can tee off on Eli since it is usually third and long and they have not been battered since we start pussies up front.
Eli is getting older, but if he is given some tools and some semblance of a pocket I think he can still do the job.
Give this offense a physical presence. Fix the o line. I watch the Falcons, Packers, Steelers,Chiefs and all seem to have better o line play than the Giants. Giant offensive line is one of the worst in the league and certainly the worst in the division.