I don't mean this as a pile on Ben McAdoo post. I thought he did a very good job last year & think he is the right man for the job going forward.
With that said, most here were very hard on Gilbride, a man who led 2 Giant Super Bowl champion offenses. A lot of us, myself included, got so wrapped up in Eli's numbers and whether he could put up big numbers in a more QB friendly system. The bottom line, Gilbride's system worked just fine **when things were going well.** Eli's numbers have been better, but most of that can be attributed to Odell Beckham and his tremendous YAC results. Eli is Eli whether Gilbride is running the show or McAdoo. He throws a lot of picks and is not going to put up massive numbers, and that's okay.
Gilbride's system was volatile & with a bad offensive line it does not work (see 18 TD - 27 INT in 2013). The idea that Gilbride was causing Eli bad numbers is so absurd, it is about winning titles & they did that twice. Eli had a fantastic completion rating this past week and it was arguably one of his worst regular season games.
I just posted scores and NFL rank.
last year they scored 27 and 28...
As mentioned above, in 2015 we scored over 30 several times, with the same, maybe worse, players.
What happened?
ehh he won a superbowl with a garbage oline and no running game
On the NFL Network the both of them were talking about Gilbride System. The both said they couldn't play in that system and be successful. There were far too many reads (Min 4 with a max 6) for the QB and Receiver's to make after the Huddle at the LOS. It was based on not only the safety/s but the LB's and how they lined up. Each and every subtle difference in the defensive lineup meant the receiver had a different cut or move or route to run. To get 3 receivers and a QB to see the field the exact same way is really too much to ask with all the different routes and cuts. That is why it sometimes looked like Eli was throwing to air, the receiver saw thing Eli saw another and the receiver cut left when Eli threw right.
That was just one example of a million different secenarios for play. I tried to make it simple)but when all pieces were on the same page that Offense could not be stopped. It was truly a high risk high reward system. We cant complain that system won this team 2 Super Bowls. It failed because Reese drafted too many receivers that could not grasp the nuances of the system in other words they were too stupid to understand it
On the NFL Network the both of them were talking about Gilbride System. The both said they couldn't play in that system and be successful. There were far too many reads (Min 4 with a max 6) for the QB and Receiver's to make after the Huddle at the LOS. It was based on not only the safety/s but the LB's and how they lined up. Each and every subtle difference in the defensive lineup meant the receiver had a different cut or move or route to run. To get 3 receivers and a QB to see the field the exact same way is really too much to ask with all the different routes and cuts. That is why it sometimes looked like Eli was throwing to air, the receiver saw thing Eli saw another and the receiver cut left when Eli threw right.
That was just one example of a million different secenarios for play. I tried to make it simple)but when all pieces were on the same page that Offense could not be stopped. It was truly a high risk high reward system. We cant complain that system won this team 2 Super Bowls. It failed because Reese drafted too many receivers that could not grasp the nuances of the system in other words they were too stupid to understand it
Yet it was plug and play for a multitude of seasons and supposed "non-replaceable" receivers came and went successfully.
Mario Manningham had great years in the offense, not to mention being a Superbowl here (along with another journeyman David Tyree).
I was always surprised KG didn't get another coaching job after 'retirement'.
I was always surprised KG didn't get another coaching job after 'retirement'.
I fully believe the reports that KG had enough of coaching when he was done. He's got a good gig as an analyst now, and he spent a long time on the sidelines with a number of teams, got himself a ring. Not sure that even if he was offered another spot whether he'd have taken it.
I agree with the overall sentiment though - it's possible for someone to have done a good job but for it to have run it's course, and that was certainly the case for Gilbride here.