Some of the same people, were claiming Gettleman was the real guy behind success, when the Panthers went to the Super Bowl, even though Gettleman had done little to that team. then you changed your tune when you saw how shitty he was handling the Norman situation and failure to get Newton any help on offense. And doing a terrible job fixing their secondary.
He's widely respected around the league from reports I've read..If he was canned, he'd be hired in a NY moment..
To me, he's one of the top GMs in the league. They all make mistakes and will continue to do so..Ozzie Newsome, the so-called standard to be emulated has had his shit years areas of neglect..
Some of the same people, were claiming Gettleman was the real guy behind success, when the Panthers went to the Super Bowl, even though Gettleman had done little to that team. then you changed your tune when you saw how shitty he was handling the Norman situation and failure to get Newton any help on offense. And doing a terrible job fixing their secondary.
And don't forget failure to upgrade the offensive line.
was a large factor in the giants success along the DL since he left they have had bromley and owa,and some free agents vs the assembly line of DL talent that yielded them jpp,osi,tuck,kiwi etc not all on him but they definately havent been as good since he left at picking DL
ziggy ansa and other raw lower league players probably dont get drafted that high before the league saw what the giants did and copied it too they also saw what a good passrush can cover up on your backend so many teams targeted the CB and LB spots the giants showed you can get be with less than superstar talent in those areas if you can bring pressure without blitzing too much
chicago,baltimore and pats all consistently target the same types and skillsets the giants do,john fox is the reason in chicago,bill was an ex-giant DC and baltimore uses a similar draft type they do as well. thou baltimore has spent more picks at LB than the giants but they havent had a good secondry since they lost reed and never managed to effectively replace thier CB's that made the 2000 team so hard to beat either
Doesn't really register with the Reese haters. Nope he just spent money that any fool could have spent. Never mind the great run that proceeded the bad stretch from 2013-2015 or how inevitable the bad stretch truly was. Nope. Reese haters don't see the good years they only see the bad and the bad is 100% attributable to Reese and only Reese. He's lucky when he wins and soley to blame when the giants lose.
but Jerry sees 1980s cute and fancy Rams air ball.
its a miss match
What the hell are you talking about. The giants won two Super Bowls with a smashing relentless defensive attack and a great running game one year, gutty effective running game the next. In 2008 and 2010 the running game was dominant. That was under Reese.
Can we let the ink dry on this latest chapter of NYG football before we condemn Reese for being too fancy? What if the giants win another 11 games this season and find success in January?
Yes, stupid shortsighted ownership will fire people too soon rather than maintain stability and cohesion. But you would have fired Reese. And you'd be a fool too.
But I can't help thinking that bad personnel decisions by the team were the biggest contributer to his firing. To the extent Reese was responsible for those decisions, he managed to get somebody else fired for his own mistakes.
But I can't help thinking that bad personnel decisions by the team were the biggest contributer to his firing. To the extent Reese was responsible for those decisions, he managed to get somebody else fired for his own mistakes.
The end of TC's reign was cursed by three years of leading the league injuries. That in turn led to shortened careers and resources spent treading water.
If you want to blame someone, go ahead. Bad luck played the biggest role I think.
he was the disciplined coach they needed to turn them around after several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him but since macadoo came in the injury situation had improved it was crazy the decimation that happened annually could be an aberration of luck good versus bad i hope they can keep as healthy this season as they did last
but i will say coughlin would have had them better prepared to play against the packers than they were that night the offence was awful and the defence folded after initially stone walling the packers for almost the whole first half
cruz was a shadow of his former self and they didnt have a move TE to break the tampa 2 zone that they stuggled with all year,in a rookie year at head coach he otherwise did a solid job,he was far better than coughlin at game management he won games that coughlin allowed to get away from him the year before in the final minute(s) when they had the lead
he was the disciplined coach they needed to turn them around after several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him
There weren't "several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him"--the Giants went to the playoffs in 2002 and the Super Bowl in 2000. And Coughlin's teams had quite a few penalty prone and undisciplined stretches. Quite a few! There is nothing you can accuse Fassel's teams of that can't also be said of Coughlin's teams other than Fassel had far less talent to work with. But two Super Bowl wins make him Teflon Tom is some people's eyes.
p.s.--Other than 2003, when he was pulling street free agents off of high school teams to fill out the grossly undermanned roster that Accorsi gave him (talk about a disastrous off-season between 2002 and 2003!), Fassel's teams always finished strong. He owned the month of December. Contrast that with Coughlin, whose teams were known for their second half collapses.
that started to bite late in the year with tom,i didnt like accorsi drafts at all one pick that sticks out was rodrick babers a dwarf CB with poor tackling and not enough speed didnt even make the team his draft year,jeff hatch,quincy monk plus others i managed to blot from memory
anyone around for the accorsi drafts era will appreciate the reese drafts so much more
mediocre when he cobbled together the most talent-depleted defense in NFL history and then needed $200M to fix it. That is SHIT performance by a GM.
Shit post is more like it. So when a gm spends money we don't give him any credit? And what's the thresh-hold? How much money spent deems a gm shit in your world? Crap post.
he was the disciplined coach they needed to turn them around after several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him
There weren't "several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him"--the Giants went to the playoffs in 2002 and the Super Bowl in 2000. And Coughlin's teams had quite a few penalty prone and undisciplined stretches. Quite a few! There is nothing you can accuse Fassel's teams of that can't also be said of Coughlin's teams other than Fassel had far less talent to work with. But two Super Bowl wins make him Teflon Tom is some people's eyes.
p.s.--Other than 2003, when he was pulling street free agents off of high school teams to fill out the grossly undermanned roster that Accorsi gave him (talk about a disastrous off-season between 2002 and 2003!), Fassel's teams always finished strong. He owned the month of December. Contrast that with Coughlin, whose teams were known for their second half collapses.
You're kidding me right?
RE: Some of you are so ridiculous with your Reese hate
Some of the same people, were claiming Gettleman was the real guy behind success, when the Panthers went to the Super Bowl, even though Gettleman had done little to that team. then you changed your tune when you saw how shitty he was handling the Norman situation and failure to get Newton any help on offense. And doing a terrible job fixing their secondary.
He gets the same type of treatment that #44 did, getting blamed for everything under the sun, and some people seem to dislike him much more than they should a guy who helped architect 2 Lombardi's.
was a large factor in the giants success along the DL since he left they have had bromley and owa,and some free agents vs the assembly line of DL talent that yielded them jpp,osi,tuck,kiwi etc not all on him but they definately havent been as good since he left at picking DL
ziggy ansa and other raw lower league players probably dont get drafted that high before the league saw what the giants did and copied it too they also saw what a good passrush can cover up on your backend so many teams targeted the CB and LB spots the giants showed you can get be with less than superstar talent in those areas if you can bring pressure without blitzing too much
chicago,baltimore and pats all consistently target the same types and skillsets the giants do,john fox is the reason in chicago,bill was an ex-giant DC and baltimore uses a similar draft type they do as well. thou baltimore has spent more picks at LB than the giants but they havent had a good secondry since they lost reed and never managed to effectively replace thier CB's that made the 2000 team so hard to beat either
Would you go as far to say that Gentleman was the driving force behind Reese's success? I think that's what some were trying to get at. IMO it's pretty disrespectful talk.
he was the disciplined coach they needed to turn them around after several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him
There weren't "several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him"--the Giants went to the playoffs in 2002 and the Super Bowl in 2000. And Coughlin's teams had quite a few penalty prone and undisciplined stretches. Quite a few! There is nothing you can accuse Fassel's teams of that can't also be said of Coughlin's teams other than Fassel had far less talent to work with. But two Super Bowl wins make him Teflon Tom is some people's eyes.
p.s.--Other than 2003, when he was pulling street free agents off of high school teams to fill out the grossly undermanned roster that Accorsi gave him (talk about a disastrous off-season between 2002 and 2003!), Fassel's teams always finished strong. He owned the month of December. Contrast that with Coughlin, whose teams were known for their second half collapses.
You're kidding me right?
You want to talk OL, in 2003formerly undrafted Ian Allen started 11 games, formerly undrafted Chris Bober started 16 games, rookie 5th rounder Dave Diehl started 16 games, Jeff Hatch started 4 games, undrafted rookie Wayne Lucier started 11 games, Luke Petitgout started 10 games, undrafted rookie Jeff Roehl started 2 games (at left tackle!), Seubert started 6 games (before his catastrophic injury), and rookie TE Visante Shiancoe out of powerhouse Morgan State started 7 games. And Jesse Palmer started 3 games for good measure.
Accorsi set Fassel up for failure and then blamed him for it.
having $200M to spend is a lay-up to success with the myriad of examples of abject failures by other GM's having that much money to spend, posting over and over again only highlights a lot of ignorance.
But that doesn't seem to stop posters from minimizing last year's roster improvement by throwing out the $200M statement. I think they feel this "critical" look is shining well on them when all it is doing is putting a spotlight on their shallow grasp of the salary cap and a worse grasp of the historical failures that have befallen many a GM.
You're right, but that's because there are a lot of garbage teams out there that don't know what they're doing and don't have four super bowls.
To me, he's one of the top GMs in the league. They all make mistakes and will continue to do so..Ozzie Newsome, the so-called standard to be emulated has had his shit years areas of neglect..
I'm thankful we have him..
You seem like the type that likes to look at the cover,read the Chapter titles, and skip the book.
Quote:
You're right, but that's because there are a lot of garbage teams out there that don't know what they're doing and don't have four super bowls.
You seem like the type that likes to look at the cover,read the Chapter titles, and skip the book.
Well if that's the case, I want to be like him. He's one of the better posters on here, imv
And don't forget failure to upgrade the offensive line.
Good lord.
This is among the most foolish statements I have read on BBI, and that is really saying something.
Good lord.
This is among the most foolish statements I have read on BBI, and that is really saying something.
I hope you don't think your fooling anyone with that username.
Quote:
Good lord.
This is among the most foolish statements I have read on BBI, and that is really saying something.
I hope you don't think your fooling anyone with that username.
Wow.
ziggy ansa and other raw lower league players probably dont get drafted that high before the league saw what the giants did and copied it too they also saw what a good passrush can cover up on your backend so many teams targeted the CB and LB spots the giants showed you can get be with less than superstar talent in those areas if you can bring pressure without blitzing too much
chicago,baltimore and pats all consistently target the same types and skillsets the giants do,john fox is the reason in chicago,bill was an ex-giant DC and baltimore uses a similar draft type they do as well. thou baltimore has spent more picks at LB than the giants but they havent had a good secondry since they lost reed and never managed to effectively replace thier CB's that made the 2000 team so hard to beat either
but Jerry sees 1980s cute and fancy Rams air ball.
its a miss match
What the hell are you talking about. The giants won two Super Bowls with a smashing relentless defensive attack and a great running game one year, gutty effective running game the next. In 2008 and 2010 the running game was dominant. That was under Reese.
Can we let the ink dry on this latest chapter of NYG football before we condemn Reese for being too fancy? What if the giants win another 11 games this season and find success in January?
Yes, stupid shortsighted ownership will fire people too soon rather than maintain stability and cohesion. But you would have fired Reese. And you'd be a fool too.
The end of TC's reign was cursed by three years of leading the league injuries. That in turn led to shortened careers and resources spent treading water.
If you want to blame someone, go ahead. Bad luck played the biggest role I think.
but i will say coughlin would have had them better prepared to play against the packers than they were that night the offence was awful and the defence folded after initially stone walling the packers for almost the whole first half
cruz was a shadow of his former self and they didnt have a move TE to break the tampa 2 zone that they stuggled with all year,in a rookie year at head coach he otherwise did a solid job,he was far better than coughlin at game management he won games that coughlin allowed to get away from him the year before in the final minute(s) when they had the lead
p.s.--Other than 2003, when he was pulling street free agents off of high school teams to fill out the grossly undermanned roster that Accorsi gave him (talk about a disastrous off-season between 2002 and 2003!), Fassel's teams always finished strong. He owned the month of December. Contrast that with Coughlin, whose teams were known for their second half collapses.
What you fail to comprehend is that there was a REASON he had $200. As GM JR managed his way to having $200MM available.
Great job by our top-5 general manager.
anyone around for the accorsi drafts era will appreciate the reese drafts so much more
Shit post is more like it. So when a gm spends money we don't give him any credit? And what's the thresh-hold? How much money spent deems a gm shit in your world? Crap post.
Quote:
he was the disciplined coach they needed to turn them around after several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him
There weren't "several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him"--the Giants went to the playoffs in 2002 and the Super Bowl in 2000. And Coughlin's teams had quite a few penalty prone and undisciplined stretches. Quite a few! There is nothing you can accuse Fassel's teams of that can't also be said of Coughlin's teams other than Fassel had far less talent to work with. But two Super Bowl wins make him Teflon Tom is some people's eyes.
p.s.--Other than 2003, when he was pulling street free agents off of high school teams to fill out the grossly undermanned roster that Accorsi gave him (talk about a disastrous off-season between 2002 and 2003!), Fassel's teams always finished strong. He owned the month of December. Contrast that with Coughlin, whose teams were known for their second half collapses.
You're kidding me right?
He gets the same type of treatment that #44 did, getting blamed for everything under the sun, and some people seem to dislike him much more than they should a guy who helped architect 2 Lombardi's.
ziggy ansa and other raw lower league players probably dont get drafted that high before the league saw what the giants did and copied it too they also saw what a good passrush can cover up on your backend so many teams targeted the CB and LB spots the giants showed you can get be with less than superstar talent in those areas if you can bring pressure without blitzing too much
chicago,baltimore and pats all consistently target the same types and skillsets the giants do,john fox is the reason in chicago,bill was an ex-giant DC and baltimore uses a similar draft type they do as well. thou baltimore has spent more picks at LB than the giants but they havent had a good secondry since they lost reed and never managed to effectively replace thier CB's that made the 2000 team so hard to beat either
Would you go as far to say that Gentleman was the driving force behind Reese's success? I think that's what some were trying to get at. IMO it's pretty disrespectful talk.
Quote:
In comment 13455328 msh said:
Quote:
he was the disciplined coach they needed to turn them around after several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him
There weren't "several penalty strewn disastrous seasons before him"--the Giants went to the playoffs in 2002 and the Super Bowl in 2000. And Coughlin's teams had quite a few penalty prone and undisciplined stretches. Quite a few! There is nothing you can accuse Fassel's teams of that can't also be said of Coughlin's teams other than Fassel had far less talent to work with. But two Super Bowl wins make him Teflon Tom is some people's eyes.
p.s.--Other than 2003, when he was pulling street free agents off of high school teams to fill out the grossly undermanned roster that Accorsi gave him (talk about a disastrous off-season between 2002 and 2003!), Fassel's teams always finished strong. He owned the month of December. Contrast that with Coughlin, whose teams were known for their second half collapses.
You're kidding me right?
Accorsi set Fassel up for failure and then blamed him for it.
2008-2010 were fine. 2013 was meh. 2011 and 2012, definitely eek.
But that doesn't seem to stop posters from minimizing last year's roster improvement by throwing out the $200M statement. I think they feel this "critical" look is shining well on them when all it is doing is putting a spotlight on their shallow grasp of the salary cap and a worse grasp of the historical failures that have befallen many a GM.